Friedrich Hayek and his visits to Chile

F. A. Hayek took two trips to Chile, the first in 1977, the second in 1981. The visits were controversial. On the first trip he met with General Augusto Pinochet, who had led a coup that overthrew Salvador Allende in 1973. During his 1981 visit, Hayek gave interviews that were published in the Chilean newspaper El Mercurio and in which he discussed authoritarian regimes and the problem of unlimited democracy. After each trip, he complained that the western press had painted an unfair picture of the economic situation under the Pinochet regime. Drawing on archival material, interviews, and past research, we provide a full account of this controversial episode in Hayek’s life

La (sobre)adaptación programática de la derecha chilena y la irrupción de la derecha populista radical

ABSTRACT Objective/context: This article offers an analysis of the evolution of the Chilean right from the transition to democracy to the present day. It aims to show that programmatic moderation has not only allowed the right to become more competitive in electoral terms, but has also orphaned a sector of the electorate and, therefore, made it highly probable that this political faction will split into two poles: one liberal-progressive and one populist-conservative. Methodology: The research involved a descriptive analysis of data from the World Values Survey, revealing the evolution of Chilean public opinion toward issues normally defended by the right, and of the “Manifesto Project,” in order to trace the variation over time of the positions defended by the Chilean right in their electoral campaigns. Conclusions: This article concludes that the great future challenge of the Chilean center-right will be how to handle internal tensions that, if not adequately channeled, can unleash a political fragmentation that gives rise to a period of greater electoral uncertainty. Originality: This article seeks to fill the gap that exists in the academic literature on the evolution of the post-transition Chilean right. At the same time, it posits that a space has opened for new types of government coalitions in Chile, either between radical populist forces and conventional parties or between conventional parties that historically have been reluctant to establish electoral alliances.RESUMO Objetivo/contexto: Este artigo oferece uma análise da evolução da direita chilena desde a transição à democracia até hoje. Interessa demonstrar que a moderação programática não somente tem permitido à direita tornar-se mais competitiva em termos eleitorais, mas também tem deixado órfão um setor do eleitorado e, portanto, é altamente provável que essa facção política seja fracionada em dois polos: um liberal-progressista e um populista conservador. Metodologia: Esta pesquisa foi realizada por meio de uma análise descritiva de dados provenientes do Questionário Mundial de Valores para revelar a evolução da opinião pública chilena diante de temas que normalmente a direita defende e do “Manifesto Project” para observar a variação dos posicionamentos defendidos pela direita chilena em suas campanhas eleitorais ao longo do tempo. Conclusões: Neste artigo, conclui-se que o grande desafio futuro da centro-direita chilena está em como lidar com suas tensões internas que, se não forem canalizadas de maneira adequada, podem desencadear uma fragmentação política que daria vida a um período de maior incerteza eleitoral. Originalidade: Este artigo pretende preencher a lacuna que existe na literatura acadêmica sobre a evolução da direita chilena pós-transição. Por sua vez, expõe a abertura que hoje há para novos tipos de coalizões governamentais no Chile, seja entre forças populistas radicais e partidos convencionais, seja entre partidos convencionais que, historicamente, têm sido relutantes a estabelecer parcerias eleitorais.RESUMEN Objetivo/contexto: El artículo ofrece un análisis de la evolución de la derecha chilena desde la transición a la democracia hasta hoy. Interesa demostrar que la moderación programática no solo le ha permitido a la derecha volverse más competitiva en términos electorales, sino que también ha dejado huérfano a un sector del electorado y, por lo tanto, es altamente probable que tal facción política se fraccione en dos polos: uno liberal-progresista y uno populista-conservador. Metodología: La investigación se realizó mediante un análisis descriptivo de datos provenientes de la Encuesta Mundial de Valores para revelar la evolución de la opinión pública chilena frente a temas que normalmente defiende la derecha y del “Manifesto Project” para observar la variación de las posturas defendidas por la derecha chilena en sus campañas electorales a lo largo del tiempo. Conclusiones: En este artículo se concluye que el gran desafío futuro de la centroderecha chilena radica en cómo manejar sus tensiones internas que, si no logran ser encauzadas de manera adecuada, pueden desencadenar una fragmentación política que dé vida a un periodo de mayor incertidumbre electoral. Originalidad: Este artículo busca llenar el vacío que existe en la literatura académica sobre la evolución de la derecha chilena post-transición. A su vez, plantea que hoy en día se abre un espacio para nuevos tipos de coaliciones gubernamentales en Chile, ya sea entre fuerzas populistas radicales y partidos convencionales o entre partidos convencionales que históricamente han sido reacios a establecer alianzas electorales

Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study

Background: The SAfety and FEasibility of standard EVAR outside the instruction for use (SAFE-EVAR) Study was designed to define the attitude of Italian vascular surgeons towards the use of standard endovascular repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) outside the instruction for use (IFU) through a Delphi consensus endorsed by the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Vascolare ed Endovascolare - SICVE). Methods: A questionnaire consisting of 26 statements was developed, validated by an 18-member Advisory Board, and then sent to 600 Italian vascular surgeons. The Delphi process was structured in three subsequent rounds which took place between April and June 2023. In the first two rounds, respondents could indicate one of the following five degrees of agreement: 1) strongly agree; 2) partially agree; 3) neither agree nor disagree; 4) partially disagree; 5) strongly disagree; while in the third round only three different choices were proposed: 1) agree; 2) neither agree nor disagree; 3) disagree. We considered the consensus reached when ≥70% of respondents agreed on one of the options. After the conclusion of each round, a report describing the percentage distribution of the answers was sent to all the participants. Results: Two-hundred-forty-four (40.6%) Italian Vascular Surgeons agreed to participate the first round of the Delphi Consensus; the second and the third rounds of the Delphi collected 230 responders (94.3% of the first-round responders). Four statements (15.4%) reached a consensus in the first rounds. Among the 22 remaining statements, one more consensus (3.8%) was achieved in the second round. Finally, seven more statements (26.9%) reached a consensus in the simplified last round. Globally, a consensus was reached for almost half of the proposed statements (46.1%). Conclusions: The relatively low consensus rate obtained in this Delphi seems to confirm the discrepancy between Guideline recommendations and daily clinical practice. The data collected could represent the source for a possible guidelines' revision and the proposal of specific Good Practice Points in all those aspects with only little evidence available