Dissertation

1
‘To make the world a slightly less wicked
place’: British solidarity with the Chilean
people, 1973-1982
Candidate Number: 58100
Word Count: 9,881
University of Bristol / History BA / Dissertation 2015

2
Contents
Introduction page 3
1. Why Chile? page 8
2. New Social Movements page 11
3. The British Government page 16
4. The Trade Unions page 20
Conclusion page 24
Bibliography page 26

3
INTRODUCTION
In the 1930s, The Times held a competition to concoct the most boring headline imaginable. Among a
number of interesting submissions, the winner was ‘Small Earthquake in Chile: Not Many Dead’.1
The
perceived insignificance of this narrow country on the pacific border of Latin America would not last.
In a violent coup d’état on 11th
September 1973, British Hawker Hunter jets were used by the Chilean
military to destroy La Moneda Palace in Santiago. From the ashes and rubble of the palace emerged
the bloodied body of the world’s first democratically elected socialist president, Salvador Allende. In
his place, Augusto Pinochet, who had been Allende’s Commander-in-Chief of the army, assumed the
role of President of the new ruling military Junta. For many in Britain and around the world, this was
the end of the socialist dream. Allende’s ‘democratic path to socialism’ had been overrun by the brute
force of American capitalism.2
Where Allende’s Popular Unity Party (UP) had begun to deliver social
welfare and increased prosperity and equality for Chile’s poor, Pinochet’s Junta gradually stripped
them of the most basic luxuries; by 1975, a loaf of bread comprised roughly 74 percent of a Chilean
workers’ salary.3
The generals knew that their ability to hold power depended on Chileans being truly
petrified. In the days that followed the coup, roughly 13,500 civilians were arrested and imprisoned.
The only spectacle on show at the National Stadium was the thousands of ‘subversives’ being
imprisoned and executed in the locker rooms transformed into makeshift torture chambers. The
carnage left behind over those four days came to be known as the Caravan of Death.4
The horror did
not end there. Over the course of the regime from 1973-1990, over 3,000 people were disappeared
or executed, at least 80,000 imprisoned, and 200,000 fled the country for political reasons.5
There was an unlikely international coalition against Chile, both at the level of politics and at the level
of popular protest. Where the USSR had lost an ally in Allende, many Western countries found it easy
to respond to public opinion given their lack of interest in Chile as economic or strategic partners.6
A
transnational Chile solidarity movement also blossomed, consisting of members of the broad Left and
Chilean exiles.7
This dissertation seeks to localise this international debate by exploring the British
response to Chile. More specifically, the principal focus of this dissertation will be to examine the
extent to which the engagements of the Chile Solidarity Campaign (CSC) suggest that there was a
1
A. Beckett Pinochet in Piccadilly: Britain and Chile’s Hidden History, (London, 2002), 87
2
An inquest in the late 1970s confirmed the role of the US in the coup.
3
N. Klein, The Shock Doctrine, (New York,2007), 84
4
P. Kornbluh, The Pinochet File, (New York, 2003), 155-6
5
Cornwell, ‘The General Willing to Kill His People to Win the Battle against Communism,’ The Independent
(London), 11/12/06.
6
J. Eckel, ‘Under the Magnifying Glass’, in S. L. Hoffmann, Human Rights in the Twentieth Century, (Cambridge,
2010), 325
7
M. Power, ‘The US Movement in Solidarity with Chile in the 1970s’, Latin America Perspectives, 36, 6, (2009),
47

4
breakthrough for human rights discourse in Britain in the 1970s. The claim that human rights broke
through in the 1970s is expounded by Samuel Moyn in The Last Utopia. He has written an international
history of human rights, focusing primarily on how the decline of the post-war consensus gave rise to
a new geopolitical environment. This dissertation will use Chile as a case study to localise Moyn’s
international human rights theory. Ultimately, this dissertation argues that human rights broke
through in Britain in the 1970s, whilst demonstrating that they formed an increasingly important part
of a process of political reorientation.
What kind of an organisation was the CSC? Peter Waterman defines solidarity committees as voluntary
organisations with the purpose of providing publicity, political support, and financial assistance to
foreign peoples, organisations, and even governments. He argues that they are closer to social
movements than they are to semi-state bodies, giving them greater flexibility and freedom to
innovate.8
Through thousands of pages of correspondence with MPs, social movements, political
movements, and trade unions, alongside detailed minutes from regular meetings, the relatively
unexamined archives of the CSC provide a fascinating insight into the culture of the Chile solidarity
activists in Britain.
The archives offer some suggestion as to the success of the CSC as well as the nature of Chilean politics
in Britain. However, this is unimportant for this study, as its principal object is to grasp the motivations
of the variety of people who became involved in the CSC. This dissertation will focus on the external
relations that the CSC maintained as opposed to their internal fabric. The CSC pursued a practical,
unified approach to solidarity. Indeed, where some European Chile solidarity movements were
ideologically fractured, the British CSC overlooked these differences.9
Rather than being ideologically
coherent, there was a desire to galvanise as much support as possible, regardless of one’s motivations.
The minutes reveal a consistency to their meetings in which they discussed various forms of action
with the broad range of people they engaged with, as opposed to discussions of ideology or raison
d’être.10
Therefore, the internal fabric of the CSC explains little as to their motivations. Contrastingly,
the nature of the external engagements of the CSC allows one to demonstrate how human rights
discourse exploded in Britain in the 1970s.
This dissertation also draws heavily on an interview conducted with the Joint Secretary of the CSC,
Mike Gatehouse. Gatehouse had been in Chile at the time of the coup, and, upon his return, assumed
8
P. Waterman, Globalisation, social movements, and the new internationalisms, (London, 2001), 132
9
Interview with Mike Gatehouse (Joint Secretary of CSC) 20/3/2015 [hereafter Gatehouse Interview]
10
Executive Committee Minutes, 25/5/76, CSC, CSC/1/6 LHASC, Manchester

5
this key role in the CSC. Though he himself quipped that his memory was a little hazy, his reflections
are instrumental in gaining a deeper insight into events.11
In combining Gatehouse’s evidence with the
archives of the CSC, alongside evidence drawn from the files of Judith Hart MP, annual reports from
the Labour Party Conference, and from a variety of newspapers, there is a clear and coherent narrative
that forms. As the CSC itself is the focal point, the archives of the CSC and the interview with
Gatehouse will form the backbone of this dissertation.
In recent years, historians have become increasingly interested in the history of human rights. Namely,
how, why, and when the discourse of human rights rose to such prominence in contemporary society.
Paul Lauren argues that the writing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the
foundation of the United Nations after the Second World War expressed a new, shared human rights
culture.12
Mark Mazower argues that the UDHR greatly assisted in setting the standards for other
declarations and legally binding conventions that covered a wide variety of new international human
rights norms.13
Samantha Powers’ account of Raphael Lemkin’s struggle for the ratification of the
Genocide Convention in the UN in 1948 is one such example.14
The likes of Johannes Morsink and
Daniel Cohen argue that the legacy of the Holocaust lies at the heart of the fresh ‘moral consensus
that was born in the 1940s’.15
Outrage at genocide and world war, combined with the global effort to
enshrine abstract rights into law adds weight to the contention that human rights were born in the
1940s.
Samuel Moyn fiercely challenges this commonly held perception. Though the Holocaust is now
regarded as the mainspring of post-war moral enlightenment, there was no distinct recognition of
Jewish suffering in the immediate post-war era.16
Consequently, human rights could not have been a
response to the Jewish genocide.17
The euphoria of the newly established legal conventions also
masked underlying problems. Mazower describes the UDHR as ‘at best, a pious exhalation of hot air’.18
States willing to adopt declarations of principles did so in fear of their limiting effect. Although Susan
Waltz recognises a number of important contributions made by small states to the UDHR, its unbinding
11
Gatehouse Interview
12
P. Lauren, The Evolution of International Human Rights, (Philadelphia, 1998), 3
13
M. Mazower, No Enchanted Palace, (Princeton, 2009), 234
14
S. Power, A Problem From Hell, (New York, 2002), 41
15
J. Morsink, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (Philadelphia, 1999), 36
16
D. Levy and N. Sznaider, ‘Memory Unbound: The Holocaust and the Formation of Cosmopolitan Memory’,
European Journal of Social Theory 5, 1, (2002), 94
17
S. Moyn, Human Rights and the Uses of History, (London, 2014), 82
18
M. Mazower, No Enchanted Palace, 56

6
terminology reinforced Great Power status, rendering a universal human rights framework little more
than empty promises.19
Instead, Moyn argues that human rights crystallised in the moral consciousness of people only in the
1970s. The title of his book, The Last Utopia, embodies the essence of his contention that human rights
were a new utopia that eclipsed the previous political utopias of colonialism, communism and
capitalism. The waning of the Cold War is an essential feature of Moyn’s thesis. The crushing of the
Prague Spring in 1968, followed by the destruction of the first democratically elected socialist
government whilst still in its infancy, pressed people to divert to the language of human rights to
express and act on their hopes for a better world.20
Moyn denies that the anti-colonial movement was
a human rights movement, as it was ‘one in which recognition of states, not the protection of
individuals’ counted.21
Hence, not only did the fall of colonialism rid liberalism of its ugly connotations,
but it signified the end of a political utopia. Therefore, Moyn proposes two defining characteristics
that consist in human rights. That they are fundamentally apolitical, and that they transcend the
traditional nation-state boundary and focus on the individual as the bearer of his or her human rights.
Instead of implying colonial liberation and the creation of emancipated nations, or a means by which
a Soviet dissident could criticise his government, human rights most often now meant individual
protection against the state.22
Entwined with these waning utopias emerged a new form of activism. Founded in the early 1960s but
rising to prominence in the 1970s, Amnesty International (AI) provided a new outlet for idealists
disappointed by the Cold War stalemate. They compiled an arsenal of material concerning human
rights abuses throughout the world through fact-finding missions, academic studies, books, and
annual and special reports. Their Nobel Prize-winning ‘Campaign against Torture’ evolved in response
to the Chilean coup. They built public campaigns to secure amnesty for political targets and refugees,
as well as working to end the practices of torture and disappearances.23
The Amnesty report on Chile
was the first international attempt to alert the world to human rights abuses. Their distinctly apolitical
stance distinguishes human rights after the 1970s. Campaigning for the rights of individual humans
became a cause whose significance transcended political ideology. As such, AI played a vital role in
19
S. Waltz, ‘Universalising Human Rights: The Role of Small States in the Construction of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights’, Human Rights Quarterly, 23, 1 (2001), 71
20
Moyn, The Last Utopia, (Cambridge, 2010), 121
21
Moyn, Last Utopia, 84
22
23
P. W. Kelly, ‘The 1973 Chilean coup and the origins of transnational human rights activism’, Journal of Global
History, 8, 1, (2013), 169

7
shaping the discourse of transnational human rights advocacy in the 1970s. Human rights activism
took the form of a semantic discourse and a mode of action, though not necessarily simultaneously.
Aside from Michael Wilkinson’s evaluation of the success of the CSC in influencing British Government
policy, there are no works written specifically on this group. As such, this dissertation is original in two
respects. It is one of the first attempts at testing Moyn’s theory on the breakthrough of human rights
in Britain. This is an important endeavour, as the theory of the Last Utopia remains largely
unchallenged. Moreover, understanding the nature of human rights is vital given their reified stature
in contemporary society. This is also the first assessment of the motivations of the CSC. These two
ventures are a happy marriage; the nature of the motivations of the CSC will elucidate Moyn’s
contention that human rights broke through in the 1970s.
There has been one similar exercise and challenge to Moyn’s thesis. Simon Stevens explored the
extent to which the anti-apartheid movement (AAM) in the 1980s in Britain was a human rights
movement. In an examination of the people and organisations that were involved in the AAM, he
concluded that a human rights discourse was largely absent. Activists were more likely to invoke
antiracism or political ideology.24
If the AAM can be shown to have had ulterior motives to human
rights, what are the implications for Moyn’s theory? Is it an anomaly or is his international theory to
be found lacking when tested against localised examples? This dissertation, then, will act as another
chapter of Breakthrough.
This dissertation will work closely with the material found in the archives of the CSC in the years 1973-
1982. Although Pinochet’s regime lasted until 1990, examining the time from the coup up to the
Falklands War is a substantial timeframe in order to thoroughly answer the question at hand. This
study consists of four chapters. The first chapter answers why the British people were interested in
Chile. The following three chapters explore the relationships that the CSC had with a broad spectrum
of the British people. The first section examines the peculiar nature of new social movements. The
campaign worked with religious organisations, students, women and other groups. The second
chapter will examine the working relationship that members of the CSC pursued with the British
Government. The final chapter will explore the close relationship between the CSC and the trade union
movement. These chapters underline the fact that human rights was a broad discourse that a variety
of people could meaningfully engage with. They suggest that a variety of rights-based discourses fell
under the umbrella of ‘human rights’.
24
S. Stevens, ‘Anti-Apartheid Activism in Britain in the Long 1970s’, in J. Eckel and S. Moyn (eds.) The
Breakthrough (Philadelphia, 2014).

8
WHY CHILE?
This chapter will explore why the British rallied around the Chilean cause. In doing so, it will expose
the crucial dichotomy between politics and human rights within the discourse of the CSC, which is the
first step in establishing that there was a breakthrough for human rights. As has been discussed in the
introduction, the Chile case attracted international attention for a variety of geopolitical reasons
largely related to the Cold War binary. However, this does not explain why individuals in Britain found
cause in Chile. In his chapter on apartheid, Simon Stevens argues that the British AAM rose to
prominence both because of its integration with the transnational movement, but also because of its
interaction with the internal dynamics of the British state.25
The same is true for Chile. Allende’s turbulent presidency and Pinochet’s brutal coup were of interest
because of its perceived relevance to the economic, political, and social spheres in Britain. Britain was
undergoing a transformation in the 1970s and was in need of major reform. Chile was deployed as a
symbolic battlefield for the political and moral extremes in British politics, as it found a lot of purchase
with the Left and the Right in British society.26
With industrial militancy and a failing economy, the
government had increased corporation tax to fund more generous welfare benefits, and set up the
National Enterprise Board to take over failing companies. These reforms sparked panic in the right-
wing press. The Daily Mail’s Chile correspondent thought these reforms called to mind the upheavals
of Allende’s final year in office when inflation hit 304% and industrial strife was paralleled by middle
class revolt.27
An article in the Sunday Telegraph hoped that, were a British government ever to seek
to turn the country into a Communist state, the armed forces would intervene just as they had done
in Chile.28
For the emerging radical right in Britain, Chile was an emblem of the direction they hoped
the British economy would take. In his new government, Pinochet named several Chicago graduates
as economic advisors. One of them, Sergio de Castro, wrote his policy proposals in ‘The Brick’, which
bore a striking resemblance to Milton Friedman’s Capitalism and Freedom.29
Spearheaded by
Friedman, the Chicago Boys’ vision of a total economic overhaul entailed a hybrid of privatisation,
deregulation, and cuts to social spending. The affinity of Thatcher with Pinochet was very much to do
with their shared ideological diet of neo-liberal economics.30
The British Right hoped for a similar
revolution to fix the British economy.
25
Stevens, Anti-Apartheid, 217
26
K. Foster, ‘Small Earthquakes and Major Eruptions’, in N. Z. Silvia and F. Leiva (eds.) Democracy in Chile
(Sussex, 2005), 48
27
‘No butter, no beef and cash is useless’, Daily Mail, 11/8/72
28
Foster, Small Earthquakes, 47
29
Klein, Shock Doctrine, 77
30
Klein, Shock Doctrine, 86

9
The British Left were deeply aggravated by the joint assault of the American government, the military
junta, and international corporations on Chilean democracy and its workers. Mike Gatehouse stressed
the ‘coincidental importance’ of the Chilean experience in terms of what democratic socialism
signified in 1970s British politics.31
There was a genuine socialist ambition within left of the Labour
party. The Tribune group, comprising the likes of Hart, Richardson, and Mikardo had a real ambition
not for revolution but for a Labour government being capable of significantly shifting the balance of
economic power in Britain. As such, Allende’s government had represented a deeply interesting
experiment. The aftermath of the coup furnished the broad left with a nightmare vision of the possible
direction that their country could take. The Birmingham branch of the CSC submitted a resolution
urging the head office to publish a leaflet ‘drawing attention to the similarities between the economic
policies of Thatcherism and the Junta’.32
Chile Fights, the magazine of the CSC, criticised Lloyds Bank
International for its leading role in a $75 million loan to the Junta.33
In response, a number of student
unions banned Lloyds from their fresher’s fairs.34
The Left were caught up in the wave of transnational
solidarity with the Chilean people because this case reflected their own aspirations for British society.
Therefore, both the Left and the Right saw in Chile a political matter of grave importance.
Another factor that drew people in Britain to become involved in the anti-Pinochet campaign was the
numerous abuses of human rights that were coming to light thanks to AI’s information politics.
Gatehouse reflected that the campaign encouraged the establishment of the Chile Committee for
Human Rights (CCHR) because they were conscious that there were people who cared about Chile but
preferred to avoid politics.35
They remained non-political and worked with churches and other
groupings outside the political left who felt uncomfortable with the main campaign. There was always
close coordination between the human rights and the solidarity campaigns, and most regarded it as
one overall campaign anyway.36
The establishment of a separate human rights campaign validates
Moyn’s argument that human rights were apolitical. He argues that the new appeal of human rights
depended on the failure of more maximal visions of political transformation, whilst, at the same time,
inaugurating new angles of moral criticism.37
Many of those who focused on the human rights abuses
in Chile rather than the crisis of socialism did so, in part, because they realised that an alteration of
31
Gatehouse Interview
32
Resolution Submitted by Birmingham CSC, CSC/1/24, LHASC, Manchester
33
‘Lloyds Funds Terrorists’, Chile Fights, Dec/Feb 1977/8, CSC/1/22
34
EC Minutes, 8/1/80, CSC/1/24
35
Gatehouse Interview
36
Gatehouse Interview
37

10
plausible hopes had to occur. Instead of pressing for the re-establishment of a socialist state, human
rights activists hoped to make the world ‘a slightly less wicked place’.38
It is clear that the British were interested in the Pinochet regime for two reasons: political aspiration
and humanitarian empathy. Their interaction with a transnational issue in a national context gave the
campaign a certain potency. Many on the broad left campaigned in the hope of democratic socialism
being restored in Chile. Moreover, they used the events as a means of criticising their own
government, and international capitalism as a whole. Some, on the other hand, sought to express
themselves in a different way. They were deeply concerned by the fact that thousands of innocent
Chileans were being imprisoned, tortured, and disappeared. This should not imply that this was of no
concern to those whose grievances were framed politically, but what was novel about the 1970s was
that many people chose to express their concerns for oppressed individuals rather than grand
idealisms. This suggests that there was a breakthrough for human rights discourse in the 1970s.
38
T. Buchanan, ‘Amnesty International in Crisis, 1966-7’, Twentieth Century British History 15, 3 (2004), 271

11
NEW SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
Uprenda Baxi argues that many developments in human rights over the last thirty years cannot be
understood outside of an understanding of the dynamics of new social movements (NSMs).39
This
contention carries much purchase, as the archives exhibit associations with a variety of social
groupings. This chapter will investigate the relationship that the CSC had with NSMs, and the extent
to which they engaged in a human rights discourse. The CSC accommodated the concerns of NSMs
within the main cause. Their left-wing political ideology, combined with their concern for human
rights, leads one to reconsider Moyn’s definition of human rights as ‘apolitical’.
Social movements springing up in the 1970s benefitted from techniques of mass mobilisation and
public protest that had become firmly entrenched in the political movements of the 1960s. Mario
Diani characterises a NSM as a phenomenon that came about in the late 1960s, as an ‘informal’
network of individuals engaged in political or cultural conflict on the basis of a shared identity.40
As
the post-war settlement between capital and labour came under pressure from the 1960s onwards,
NSMs emerged as an expression of social groups excluded from that settlement who felt increasingly
disenfranchised. This concept of a shared identity, or, “identity politics”, blurred the lines between
lifestyle and political attitude. These movements used strategies of direct action such as
demonstrations and boycotts to encourage mass participation and high visibility; ultimately, culture
became an important tool of protest.
Human rights activism bore a strong resemblance to other NSMs such as student, homosexual,
feminist, and religious movements. One of the strengths of the CSC, Gatehouse recalled, was that it
provided a broad umbrella which gave activists enough ownership without feeling controlled by the
central office.41
For example, the “Gays Against Fascism” movement encouraged their group to join
the annual CSC demonstration marking the anniversary of the coup. They recognised that fascism
denied homosexuals ‘even limited civil rights’.42
This is a pertinent example, as although the CSC had
no official affiliation with homosexual rights movements, the broad nature of the campaign
accommodated and welcomed their contribution.43
A transnational solidarity movement emerged from the relationships among Chilean exile
communities, international organisations, and opposition groups in Chile. The CSC viewed cultural
organisations as essential to maintaining connections across national borders. Whilst political criticism
39
U. Baxi, The Future of Human Rights, (New Delhi, 2002), 36
40
M. Diani and D. McAdam, Social Movements and Networks (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 165
41
Gatehouse Interview
42
Gays Against Fascism, CSC/6/1
43
Chile and the British Labour Movement, 1

12
was inherently aggressive and provocative, cultural practices were a field in which to contest the
policies and ideology of the dictatorship.44
A day called ‘Popular Culture in Chile and its Implications
for Britain’ explored the inter-relation of popular culture and socialist policies in Chile and Britain. The
CSC invited Chilean and British speakers active in many areas of popular culture.45
In another event,
the CSC hosted a concert of Chilean bands Inti-Illimani and Paco Pena which provided an opportunity
for fundraising and consciousness raising.46
Gatehouse emphasised the importance of cultural events
in galvanising a broader range of people around the cause.47
Particularly for those who had little
interest in pursuing formal action but felt limited by mainstream politics, buying a ticket to hear a
Chilean band, or hearing an exile speak gave them an important connection to the campaign. In this
way, the CSC garnered extra support through cultural practices.
The student activism that characterised much of the opposition to the Vietnam War precipitated the
importance of students to a wide variety of social movements, including Chile solidarity. A variety of
student movements desired differing levels of involvement with the CSC. The Young Communist
League of Great Britain requested a member on the Executive Committee of the CSC because they
wanted to ensure greater coordination with the Campaign, whilst the Labour Party Young Socialists
requested official affiliation.48
Many students found political reasons for showing solidarity with the
Chile cause. The National Organisation of Labour Students highlighted the fact that most of their
members were committed to the establishment of a tolerant, democratic, socialist society. They
hoped that the CSC would appreciate the value of publicising themselves to the naturally left-wing
student movement.49
The nature of student solidarity was characteristic of the new utopia of the 1970s. As well as being
politically motivated, student solidarity also concerned itself with human rights. In fact, any attempt
to distinguish between the two discourses is largely arbitrary. Under Pinochet, military indoctrination
was introduced to primary schools, whilst thousands of students and teachers were expelled from
universities. Students worked with the World Universities Service to provide refuge for Chilean
students and professors.50
Hortensia Allende, the widow of the late President, recognised the
importance of student solidarity. She sent her ‘warmest greetings’ to the National Union of Students
44
B. Elsey, ‘As the World is My Witness’ in J. Mor, Human Rights and Transnational Solidarity in Cold War Latin
America, (Wisconsin, 2013), 177
45
Popular Culture in Chile, CSC/1/6
46
Concert for Chile, CSC/7/18
47
Gatehouse Interview
48
Letter from Young Communist League of GB, 31/10/1975; Letter from Labour Party Young Socialists,
11/7/1975, CSC/1/22
49
Letter from National Organisation of Labour Students, 7/6/1982 CSC/12/4
50
Gatehouse Interview

13
in advance of their seminar on the crimes of the junta against Chilean students.51
International student
solidarity manifested itself in the relations of British students to the CSC. The General Union of
Palestine Students recognised the similarities between the political prisoners in Israel or Chile being
detained and tortured.52
Within the student movement, politics and human rights were different
means to the same end.
The church was another important element of the CSC. It underwent a transformation in this period
in which it saw a dramatic redefinition of its role in world politics. It opened itself up to a variety of
global issues under its new liberation theology.53
Indeed, eight years before the coup, the Second
Vatican Council had emphasised the protection of religious freedom as a human right.54
Many people
joining the CSC had strong religious ties; there were some clerics but most were ordinary people who
were active in their local communities.55
The identification of the church with the struggle against
poverty and the oppression of the poor was particularly relevant to the Chile solidarity movement.
Indeed, Gatehouse recalled that a key feature of the CCHR was its work with the church.56
In Chile, the Catholic Church was crucial in the move towards human rights, and generated important
languages of opposition to the Junta that would have been unfeasible from a political angle.57
The CSC
worked closely with the Chilean Catholic Church on human rights issues, who framed their cause as
one of ‘Christian humanism’. 58
An important struggle was the search for disappeared people. At a
more local level, the Cumbernauld and Kilsyth CSC Committee helped establish the Talcahuano
Kitchen Fund, which provided food for the children of unemployed workers.59
The fund was set up by
a Franciscan priest who had been imprisoned in Chile. Upon his release, he enlisted the support of his
order in Europe before returning to Chile to run the soup kitchen. This demonstrates how the links
were both local and transnational in their composition. The CSC framed their collaboration with the
church through the semantic and activist discourse of human rights.
The Women’s section of the CSC played a vital role in maintaining support and injecting life into the
Campaign.60
Women’s rights were significant in the growth of human rights discourse. Neil Stammers
identifies a liberal current of feminism which sought to ensure that women’s needs were taken into
51
H. Allende to NUS, 17/11/1975, CSC 2318
52
Message of Solidarity from General Union of Palestine Students, 15/9/74 CSC 1879
53
J. Eckel, ‘The Rebirth of Politics from the Spirit of Morality’, in The Breakthrough, 260
54
Eckel, Rebirth of Politics, 261
55
Eckel, Rebirth of Politics, 257
56
Gatehouse Interview
57
58
Declaration of the Permanent Committee of the Bishops’ Conference of the Chilean Catholic Church,
9/11/1978, CSC/1/22
59
The Talcahuano Kitchen Fund, CSC/31/7
60
Solidarity: An Action Guide, CSC/28/7

14
account within the context of civil and political rights.61
The CSC corresponded with a variety of
independent Women’s organisations in Britain and Chile, demonstrating concern both for women’s
political rights and for human rights. The Women’s Organiser of the Communist Party appealed to
British women to adopt female prisoners.62
The decision of the Communist Party to pursue a
humanitarian goal demonstrates how human rights became an important language for a variety of
interests. The Women’s Section of the Trade Union National Coordinating Committee aimed to help
create organisations in Chile which could secure the basic rights of women, particularly with their
‘special claims’ as mothers.63
Women’s groups also related their human rights concerns to the
government. In a letter to the Foreign Secretary, the Chairwomen of the British Liaison Committee for
Women’s Peace Groups lay emphasis on the continuing repression and torture of women in Chile and
thus condemned the Conservative renewal of ambassadorial relations. The noteworthy involvement
of women’s groups in the CSC demonstrates how it acted as a forum in which diverse groups could
demonstrate solidarity with Chile. Women were interested in the rights of women in Chile, which
manifested itself as both a political and humanitarian endeavour.
The relationships that the CSC maintained with social movements is a testament to the organisation
of the Campaign. Their organisation around the CSC was, as Gatehouse recalled, ‘classic popular front
tactics’.64
Students spoke in leftist terms, raising fears concerning democracy, socialism, and fascism.
Within their discourse, there was a recognition that their utopian political ambitions had been
crushed, but also an understanding that the human rights of the Chileans had also been severely
compromised. Women had similar conceptions of the situation, as they campaigned to improve the
civil and human rights of Chilean women. The CSC pursued only human rights issues with the Church,
as it entered a new age of Christian humanism. Therefore, the way social movements engaged with
Chile solidarity suggests that there was a breakthrough for human rights in the 1970s. Many of these
people joined these NSMs precisely at the moment when previous endeavours had come to an end.
Semantically, their individual concerns often fell under the notion of human rights, whilst their mode
of action was typical of newfound human rights activism. The fact that most of the movements
pushing these political and cultural shifts forward were associated with leftist politics raises the
question of how the human rights revolution of the 1970s was related to the altered political
landscape. In other words, the CSC’s close interaction and coordination with NSMs suggests that
human rights discourses morally reoriented leftist politics, rather than completely transcending it. This
61
N. Stammers, Human Rights and Social Movements, (London: Pluto Press, 2009), 144
62
Second National Meeting of Chilean Women’s Section of the Trade Union National Coordinating Committee,
10/11/1979, CSC/35/1
63
Ibid.
64
Gatehouse Interview

15
challenges Moyn’s argument that human rights rose to prominence in the 1970s in the way it
transcended waning political utopias. Their political fervour did not disappear. Rather, they reassessed
their aims and, instead, committed themselves to the pursuit of human rights.

16
THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT
This chapter will explore the CSC’s relationship with the British government, how the government
situated itself in the debate on Chile, and to what extent it adopted the growing human rights
discourse. It will demonstrate that, over and above political ideology, the CSC and the government
engaged in the semantic and active rhetoric of human rights, which underlines how the discourse
transcended political considerations. An important moment in the history of human rights was its
canonization in the Helsinki process, and then Jimmy Carter’s affiliation with the language in 1977.
Moyn argues that without this adoption in the international fora, human rights might have remained
the preserve of minor advocacy groups.65
In the wake of the Watergate scandal and the disaster of
the Vietnam War, Carter sought a moral foreign policy in order to restore the faith of the American
people, and the world, in the US State. His stand for morality linked him with a surge in human rights.
American foreign policy discussions were permanently altered, with new relevance for a ‘moral’
option that referred explicitly to individual human rights. There is much evidence to suggest that there
was a similar eruption in British politics.
In foreign policy manifestos, both the Labour and Conservative parties expressed their understanding
of the importance of human rights. In a document entitled ‘Human Rights and Foreign Policy’, the
Conservatives stated that they wanted ‘to help people rather than governments’, because ‘the plight
of fellow human beings must remain a matter of profound concern to us all’.66
The Labour Party
showed immediate concern for human rights. At their Annual Conference in 1974, they suspended aid
to Chile while adopting a more generous policy on refugees. Furthermore, they joined with other
governments in condemning the policies of the Junta in the form of co-sponsoring resolutions on
human rights in Chile at UNESCO and at the International Labour Conference.67
Even when they were
out of office, they released a manifesto released in 1982 entitled ‘A Socialist Foreign Policy’, in which
they advocated an increase in the number of refugees being admitted as they recognised that they
had admitted far fewer than other European countries had.68
Human rights talk also entered public
discourse through the media. In an article for the Guardian, David Montgomery received a fierce
backlash when he condemned the ‘demagoguery of human rights’. He believed it was inconsistent to
celebrate the overthrow of a right wing dictatorship but not the other way round, and hoped that a
Conservative policy would prioritise business rather than humanitarian considerations.69
In response,
65
Moyn, Last Utopia 149
66
‘Human Rights and Foreign Policy’, Conservative News Service CSC/25/5
67
Labour Party Annual Report 1974, 61
68
‘A Socialist Foreign Policy, 1982’, CSC/1/24
69
David Montgomery ‘A continent condemned out of hand’, The Guardian, 4/6/79

17
the CCHR argued that the article amounted to an apologia for the military dictatorship in Chile, and
questioned the torture and destructive economic policies that had ransacked the Chilean poor.70
The CSC was seen by the Labour government as a legitimate organisation and was welcomed into key
areas of the decision making process.71
They were helped by the fact that Judith Hart MP, the foremost
expert on Latin America, affiliated herself with them. The interactions between the CSC and the British
Government were couched in human rights discourse. One important question was over the provision
of military assistance to the Chileans. This entailed the servicing of submarines and jet engines that
had been sent back to Britain from Chile, as well as arms sales. The Government faced internal and
external attack. The Times noted that the CSC’s campaign on violence in Chile and the importance of
cutting arms and aid had created ‘the most serious difficulties’ since Labour won the election.72
In one of the most momentous protests, the workers at the Rolls Royce East Kilbride factory in
Scotland refused to do routine works on Hawker Hunter jet engines – the same jets that had been
used to bomb La Moneda Palace. Gatehouse wrote to the Prime Minister, Callaghan, explaining how
the engines had become a major symbol of the international solidarity movement, and lamented the
‘tragic blow’ to Britain’s human rights record if this assistance were to be given to Pinochet.73
They
also pressured the Foreign Minister, David Owen, urging him to oppose any moves of returning the
engines until ‘fundamental democratic and human rights’ were restored.74
Indeed, David Owen was
the most vocal adopter of human rights language in government, insisting that only respect for human
rights could bring ‘peace and stability in the long term’.75
Ultimately, though, Callaghan and Owen
were advised by the Attorney General that the government were legally obliged to honour the existing
contracts with the Chileans. Yet they agreed no further arms deals with the Chileans. This suggests
that, through CSC pressure, the Labour government recognised that military aid would have increased
human rights abuses in Chile.
The CSC also pressed the Labour government to act on behalf of those being tortured and exiled from
Chile. The British government had always given a small amount of aid that usually went to Chilean
universities. Hart argued that it was ridiculous for British aid to go to universities which were now
controlled by Pinochet’s government. She redirected the funds and set up the Joint Working Group
for Refugees from Chile (JWG), giving it direct responsibility for the reception and resettlement of
70
Annie Street, ‘Latin America: Human Rights before a business head’ The Guardian 7/6/1979
71
M. D. Wilkinson, ‘The Chile Solidarity Campaign and British Government Policy towards Chile, 1973-1990’,
European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 52, (June, 1992), 60
72
‘Blocking of arms for Chile beset by legal difficulties’, The Times, 17/5/74
73
Gatehouse to Callaghan, 14/7/78, CSC/23/3
74
Barlow to Owen, 23/6/78, CSC/23/3
75
‘Owen champions human rights’ The Guardian, 4/3/77

18
refugees.76
JWG committees were set up in various cities across the country, and local authorities
made flats available and passed on donated furniture to incoming refugees.77
However, Michael Wilkinson questions the efficacy of the Labour government.78
The Home Office
wrote to Gatehouse explaining difficulties they were facing in communicating with and receiving
Chilean refugees. In this light, it is interesting that the CSC placed the resettlement programme in the
hands of groups which were largely independent of the government: The World University Service and
Academics for Chile sponsored just under half of all Chilean exiles in Britain. However, these two
services were given £11m funding by the government. Moreover, Gatehouse recognised the measures
adopted by the government to protest the treatment of Dr Sheila Cassidy, a British doctor who was
tortured in Chile. The government kept the CSC informed of their efforts to secure her return
throughout.79
Furthermore, the decision of the government to withdraw their ambassador from Chile
in light of Cassidy’s torture vindicates the argument that the government acted on the human rights
abuses of the Junta. Overall, the Labour government was receptive to the human rights issues raised
by the CSC.
Thatcher’s government ignored lobby groups on the centre and the left. The main non-governmental
influences on Conservative policy were Canning House and the British Chilean Council, both of whom
were apologists for Latin American military regimes.80
In fact, the Conservative government entirely
disregarded the promises they had made in their foreign policy document. One of their first acts in
1979 was to restore ambassadorial relations with the Chilean Junta. Although they claimed this was
to achieve a working relationship, many, including Pinochet, saw it as a gesture of goodwill.81
Despite
this, the CSC attempted to make the most of restored diplomatic relations with Chile, as they deemed
it imperative that the government explored the case of four trade unionists who had been expelled
from Chile.82
Unfortunately, the most the Ambassador could do was to make known ‘informally’ to
the Chilean government that this action could ‘only harm their international image’.83
Whilst the Conservatives refused to involve themselves with human rights issues, they sanctioned a
major operation to supply black market arms to Chile, as well as restoring credit guarantees to the
regime. They were wary of the public backlash these dealings could cause; the CSC accused the
76
Joint Working Group members, 9/2/74, HART/4/7 LHASC, Manchester
77
Gatehouse Interview
78
Wilkinson, CSC and British Government Policy towards Chile, 64
79
Gatehouse to Callaghan, 3/1/76 CSC/21/1
80
81
‘A Harsh and Repressive Regime’, The Times, 18/1/1980
82
CSC to Thatcher, 14/8/81 CSC/25/5
83
G. Drain to CSC, 27/9/81 CSC/25/5

19
government of ‘testing the water’ as it announced that it was merely ‘reviewing’ the ban on arms sales
to Chile.84
Indeed, they kept the Chilean army at a distance and cancelled a visit to Farnborough
Airfield by the head of the Chilean air force due to a wave of protests from the CSC.85
The majority of
Conservative dealings with Pinochet were secretive. A secret cooperation agreement during the
Falklands War was made in which Britain would supply military equipment in return for the use of
Chilean bases during the conflict. In addition, Britain agreed to try to ease the human rights pressure
on Chile in the international community.86
Therefore, the Conservative office showed complete
disregard for human rights. Indeed, Gatehouse remarked that the Tories paid only lip service to the
Campaign.87
The relationship between the CSC and the government was varied. With a strong socialist tendency,
the Labour government sympathised with events in Chile. They helped where they could, but were
ultimately restricted by geopolitical considerations. For instance, David Owen feared that sanctions
on Chile would obstruct the efforts of British exporters and disrupt copper imports from Chile.88
With
Britain relying on Chile for 30 percent of their copper imports, this was a significant risk. On the other
hand, the Conservative government showed interest in Chile but in the exact opposite manner to how
the CSC hoped they would. Indeed, the fact that Thatcher later took tea with Pinochet once he had
been arrested is telling of the sort of relationship the Conservatives developed with the Junta.89
What is most interesting about the relationship of the CSC with both governments is that their
communication was framed in terms of human rights. Granted advocating socialism to a Conservative
government would have been a fruitless endeavour, but there was also no mention of it when
speaking to the Labour government. Human rights became a legitimate means of pressuring the
government as it was a discourse that was deemed to transcend politics. Whilst a small solidarity
group would have had little authority on the question of political ideology, their humanitarian views
were a legitimate means of protest. In particular, the Labour Party pursued both a semantic and active
policy of human rights. Although the Conservatives were unsympathetic, this thesis does not require
universal acceptance of human rights, as the universal accommodation of an ideology is an
unreasonable requirement. Therefore, the nature of the CSC’s relationship with the British
government consolidates the notion there was a breakthrough for human rights in the 1970s, as well
as adding new weight to the suggestion that it was an apolitical discourse.
84
Secretary to Norman Atkinson MP, 14/4/80, CSC/11/11
85
86
J. Ferguson and J. Pearce, The Thatcher Years: Britain and Latin America, (London, 1988), 58
87
Gatehouse Interview
88
Owen to Kitson, 5/7/77, CSC/23/3
89
Amelia Gentleman, ‘Thatcher takes elevenses with old ally’, The Guardian, 27/3/99

20
TRADE UNIONS
As with the NSMs, the trade unions pursued human rights principally through their mode of action,
whilst framing their semantic discourse politically in terms of workers’ rights. This chapter will explore
the relationship that the CSC had with the trade unions and the ways in which they became involved
in Chile solidarity. Trade union affairs have the most sections devoted to them in the archives of the
CSC, which is reflective of the important role they played in Chile solidarity. In fact, local CSC
committees were not pursued nearly as vigorously as were links with trade unions because of their
comparable size and political might. The alliance with the trade unions was advocated by the local
committees themselves; the Stirling CSC believed it to be of ‘greatest priority’ to develop links
between the labour movement of Britain and Chile.90
By courting strategic individuals, the CSC could
punch above its weight in political arenas.91
Alex Kitson was the Executive Officer of the TGWU, as well
as being a member of the British Labour Party National Executive Committee. As such, his place on
the Executive Committee of the CSC gave them political credibility within the labour movement. The
CSC made Brian Nicholson and George Anthony, both rank-and-file trade unionists, their joint chairs.
In this way, the CSC was heavily influenced by the British trade unions.
Nicholson commented at a conference that the CSC’s strength stemmed from the hundreds of party
branches, trade union district committees and trades councils that ensured ‘real solidarity action with
the Chilean people’.92
By 1976, the CSC were affiliated with 19 unions which comprised almost six
million people. The CSC established an annual calendar of events that revolved around significant
Chilean labour movement dates. For example, Navy Day was important for relations between Britain
and Chile. On this day, Chilean Navy officers travelled to London to lay a wreath at the tomb of Lord
Cochrane, a British commander-in-chief of the Chilean Navy during the War of Independence.93
A large part of the importance of the trade unions was the size of the support they could generate.
This was particularly evident in the trade union turnout at Chile solidarity demonstrations. The annual
demonstration in the year following the coup saw 10,000 people descend onto Hyde Park. Stewards
divided the march into four sections, in what The Morning Star deemed ‘a roll call of the British labour
movement’.94
The trade unions marched at the front of the demonstration, followed by a variety of
left-wing political parties. The presence and influence of the trade unions was vital to the success of
the demonstration. This is clearly portrayed in a list of official supporters and speakers at the
90
AGM 1981, CSC/1/26
91
A. Jones, No Truck with the Chilean Junta!, http://press.anu.edu.au?p=286921 ,44
92
Bristol Conference, Notes for Nicholson, 30/1/82, CSC/11/15
93
Jones, No Truck with Chilean Junta, 46
94
M. Gostwick, ‘Solidarity with Chile’s Democrats’, Morning Star, 14/9/74, in Jones, No Truck with Chilean
Junta, 68

21
demonstration, of which only four out of fifteen were not trade unions, though all were on the British
Left. Similarly, they attracted high profile trade union officials to speak, notably Jack Jones, General
Secretary of the TGWU and Hugh Scanlon, President of the AUEW.95
Indeed, Ken Gill of the AUEW
argued that the Chilean experience provided a lesson to the British Left when confronting fascism that
‘they must stay united’.96
Thus, the trade unions were vital in the success of the CSC’s demonstrations,
both in the quantity of workers they mobilised but also in galvanising the broad Left.
A crucial part of Chile solidarity was the worker protest at a number of factories across the UK. The
British unions with the most strategic industrial locations in terms of trade with Chile were the AUEW,
TGWU, and the National Union of Seamen. Workers at the East Kilbride factory engaged in servicing
for Rolls Royce. The company held long-term service contracts with civil airlines and military forces
around the world. A few shop stewards were working there when they noticed crates bearing lettering
noting that they were Hawker Hunter engines that came from Chile. The workforce at East Kilbride
were particularly militant; 80 percent of shop stewards were members of political parties, and the
Communist Party paper, the Morning Star was widely distributed. As such, news of action could be
relayed among the workers very effectively, and the engines were immediately ‘blacked’.97
‘Blacking’
was a popular tactic used by trade unions, which meant simply that they would not undertake work
on those items. The engines remained blacked for a number of years, before they mysteriously
disappeared in 1978. The Chambers found no evidence of any offence having been committed in their
removal, but it marked the end of four years of solidarity.98
In spite of their eventual defeat, the Scottish CSC expressed their admiration of the stand taken by the
Rolls Royce workers. Gatehouse hailed the action as ‘an outstanding example to the whole trade union
movement’.99
The Rolls Royce action was arguably the most important because of the symbolic
significance of Hawker Hunter engines that had been used to destroy Allende’s regime. Having said
that, there were lots of other boycotts and instances of worker unity, such as the decision of 700
Liverpool Seamen to refuse to sail ships due for Chile in protest of the arrest of Jack Jones and Sheila
Cassidy. Given their subsequent unemployment, their boycott was especially remarkable.100
In a
smaller yet equally symbolic protest, crane drivers at Newhaven refused to unload Chilean onions,
leading to their rotting.101
Interestingly, Gatehouse said that the blackings were entirely the initiative
95
Plans for National Demonstration 1974 CSC/6/1
96
97
98
CSC to Neil Kinnock, 3/11/78 CSC/23/3
99
Gatehouse to Lowe, 4/2/79, CSC/11/10
100
‘To all British Seamen: Support your Executive Council’ CSC/28/6
101

22
of the workers. In fact, the CSC remained quite inactive during the boycott as it emphasised the
worker-based nature of the solidarity movement. In other words, what does this suggest about the
motives of the trade unions?
Speaking at the CSC Trade Union Conference, Luis Figueroa, President of the Chilean Trade Union
Congress, rallied the crowd. He argued that only with the direct contact affording by this conference
could one ‘get to know a class beyond the boundaries of nation, flag and language, and perceive the
true nature of the international workers’ movement’.102
The conference culminated in the production
of a pamphlet which concluded that the continued struggle of the labour movement against fascism
was linked to their solidarity work with Chile. Solidarity with the people of Chile was part of the fight
for socialism. More than that, they believed that in attacking the fascist methods in Chile, the British
labour movement was contributing ‘to its own defence against any similar attempt in Britain’.103
Tom
Pilford, Chairman of the Greater London Association of Trades Councils, said that trade unionists had
conveyed to him their horror at events in Chile, and wanted to fight for the right to give Chilean
workers decent homes and living conditions.104
Therefore, trade union members displayed a passion
for worker solidarity and democratic socialism, as was commonplace among the broad Left who
affiliated with the CSC.
However, above any organisational or political gain, the plight of an individual unionist went beyond
political difference. Whilst the term ‘human rights’ is almost entirely absent from trade union
discourse, they did partake in the sort of human rights action that defined the work of AI and other
human rights organisations. Stories such as when a prisoner begged the Scottish NUM to see what
could be done for his ‘wife and little girl’ were particularly inspiring.105
This led many trade unionists
to ‘adopt’ prisoners in the same way that AI pursued letter-writing and adoption campaigns
throughout the world. In some cases, these adoption campaigns were successful. Gatehouse
remembered the return of a refugee with his children who were met by a delegation from the Norwich
Builder’s Union at Heathrow Airport in an uplifting affair. In another case, miners in Scotland furnished
an entire house, organised employment in the mines, and arranged English classes. This had a huge
multiplier effect; it brought the Chileans into contact with fellow compatriots, who also spoke at CSC
events, which rallied further support. In short, Gatehouse said, the impact of the trade unionists
‘cannot be overstated’.106
Indeed, the CSC acknowledged that the adopt-a-prisoner program was vital
102
CSC TU Conference, Concluding speech of Luis Figueroa, CSC/11/2
103
104
105
Jones, No Truck with Chilean Junta ,78
106
Gatehouse Interview.

23
for building the entire campaign, as was evident at the trade union conference.107
In Figueroa’s
concluding speech, he celebrated the ‘fundamentally humanitarian character we have’.108
The trade unions and the CSC were formidable partners in Chile solidarity. Their strong relationship
was forged in a shared desire for the repression of fascism, the restoration of socialism, and the pursuit
of workers’ rights in Chile and Britain. Two of their most noteworthy successes, the annual
demonstration and the blacking of the Rolls Royce engines were typical tactics of worker protest. In
this way, the CSC accommodated the trade unions into their campaign by exploiting the solidarity and
protest tactics that had become engrained in the working class movement. It is not surprising that the
unions framed their language in political terms as they naturally fought for working class interests. In
other words, the trade unions pursued human rights symbolically through their mode of action rather
than semantically. The very fact that they pursued new human rights tactics such as prisoner adoption
and the resettlement of refugees suggests that the discourse broke through in Britain in the 1970s.
107
CSC Executive Committee: Discussion Document, 17/12/75, CSC/1/5
108

24
CONCLUSION
Luis Figueroa spoke eloquently and passionately at the Trade Union Conference:
You can see ordinary workers in company with priests and nuns going round the working class
neighbourhoods to distribute food and the necessities of life to the unemployed, or going to
visit the prisoners in the concentration camps, carrying out different forms of protest actions
against the junta.109
This quote perfectly encapsulates Chile solidarity. Everyone empathised with the Chilean cause, and
supported the oppressed Chilean people in any way they could. In Britain, a variety of interests worked
together in this common pursuit. The way they framed their concerns, and the way they interacted
with each other suggests that the CSC is an example of how the 1970s was a breakthrough era. But,
the nature of this breakthrough is different to the one which Moyn expounds. He argues that as the
Cold War binary seemed increasingly futile, barbaric, and, ultimately, not able to deliver the social
utopias they promised, people sought human rights as an alternative utopia. The human rights, or
‘Last’ utopia, demanded reasonable, achievable aspirations rather than lofty ideologies. It presented
people with a moral option, which was particularly pertinent at a time where morality was noticeably
lacking in the international fora. Above all, argues Moyn, human rights were explicitly apolitical in the
way that they transcended the previous political boundaries and became a discourse that people of
all class, culture, or race could meaningfully engage in. He has written an international history of
human rights, in which waning political utopias created space for new ideas to replace them.
However, this dissertation has explored a localised history of human rights. It has taken the
international question of Pinochet’s military Junta, and examined how the British responded to and
perceived it. In so doing, this dissertation examined the relationship of the CSC with NSMs, the
government, and the trade unions. There is a recurrent theme when one asks to what extent the
engagements of the CSC suggest that there was a breakthrough for human rights discourse. As such,
there are two points with which to conclude.
The first conclusion one can draw is that it is indubitable that the 1970s saw a breakthrough for the
human rights utopia. The interactions that the CSC had with a variety of social movements, the British
Government, and the trade unions all involved human rights in some manner. The most explicit
manifestation of this discourse was in the relationship between the CSC and the government. In
conversations with MPs and even with the Prime Minister, the CSC voiced their concerns that the
human rights of Chilean were being abused, or that the government had a duty to pursue human
rights policies. The trade unions and NSMs committed to the pursuit of human rights through their
109

25
mode of action. Students, women, religious people, and others were incentivised by the connection
they felt with these people. In each case, they condemned their political repression and worked to
secure their refuge in Britain. Similarly, trade unionists adopted the human rights tactics made famous
by AI in writing letters to political prisoners and providing refuge to exiled workers. Overall, human
rights was a cause that a variety of people could engage with. However, if they campaigned for human
rights, why did the NSMs and trade unions not explicitly frame their debate in human rights rhetoric?
This leads on to the second conclusion.
The second conclusion challenges Moyn’s contention that human rights were apolitical in the way that
they transcended the Cold War binary. In some ways, human rights were apolitical. This is evident in
the manner in which the CSC engaged with the government. A question of human rights was one that
was deemed to eclipse the political arena, rendering it a valuable tool with which to criticise the
government. MPs were more likely to listen to a group lamenting a poor human rights record than a
political ideology. In contrast, NSMs and trade unions had firm political interests, and, as has been
explained, were outraged by the overthrow of the first democratically elected socialist government.
This fact is crucial. Whilst Moyn holds that the new human rights discourse went beyond political
contention, it was actually very much a left-wing project. The way they spoke to each other and to the
CSC corroborates this. The NSMs and the trade unions campaigned for socialism and workers’ rights,
and against fascism, whilst, at the same time, they engaged in the human rights activism that
prompted the first conclusion that human rights broke through in the 1970s. Therefore, Moyn’s
conceptualisation of human rights as inherently apolitical needs reformulation. People broke with the
belief in political utopias and with the revolutionary fight against ‘the system’. Rather than
transcending the Cold War binary, human rights broke through because they were adopted within the
left of that binary. Rather than being entirely separate from political discourse, human rights became
another function of left-wing politics.
Though more examples are required to test this thesis, if human rights truly are political, then there
are a number of interesting ramifications for how we perceive world politics. In the past decade,
human rights have been increasingly used as moral justifications for seemingly immoral acts. For
instance, the 2003 invasion of Iraq was justified in the pursuit of human rights, rendering it supposedly
impervious to challenge. It raised war above political considerations; how could a moral person
contest such a humanitarian act? This is why this dissertation is so important. If we can embrace
reality, and have a deeper understanding of the fundamental nature of human rights in contemporary
society, we can engage in a more meaningful dialogue about the actions of people and governments,
and strive for a more lawful and fairer world.

26
BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES
Labour History Archive and Study Centre (LHASC), Manchester
- The Archives of the Chile Solidarity Campaign, 1973-1990, Reference: CSC
- The Judith Hart MP Papers, 1959-1988, Reference: LP/HART
- Labour Party Annual Reports 1973-79
Interviews
- Mike Gatehouse, Joint Secretary of the CSC, 21/3/2015
Pamphlets
- Chile and the British Labour Movement: Trade Union Conference Report, 1975
Newspapers at the British Library Online Archive
- The Independent Digital Archive, 1986-2012
- The Times Digital Archive 1785-1985
- The Guardian 1821-2003
- Daily Mail Historical Archive, 1896-2004
- The Daily Telegraph, 1996-2000
SECONDARY SOURCES
- Baxi, U, The Future of Human Rights (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2002)
- Beckett, A, Pinochet in Piccadilly: Britain and Chile’s Hidden History, (London, 2002)
- Buchanan, T, ‘Amnesty International in Crisis, 1966-7’, Twentieth Century British History 15. 3
(2004): 267-289
- Diani, M and D. McAdam, Social Movements and Networks (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2003)
- Donnelly, J, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice (Ithaca: Cornell University Press,
1989)
- Eckel, J and S. Moyn, The Breakthrough (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014)
- Iriye, A, P. Goedde, and W. I. Hitchcock, The Human Rights Revolution (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2012)
- Ferguson, J and J. Pearce, The Thatcher Years: Britain and Latin America, (London: Latin
American Bureau, 1988)

27
- Jones, A, No Truck with the Chilean Junta! http://press.anu.edu.au?p=286921, August 2014
- Kelly, P. W, ‘The 1973 Chilean coup and the Origins of Transnational Human Rights Activism’,
Journal of Global History 8.01 (2013) 165-186
- Klein, N, The Shock Doctrine (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2007)
- Kornbluh, P, The Pinochet File (New York: New Press, 2003)
- Lauren, P. G, The Evolution of International Human Rights (Philadelphia, University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1998)
- Levy, D and N. Sznaider, Human Rights and Memory (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State
University Press, 2010)
- Mazower, M, No Enchanted Palace, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009)
- Morsink, J, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (Philadelphia: University of
Philadelphia Press, 1999)
- Moyn, S, Human Rights and the Uses of History, (London: Verso, 2014)
- Moyn, S, The Last Utopia (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,
2010)
- Nagy-Zemki, S and F. Ignacio Leiva, Democracy in Chile, (Brighton: Sussex Academic Press,
2005)
- Power, M, ‘The US Movement in Solidarity with Chile in the 1970s, Latin American
Perspectives, 36.6 (2009) 46-66
- Power, S, A Problem From Hell, (New York: Basic Books, 2002)
- Stammers, N, Human Rights and Social Movements, (London: Pluto Press, 2009)
- Stites Mor, J, Human Rights and Transnational Solidarity in Cold War Latin America
(Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsim Press, 2013)
- Waltz, S. E, ‘Universalising Human Rights: The Role of Small States in the Construction of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights’, Human Rights Quarterly 23.1 (2001): 44-72
- Waterman, P, Globalization, Social Movements and the New Internationalisms, (London:
Continuum, 2001)
- Wilkinson, M. D, ‘The Chile Solidarity Campaign and British Government Policy towards
Chile, 1973-1990’, European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 52, (June,
1992) 57-74

Dissertation

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Dissertation

Similar to Dissertation (6)

Dissertation