On NRO Anthony Daniels has the best write up I have seen on why the left detested Pinochet so virulently:

The reason Augusto Pinochet was universally hated by leftists and many academics worldwide was not because he was so brutal or killed so many people (he hardly figured among the 20th century's most prolific political killers, admittedly a difficult company to get into) but because he was so successful. There is no doubt that there was indeed much brutality and hardship in the wake of his coup, but unlike the much less reviled military dictators of Argentina and Uruguay, he actually achieved something worthwhile, namely the prosperity of his country.

Worse still, he did so by adopting the very reverse of the policies for so long advocated by third worldists and academic development economists, who were certain that the cause of the third world's poverty was the first world's wealth, and that everything would have to change before anything could change. His demonstration that a country could draw itself up by its bootstraps, by embracing trade, was most unwelcome. It forced a change of world outlook, never welcome to those who live by ideas.

That a hick general from a humble background should so obviously have done much more for his country than a suave, educated, aristocratic Marxist was a terrible blow to the self-esteem of the Left in every Western country. As for holding a referendum on own his rule and abiding by the result when he lost, that was quite unforgivable, setting as it did a shocking precedent for left-wing dictators.

I lived in Santiago for a time in the early '90's, in the early years after Pinochet lost a 1988 referendum to stay in power (he stepped down in 1990), but while he was still the head of the Chilean military. His legacy is far more complicated than what you might think reading much of the mainstream press. Forbes' Rich Karlgaard takes on the New York Times' front page story:

Pinochet was a rough guy, a bad guy, and yet another thief at the public till, as it turned out. There is no doubt about this. Relatives of the victims of Pinochet's murderous repression will never forgive him, nor should they.

I only suggest that today's NYT story, in its tone and lopsided balance, tries to tie Pinochet with the 20th century's worst dictators: Hitler, Stalin and the rest. This simply won't do....

Pinochet is roasting in hell now. But the fruits of his time on earth aren't all bad. He wasn't one of the 20th century's worst dictators. Not even close.

Otto Reich who served President Bush from 2001 to 2004, as assistant secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere and later at the NSC has it right:

Today, thanks to the KGB files smuggled out of Russia by Vasily Mitrokhin, we know that Allende was receiving payments from the KGB. There is no doubt that if he had succeeded in his plans, Chile today would be an impoverished Communist prison like Cuba, instead of a shining example of democracy and prosperity. With some compassion and self-discipline, Pinochet could have been remembered as a liberator and not a despot. He was both.