I was fascinated by the way Chile has dealt with the military regime’s many human rights violations. The military government in Chile lead by Augusto Pinochet was responsible for the disappearance of thousands of civilians. Any opposition to the ruling government was met with disdain and those who were part of the opposition were kidnapped, tortured, raped, and “disappeared.” The state, in the majority of the Latin American cases, has refused to acknowledge or condemn any wrongdoing; some, simply do not discuss the violations. I can’t imagine what it would be like to have survived being tortured and to then live in a state and society that doesn’t condemn the horrible acts that were committed against you.
I felt that the article “The Need for Moral Reconstruction In the Wake of Past Human Rights Violations: An Interview with José Zalanquett” brought many of these questions to the forefront. What happens in societies where there are divergent sets of common moral beliefs? One man’s hero is another’s killer. Zalanquett feels that the state can play a decisive role in healing and moving forward. Zalanquett admires the way President Aylwin acknowledged and condemned the many wrongdoings by Pinochet’s government. Zalanquett feels that talking about the human rights violations in a “sacramental” manner are a must and may help heal those on the receiving end of the many abuses.
During class we watched "Special Circumstances" by Patricio Guzman. Patricio was one of the victims of the military regime. He goes back to Chile after he learns of all the military members involved in his capture and torture and pays them a home visit. As someone watching the film, I noted that it was difficult to watch how people can justify genocide and how detached many of the people seemed. I thought of how difficult it must be to not feel validated. Many of the people he confronted either did not admit to having done anything or did not feel like they were to blame.
I’m not sure if confronting these people gave him closure. Can there be closure? I guess doing a documentary that showed their faces shames them. This raises many interesting questions, like is doing something like this ethical?
Youtube videos on the topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-La1CVdwjY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCzGeO6DFLU&feature=related
When it comes to your concerns and your reaction on this topic, I have found that the need for justification is very important in a human beings life. Other factors like pride and the simple act of wanting to escape and forget the past are at play. Time is also a factor. People are more prone act differently when involved in an organization that involves the masses. ofcourse this doesn't take away their individual guilt but it unifies or clumps together the act as one group. trying to find an answer is definitely difficult because a justification in this case is highly imposible.
ReplyDeleteI am a Latin American Studies Major and one thing that I have noticed about the issues in our Latin American Countries is that the Government is ran with a lot of tradition. So they are not going to acknowledge nor apologize for their wrongdoings because these topics (death, corrupt governments, etc) are taboo topics and will not be discussed. And you will not get an apology. Not only that but there is a large distrust for the government in general and so people are afraid of speaking it. Pinochet, Trujillo, Castro were people who are responsible for millions of deaths but the fiscal/social changes that they provided for the country over shadow the wrong doings they committed. Its is terrible and sometimes it is embarrassing as a Latina to witness. I do not agree with the lack of apologies/JUSTICE brought to those affected by Pinochets regime. Then again with the United States supporting these countries despite their horrible acts, you will rarely get an apology!
ReplyDeleteThe film “ Special Circumstances” by Patricio Guzman is a rare case. Most people that have lived through a traumatic experience or survived genocide do not go to their native land seeking revenge. It might cross their mind, but most people do not act on their feelings of revenge or hatred toward the people that hurt them. In Patricio’s case, confronting the people that tortured him would not bring him closure. Getting closure means that you can close the book on your situation and associated pain. Attaining closure means that you could put that book of pain on a shelf and never look at it or read from it again. Closure requires forgiveness and I don’t think Patricio forgave his aggressors. Without forgiveness, Patricio is almost inevitably destined to a life stained by anger, bitterness and hatred.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 2- thank you for the insight. I definitely agree that admitting wrongdoings, particularly government sponsored acts of violence, is something that historically Latin American countries have not done. Do you think that, that has changed at all? I think Chile's case is a refreshing one. Will and can other latin American countries follow this lead? or is Chile a "special" case?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 3- I found his story to be fascinating. There was something disturbing about watching him go after these people. It seemed like he wanted them to apologize, to admit to what they had done to him, and he wasn't hearing that. It was painful to watch. I agree 100%, it didn't seem like Patricio had forgiven his aggressors.
My comment is more of a personal opinion, rather than facts, since I'm not as knowledgeable as others in this matter but... I'm sure you've heard the saying, The richer get richer and the poorer get poorer. Well in this case the powerful get more powerful. I believe is because of things like these. They use the tactic of instilling fear in the population to gain control, whether that is their primary goal, or not, it is what it causes. On the other hand, this is the reason, I believe, why you have civilians organizing their own group to stand against government. If the government, who are supposed to be "for the people" is not there to protect its people, then you're going to have others taking matters into their own hands.
ReplyDeleteI believe these are all valid points. I haven't seen the video with the interviews so I really wouldn't know if Patricio Guzman did this to seek revenge or to seek an apology. And the fact that he could get neither is terrible. It's bad enough to have been through what he has; imagine trying to seek closure for that chapter of his life and never being able to find it. He may be able to forgive or he may not, but he's still looking for an answer, an apology, just something to relieve his pain.
ReplyDeleteEmmanuel:
I saw the videos on this post (you can't see the first one) and I found the last one to be very touching. I think you should explain for those who are not Spanish-speakers what it is about, because it is very important to know the effects these things have on people. It's sad to watch her still looking for her son since 1974, and not knowing where to find him. And the same goes for the rest of that particular group of people trying to find their loved ones and not knowing where to go to find them. This video made me cry.
I haven't seen the documentary with Patricio Guzmán but I think you guys bring up good points/questions about closure. I don't think that it's possible to get closure for a life event that's so traumatic. Maybe possible isn't the right word. "Likely" is probably more appropriate. But the point is that even with an outcome where the... villains (for lack of a better word) actually pay for what they've done, be it with their lives via death or imprisonment, can the damage ever be undone? Can you ever really put that away and not hold strong negative feelings towards it?
ReplyDeleteI love the idea of going back to the wrong-doers and asking them for an apology. Much like Michael Moore's in-your-face approach. I don't think this happens enough because the truth is that many people can do something wrong in their lives and never entertain the thought of really judging what they're doing. So having it thrown in their faces, I find, is a great concept. And while I can see how this could potentially be very satisfying for Patricio Guzmán, he will never let that ago. Apology or not.
I beleave in the words that say a country that doosn't know his past it will repeacted againg, and it doesn't care if the people that were imvolve during these crime shows any type of arepentimiento (sorry my inglish is not that fluent),what is important is that the future generation learn what happend and do not let some like that happend againg and of course that people responsable that still a life paid for their accions.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the military members involved (i.e. the ones who feel they are not to blame)
ReplyDeleteIndividuals are individuals, and even when acting as part of a collective, their actions are their own.
With the exception of acting obligated by force and against one's will, how can any single human being with fully fictional cognitive abilities, claim that they are not responsible for their actions!?!?!?!
Even if you are fighting for a cause and willing to die for that purpose, as should be the case of any honorable soldier, there has to exist the ability within that mind to distinguish between the desecration of human rights and the fight for any honorable cause.
The soldier who blindly follows a straight line, in the name of 'orders from a higher ranking officer’, has more blood in their hands than the voice they follow.
functional*
ReplyDelete