Thom Hogan held hostage in Chile

Interesting Story, indeed.

I took Thom's story and tried to distill it down to 100 words or less, so to speak. This is what I got out of it:

1. The Chileans in that area are horrendously poor.

2. Some clown of a mid-level government bureaucrat makes a ham-fisted decision to raise the energy rates in the blink of an eye instead of a slow phase-in of price increases that would have been easier for the local population to accept.

3. The local population becomes aghast at the prospect of seeing everything they have worked for jeopardized by what they see is an insensitive national government.

4. The locals adopt a policy of "If it's not good for me, then it's not good for anyone" in response.

5. Thom and company return from the wilderness to find things have changed while they were gone and start to get their nickers in a knot.

Honestly, does Thom and company think they live in a vacuum where they can remain unaffected by local influences in a foreign country. Was Thom held hostage? Don't think so! He was severely inconvenienced, but was not confined, handcuffed, or even blindfolded so using the term hostage is a very big stretch for the imagination.

Blockading the roads by the Citizens' Assembly Magallanes sounds like democracy in progress, as it was an action supported by a majority of the local population. Would Thom still have felt he was being held hostage if everyone just decided not to show up for work for a couple of days? The only difference between the two was that some vehicles got shuffled around a bit instead of being left to sit where they were. He's lucky they didn't shut down all services as he wouldn't even have a place to eat either. Thom goes further and disparages the citizen's movement by saying "amazing what a trip to Staples and a desktop printer does these days". Sorry pal, your a guest in someone else's country and if you don't like the way they conduct their democratic processes then maybe you shouldn't have gone there in the first place.

I mean really, he paid a lot money to get to Chile to photograph the countryside, come on now, all he had to say to himself was "Great! I have another day or two to spend with my camera photographing a country I may not get back to for some time, please call me when we are able to go home again". Turn an obstacle into an opportunity, for crying out load. End of story.

Throwing in the story of the child being killed along with injuries to two other protesters into the mix is a red herring. One boneheaded truck driver decides to do something very stupid, and Thom cries carnage all over the lower half of Chile. Criminal charges and civil suites for damages filed against the truck driver will take care of that situation.

His use of the environment and conservation issues as justification for raiding everyone's bank account simply stinks to high heavens. Why not institute a policy of rebates for heating equipment upgrades to increase energy conservation instead? It's better government policy.

Traveling without sufficient medications to cover the period of time you will be away from home, as well as an extended period of time past that, is just asking for trouble. You can get marooned on Cozumel, in London, or New York city just as easily. Were there no pharmacists of doctors available for consultation for an extension of the prescriptions? If you're traveling without adequate meds, then you are nothing but a disaster waiting to happen, and a very personal disaster at that.

Thom and crew lost a great opportunity to turn adversity into opportunity by not continuing to do what they had come there for. The news services were right not to pay to much attention to the issue as it was just a low grade case of insubordination of bad government policy by its' people.

Thom's answer to all this is to scream at the top of his lungs to tell people not to go to Chile because he had one bad experience among many great trips to Chile. Really? Just how far does he think he will get. He might have a popular website but the internet is a very big place. Good luck being heard Thom! I mean tourists are being murdered in Mexico these days and they still keep on going to Mexico. What Thom may find out though, is that even having a popular website with hundreds of fact filled pages doesn't mean your opinions and arguments are worth anymore than a tinker's dam, like the rest of us. Hope his ego can handle that.

Paul

The Magellanes region is actually full of contradictions. They have a high per capita income compared to the rest of the country, yet everything costs X00% more due to remoteness. While the rest of Chile has tripled income, the area stayed pretty much the same. Lots of factors in the geopolitical status makes it a lot more complicated than a bunch of Huasos kicking up a fuss.

Bottomline is the Magallanicos don't have much bargaining power and thus chose to use the tourist trade to gain leverage. Thom thinks that was dumb and selfish but I think it was their best play, however it affected their immediate income. Block the main road and strand a few thousand tourists and create an international incident, without harming anyone. Pressure from other governments to extricate their citizens and bad press go a long way. For better or worse, it worked as the hikes were lowered dramatically.

Their actions are no more selfish than people who complain about areas losing their "raw and wild" aspects to development. So the people in the area are suppose to stay less developed so someone can take a photo or enjoy the atmosphere? That's pretty selfish! There are places which want to restrict development as a goverment choice, like Bhutan.

I dont really want to defend Thom, I barely know him except I once owned a few manuals written by him. I also think his story is full of hyperboles and a little whiny. But I think some reactions here are almost the opposite end of silliness.

Interesting Story, indeed.

 

I took Thom's story and tried to distill it down to 100 words or less, so to speak. This is what I got out of it:

 

1. The Chileans in that area are horrendously poor.

 

2. Some clown of a mid-level government bureaucrat makes a ham-fisted decision to raise the energy rates in the blink of an eye instead of a slow phase-in of price increases that would have been easier for the local population to accept.

 

3. The local population becomes aghast at the prospect of seeing everything they have worked for jeopardized by what they see is an insensitive national government.

 

4. The locals adopt a policy of "If it's not good for me, then it's not good for anyone" in response.

 

5. Thom and company return from the wilderness to find things have changed while they were gone and start to get their nickers in a knot.

6. Thom and company were not allowed out of the region because all roads in and out of the region were blockaded.

Let's put this into perspective. I just came from Misool Eco Resort (beautiful place, I can recommend this to anyone). Let's say they had some issue and decided to prevent us from going home by blocking us from using a boat, the only way out of the region. They decided to keep us there unless we caved in to some demand of theirs. We're free to move around on the island, but we cant go home. We're not wearing handcuffs or anything, so thats not so bad right? Minor inconvenience? I dont know, I think id feel pretty pissed off if someone stopped me from going home and kept me there against my will.

Blockading the roads by the Citizens' Assembly Magallanes sounds like democracy in progress, as it was an action supported by a majority of the local population.

This is not democracy. Democracy is not about the will of the majority, it's about protecting the minority and their views and wishes. What you are describing is more like "The Tyranny of the Majority" where a majority decides to enact their will by force. Now if they'd proposed a new bill to allow for roadblocks to be put up, then voted on it, and then let local police enforce the roadblocks, that would be democracy. Otherwise it's just angry mob justice. Some really really bad things have happened in history with this form of 'democracy'.

6. Thom and company were not allowed out of the region because all roads in and out of the region were blockaded.

Cor, Thom does mention that mention the people at the blockades were quite happy to let them pass through the blockades and get on buses on the otherside. Inconvenience yes, hostage taking no.

I don't think your example using the Misool Eco Resort (a place I would like to visit someday) doesn't quite echo the situation on the ground in Chile. In the situation you are describing, you are denying all use of the boat to get off the island. For your example to be accurate the people would be allowed to get on the boat, but only travel a certain distance before having to change boats every so often (whether there was a boat there to receive them or not is another story). In the Chilean situation, Thom and crew were not denied the right to travel, as evidenced by Thom's own words when he quoted the protesters, "But we have a solution for you," he said. "You may take your luggage and bags with you and walk through the barricade and get another bus to pick you up on the other side and take you into town, but you must choose to do this soon." Travel was hindered greatly, I'll grant you, but not denied, as in your example.

This is not democracy. Democracy is not about the will of the majority, it's about protecting the minority and their views and wishes. What you are describing is more like "The Tyranny of the Majority" where a majority decides to enact their will by force.

I hope we can agree to disagree on this point as I feel democracy is all about the will of the majority while accommodating the views and wishes of the minority. When you step back and look at it on a national level, isn't this what the local population was doing, by protecting themselves as a minority, their views and their wishes?

Boiling it all down to 25 words or less, Thom hit a traffic jam on the way home and "lost it", think of it as road rage, if you will. Simple as that. You're in a foreign country don't forget, things don't go the same way as they do back home all the time. Shit happens, and in this case some did. Deal with it, Thom.

Boiling it all down to 25 words or less, Thom hit a traffic jam on the way home and "lost it", think of it as road rage, if you will. Simple as that. You're in a foreign country don't forget, things don't go the same way as they do back home all the time. Shit happens, and in this case some did. Deal with it, Thom.

This is an absurd summary.

Maybe a better summary would be; democracy would have been served if these guys had protested on the side of the road, airports etc and refused to show up for work. Only tyranny is served by physically blocking anyone, majority or minority, from using a public road. But then there are some who think all the murders of the intelligentsia during the French Revolution was democracy being served as well

I dont really want to defend Thom, I barely know him except I once owned a few manuals written by him. I also think his story is full of hyperboles and a little whiny. But I think some reactions here are almost the opposite end of silliness.

 

6. Thom and company were not allowed out of the region because all roads in and out of the region were blockaded.

 

Let's put this into perspective. I just came from Misool Eco Resort (beautiful place, I can recommend this to anyone). Let's say they had some issue and decided to prevent us from going home by blocking us from using a boat, the only way out of the region. They decided to keep us there unless we caved in to some demand of theirs. We're free to move around on the island, but we cant go home. We're not wearing handcuffs or anything, so thats not so bad right? Minor inconvenience? I dont know, I think id feel pretty pissed off if someone stopped me from going home and kept me there against my will.

At least we agree on Thom's tone in his blog, Cor.

Still if a driver of a bus or boat doesn't want to work, for whatever reason, then they are not keeping you against your will. They may be financially obligated to fulfill their contract but I doubt any of them signed a work contract. It may be morally reprehensible but it's not the same as having an EMT ignore a gunshot wound while on strike. Now if they kick you out of town to fend for yourself in the forest, then it's criminal. All they did was be non-cooperative and make things difficult for their own people, which I feel is within anyone's right to. I see it as a human version of an avalanche or rockslide which blocks off the road out.

There were a few alternatives. There was internet and telephone service. Calling the travel insurance would've given them an option of a security evacuation plan, which includes chartering a plane, helicopter etc. Or one can charter your own plane. I've done it because we were stuck without transport in Africa. My insurance supplied me their security evac company and I also had an evac plan on standby for contingencies. That's what trip organizers do or at least should do.

This is not democracy. Democracy is not about the will of the majority, it's about protecting the minority and their views and wishes. What you are describing is more like "The Tyranny of the Majority" where a majority decides to enact their will by force. Now if they'd proposed a new bill to allow for roadblocks to be put up, then voted on it, and then let local police enforce the roadblocks, that would be democracy. Otherwise it's just angry mob justice. Some really really bad things have happened in history with this form of 'democracy'.

Exactly, and the minority Magallanicos would feel the pitch of a 20% price hike, enforced by the government. But their voice wasn't heard so they took to defending their rights, in a relatively non-violent way. 2 people died because of a drunk truck driver, and the looting is par for course for most mass protests, since criminal opportunists will take advantage of the situation. I guess this discussion can continue until your jacket enlarges back to XL , so I'll just say I disagree with your assessment of the Magallanico's actions, like you care what I think!

Exactly, and the minority Magallanicos would feel the pitch of a 20% price hike, enforced by the government. But their voice wasn't heard so they took to defending their rights, in a relatively non-violent way. 2 people died because of a drunk truck driver, and the looting is par for course for most mass protests, since criminal opportunists will take advantage of the situation. I guess this discussion can continue until your jacket enlarges back to XL , so I'll just say I disagree with your assessment of the Magallanico's actions and your definition of hostage in this case, like you care what I think!

The exact quote was this

"Blockading the roads by the Citizens' Assembly Magallanes sounds like democracy in progress, as it was an action supported by a majority of the local population"

Thats the part I have issues with. This quote does not describe democracy at all, quite the opposite. So feel free to insert some other word that describes the situation, democracy isnt it. I did not use the word majority, pollywog did. Flipping things around and making it about a minority does not change anything. It is kind of unrelated to the thread, but I feel it's quite a big misunderstanding of what it means to be a democracy. Just saying

The London Underground Train drivers held everyone hostage on Boxing Day (26th Dec) by going on strike and making travel across the capital impossible. They plan to do the same on the day of the Royal Wedding. Spanish air-traffic controllers did not turn up for work one day in December holding hostage at Madrid's airport those in transit from London to the Galapagos. This sort of thing happens in many different countries. Bloody inconvenient it is too. It's as bad as having SSSS marked on your boarding card as I always seem to have done to me when travelling to the USA.

Mind you, it's the first time I've called it 'hostage-taking' but maybe the idea will catch on. Illegal isn't it?

Arguing about the rights and wrongs of the situation could go on ad naseum. In some countries they do take HOSTAGES over whom hangs the real threat of death with far too much evidence that all too often the threat is real. Describing what Thom Hogan went through in the same terms is what I have a problem with.

You are right in that the democracy question should be left alone for future debates. That issue is as broad as it is long.

I read Thom's account of the incident a couple of times now, and each time I came away troubled with what I read. I have just now been able to put my finger on it and it is this:

Early on in the narrative, Thom says his group was visited by two members of the Chilean equivalent of the FBI and was told to stay put. Thom and his gaggle chose to disregard the advice and press on regardless of the consequences. Why did he do this? Did he think he knew better? Maybe he doesn't respect the police officers down there. Who knows? But Thom still decides to traipse off over the countryside and gets himself in trouble with the locals. He was very lucky the locals down there did not nominate him for the Darwin Awards.

Again, He was told not to do it before he left. Then when he does get in trouble, he has the audacity to holler "Help -- I'm being held hostage". He brought it down on himself by doing what he was asked not to do. I have little sympathy for people who pull stunts like this.

Paul

If I remember Thom's blog correctly, the PDI told them not to leave early and they heeded the advice. According to the Santiago Times, the barricades were in place the day before so it didn't really matter. We can second guess Thom's decisions in Chile ad nauseum, should he have gone to Chile knowing there was a big strike 3 days before he arrived, should he have left earlier when the rumblings was getting bigger etc etc. He was stuck there and his blog is about his experience. He didn't do himself any favors by calling for a boycott of Chile and making disparaging remarks at many South American countries and other little whines about his trip. Maybe it's PTS,

Drew

This is from Thom's blog:

Their recommendation was actually that we not leave early, which had been our original plan, but stay put. (As it turned out, that would have been bad advice, and I wouldn't be writing the full story of what happened to me yet if we had.)

He calls the advice offered by the PDI bad and in brackets goes on to say they didn't listen to the PDI.

In situations such as this, when times are uncertain for whatever reason, I think it really behooves everyone involved to display a greater than normal amount of prudence. Thom did not do that. Instead, he took matters into his own hands, and then blamed everyone else for the calamities he had to endure. I think he should own up to the misadventure and put the blame for the incident squarely on his own shoulders where it belongs.

Thom had a severe case of "get-home-itis". While it is not always fatal, it does cause a fair number of individuals to succumb to it every year by taking irrational courses of action.

The one thing I will grant Thom, is he wrote a very slick piece of journalism. Ultimately, I think this story will do him more harm than good though.

Their recommendation was actually that we not leave early, which had been our original plan, but stay put. (As it turned out, that would have been bad advice, and I wouldn't be writing the full story of what happened to me yet if we had.)

What I understand from this is that he would still be stuck there if he had listened?????

I just don't get it. Sure Thom may be overhyping the whole deal, but it's just insane to me how folks can think that what these protesters/ strikers/ hostage takers or whatever you call them did is just OK, written off to some cultural thing, 'oh they're poor so it's justified' thing. I can appreciate the sentiment that if someone does not want to take these type of risks they should not travel, but that still does not justify in any way, in any culture or country, physically blockading someone from leaving one place to move to another. It's not OK if someone blockaded my driveway, and it's not OK if someone blockades a public road in Chile in my book.

Thanks Paul. I'd only read Thom's blog once and I expected accurate and unbiased journalism. Obviously he has a lot of anger toward what was happening and it showed in his blog. That's not journalism for me.

As for his decisions, it's easy to be critical in hindsight. I just didn't like the general tone of the blog (eg. criticizing the Chileans for not carpooling or keeping their indoor temperature at 74°F etc), the Chile/South America bashing nor his description of certain regions to be dangerous (For eg. UAE and Jordan are in the Middle East, those places are dangerous?!?)

I just read that he's updated the blog to answer criticisms to his blog, over a few of the same issues I have with his blog. He seems unwavering in calling it a hostage situation, or the criticisms of the Chileans. To me, he's angry and feels outraged that it happened to him and the blog is his way of venting. He seems to think the Magallanicos purposely picked Thom Hogan to be the target of their protest. Sounds like PTSD with feelings of victimization.

Yes, I think Thom has made a mistake by internalizing a lot of what was going on as being focused directly at him. He does inadvertently make himself a target. Rightly or wrongly, I do think he displayed a huge amount of impulsivity (if that's a word), and that's something I personally would not want to see in a tour leader.

I was in a similar situation in San Andres, Columbia a few years back, The taxi drivers (Thom's favourite group of people) were blockading the airport there. On the day we were leaving we were delayed a few hours, and had to carry or drag our luggage three or four blocks to the airport under the watchful eyes of the machine gun carrying army militia. There were a few groans to be heard , but no rash acts were offered up due to the inconvenience.

Closer to home, we have had several instances of road closures, and land and subdivision occupations instigated by the warriors of the First Nations People (Aboriginal Indians). We have even had the Tamil Tigers close down a portion of Canada's busiest highway called the 401 for several hours. People have come to live with it, and most people treat it as just another little inconvenience in the course of one's life.

There is generally, a type of choreography to these events, some progress more rapidly than others, and in all cases it is better to remain on the sidelines unless you have to act in some form of official capacity. All you need is one person to do something rash and impulsive to send delicate negotiations into the ditch and prolong the discomfort for everyone involved.

By now the Chileans have probably run Thom's blog through Google Translate and no longer want to see him as much as he does not want to see them . I just hope to God that Thom doesn't fill in the holes in his trip itinerary with trips to Canada. That same type of messy stuff happens up here too. The only difference is that most people will keep their noses out of it and get by as best they can with a minimum amount of fuss.

The way it looks to me is that Thom probably caters to an older crowd. Ive been with dive group leaders like that, and their clientele sometimes is actually a bit helpless (not all!, some are awesome and I can only wish to be that active at that age). So Thom maybe needs to overcompensate to make sure his older group is not getting overwhelmed. Ive seen that before as well. It's one of the main reasons we travel a lot with Eric, as he attracts a younger active crowd that probably would have been fine being stuck someplace

Well I think Thom has realized being at home in the US could be even more dangerous than traveling overseas!!! Shootings all over the country, backpack bombs in Spokane,WA, sheesh , I gotta move to the Antarctic!

Well I think Thom has realized being at home in the US could be even more dangerous than traveling overseas!!! Shootings all over the country, backpack bombs in Spokane,WA, sheesh , I gotta move to the Antarctic!

Don't fly to Moscow today!

The way it looks to me is that Thom probably caters to an older crowd. Ive been with dive group leaders like that, and their clientele sometimes is actually a bit helpless (not all!, some are awesome and I can only wish to be that active at that age). So Thom maybe needs to overcompensate to make sure his older group is not getting overwhelmed. Ive seen that before as well. It's one of the main reasons we travel a lot with Eric, as he attracts a younger active crowd that probably would have been fine being stuck someplace

Well that's a little unkind. Anecdotally, I find the younger ones to be more impatient and less tolerant of local customs sometimes. But overall I find it's the culture of the nationality of people which show different travel traits than age demographics. No points for guessing which ones tend to be less respectful, complain a lot more and generally wish they could import the location to their home country!

Btw, I hate to tell you this Cor, but you're not that young.

Im 39, young enough You get very many people younger than say 30 on your trips? I can count them on 1 hand over the years.