Alejandra Torres
The
truth can be troublesome, as psychologist Elizabeth Lira
explained in a recent presentation at CLAS.
A professor and researcher at the Universidad Alberto Hurtado
in Santiago, Chile, and the author of several books on psychology,
political repression and terror, she has recently focused her
attention on exploring Chile's political history, particularly
the politics of reconciliation.
In
her research and writing, Lira argues that reconciliation
does not have the same meaning for everyone,
and that within
Latin American societies there often exist conflicting visions
of "common good." In addition, some groups within
society, mainly the victims of past political repression, may
possess a strong resistance to political reconciliation, which
implies simply "forgiving and forgetting." The principal
question becomes, how can a country deal with the traumas caused
by political repression? These issues have become particularly
important to many Latin Americans in recent decades, as initiatives
aimed at promoting reconciliation emerged in such countries
as Argentina (1983-84), Chile (1991), El Salvador (1992-93),
and Guatemala (1995-98).
For Lira, political reconciliation in Latin America is an
elite preoccupation: concerns about formal restoration, legitimacy,
social peace, and order have primarily been expressed by powerful
groups. Given a shared Catholic culture, elites have appealed
to nationalism and family structures, defining reconciliation
as amnesty and justifying impunity for perpetrators as necessary
to overcome past wounds. As opposed to personal reconciliation,
political reconciliation traditionally meant not discussing
certain issues in order not to shatter the fragile consensus
underlying incipient democracies.
In
Chile, for example, Dr. Lira suggested that the issue of
national reconciliation has been recurrent since
1814, but
took on greater importance following the Pinochet dictatorship.
Historically, Chilean politics have not been tolerant of cultural
pluralism, and from the 1820s to the 1930s, torture was commonly
employed against political opponents. In fact, Chile's model
throughout the 19th century was one of "rupture and reconciliation," whereby
the ruling class called for reconciliation following each political
conflict.
Today,
Chilean society has changed, and the global context as well,
yet the discourse of many Chilean
elites remains essentially
the same as in the 19th century. Throughout the 20th century,
Lira explained, the Chilean ruling class responded to conflict
by attempting to construct an "official memory" and
impose collective amnesia. Yet today these efforts to force
forgiveness and denial are met with increased resistance. While
in the past, access to education and information was not widespread
in Chile, over 2 million people use the internet in Chile today,
and the television, radio, and newspapers serve an increasingly
well-informed public throughout the country. More Chileans
are not only aware of their own history, but of the international
human rights movement and its insistence that war crimes be
prosecuted; this makes the traditional model of silence and
forgetting difficult to impose.
For Lira, reconciliation cannot be imposed; it must be constructed
on a foundation of truth. Indeed, she insisted, truth-telling
is the most rational way to channel and confront the collective
trauma caused by political repression. In order for Chile to
achieve a lasting reconciliation between victims and perpetrators,
the ruling powers need to acknowledge the nature of past abuses
and take responsibility for their actions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alejandra Torres is an M.A. student in Latin American Studies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
