The whole deregulation, privatization, and greater freedom for corporations part. Approximately 8 of the 10 points. Yes, and that 40% are still going to say that corruption is bad, public funds should help out people, all the rest. Again, this something that is pretty much meaningless. Institutions should be independent? Yeah, no crap. It's like saying "I'm for world peace." And this is the big problem when dealing with a set of very broad suggestions and treating them like the 10 Commandments. For example, the tax reform part. It asks for "moderate tax rates." WTF does that mean? The rich ALWAYS think their taxes are too high, whether they're in Sweden, the US, Chile or Nigeria. It also asks for "oversight of financial institutions." Who gets to determine how strong this oversight is? I'm sure Goldman Sachs and Bear Sterns swore up and down that they were up to their neck in oversight prior to the 2008 crisis. It's just more right-wing orthodoxy. Privatize everything, deregulate, increase profits and growth... oh yeah, and if there's some money left over, build a little hospital somewhere so the poors don't get antsy and start messing up our country clubs. That's right, because privatization is a huge component of the Washington Consensus (at least the one that's most meaningful) and privatizing Codelco has never even been in the cards and even ultra-right Pinochet wasn't crazy enough to try to pull that off. Again, Chile is a mixed bag. Large state expenditures are what made its poverty the lowest and its education the highest in the region. It also has a state-owned enterprise as its main economic driver. At the same time, it's also very business-friendly. And the Washington Consensus can be a mixed bag as well. If you undermine or only very superficially touch upon the privatizing and deregulation parts, but emphasize the social spending part, it can be halfway social-democratic.