Eggplant,

I see that you, for some reason, equate an authoritarian, dictatorial form of government with fascism (and communism obviously). But that is not necessarily the case.

The difference is that while the totaliarian-isms institutionalize, ideologize and banalize evil as a built-in feature for whatever greater good they set as their ultimate goal, the authoritarian regimes of Peru and Chile used some not so agreeable methods as a temporary and utilitarian ad hoc measure. They did not pretend that the evil they thought they have to utilize is something else than what it was.

Thus, neither Pinochet nor Fujimori intended to keep the repressive system in place beyond the need to fend off a greater evil, no ideological “considerations” warranted it. Of course, the duration of the “need” was defined by them, especially in Pinochet case–but once he saw the “need” for a strong authoritarian rule diminishing, he did let go, even if somewhat reluctantly.

I am not justifying their misdeeds, but thought that there is a distinction and also that the tendency to associate any type of temporary repression with fascism and nazism is not being helpful to understanding what these system represented.