of talk, dialogue, speaking out, as the best weapon in
the war against political injustice.
Those who criticized these confessional acts,
concentrated on del Barco’s text. Some agreed
that mistakes were made by the left, but they
felt that del Barco went too far in demonizing
the whole left for those mistakes, particularly in
the reference to “serial assassins.” A common
criticism was the view that del Barco constructed
a moral equivalency between the violence on the
left and right. In particular, the confessional text
emphasized a few terrible events on the left that
creates a twisted version of the past (“una moral
distorsionada”), more likely to politically polarized
society rather than find common ground. The
notion of “thou shalt not kill,” moreover, is on the
surface unimpeachable, but fails to recognize how
throughout history violence and counter-violence
was required to address gross injustices. The very
independence of Latin America from Spain’s tyranny
depended on a willingness to kill and be killed. To
reduce the struggle of the armed left to the act of
“serial assassins,” furthermore takes away the
Maby Picón de Viola on the funeral of her husband, Captain Humberto
Antonio Viola, and daughter, Maria Cristina Viola (1974)
dignity of those who sacrificed their lives for a better triggering event, that those on the left responded
world, turning them instead into “senseless deaths” to in different ways. In the texts, references are
(“muertes sin sentido”). made to a Mariano Grondona television program in
This contentious debate could be seen as
which a widow of army captain Viola speaks of the
healthy for democracy, putting into practice cruelty of the People’s Revolutionary Party (ERP) in
its essential elements of political participation, killing her husband. Grondona evoked – “without
expression, and contestation. It could be said any subtlety” -- the image of the two devils. This
that Jouvé and del Barco achieved their goal by highly contested view of the past promoted by the
stimulating dialogue, the art of doing politics authoritarian regime was back in circulation. Rather
through talk, speaking out, raising difficult than simply rejecting it out of hand, in this less
questions, critical analysis, and overcoming polarized moment, those on the armed left who had
authoritarian adherence to a single perspective. engaged in or witnessed cruelty by their own forces
Why was contentious debate over the left’s
violence possible in the past and not in recent
were willing to take a moral stand against it.
Another part of the debate focused on a
years? One of the historians who participated in different aspect of the political moment. This debate
the debate focused on the political environment in followed the “que se vayan todos” (“throw the bums
2004-2005 when the news media focused on these out”) protests in which a majority of Argentines
confessions. He argued that the period of time took to the streets against politicians. Argentines
was less threatening than in the years following were claiming their voice, their citizenship, their
the transition. The climate was more conducive to right to have rights. In this context, the closed and
open and public debate than in those earlier times. unresponsive state was challenged. It is in this
In addition, there was a catalysing moment, a context that the authoritarian regime of the past
Deep Article
17