Abstract

The question of how to remember twenty years of insurgency and state violence during the internal armed conflict (1980–2000) continues to polarize the social and political landscape of Peru. Dominant narratives of victims and perpetrators effectively silence more ambiguous and complicated memories. In this article I examine memories of the conflict that have been relegated to the margins of public discourse. Memories that tell stories of victims as perpetrators and perpetrators as victims are “placeless” because they upset a post-conflict order that is constituted by a form of civil contract through which mutual opponents coexist with each other without having to confront a conflicted past. I argue that in order to maintain a status quo, polarization is not merely a byproduct but a condition.

Full Text

Published Version

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.