Week 11: The Terror

In the beginning of my exchange year I had a very eager history teacher, who was committed to teach me about the Argentine history, even if I didn't speak or read Spanish. I remember reading about the military junta and that horrible things happened, but as it was in a completely weird language, the topic never really opened to me. Therefore, this weeks readings were really helpful in making sense of what I was trying to learn during my exchange. 

However, this week's document's provided insight to the Peruvian conflict from many different angles: the state, the guerillas and the victims. Together they highlight the profound division that existed in the country. The essay from Mario Vargas Llosa, who was sent to investigate the murders of the eight journalists, paints a picture of a gruesome slaughter by the savage indigenous. The motive behind the murders has been twisted: instead of explaining the conflicts between the Sendistas and the Inigenous, which led into a misunderstanding, he focuses on mystifying the indigenous: 

"[...] although the Iquichanos saw the strangers were unarmed, they attacked them anyhow, convinced they were their enemies. The massacre had magical and religious overtones, as well as political and social implications. The hideous wounds on the corpses were ritualistic. The eight bodies were buried in pairs, face down, the form of burial used for people the Iquichanos consider “devils”—people like the dancers of the tijeras, a folk dance, who are believed to make pacts with the Devil. They were buried outside the community limits to emphasize that they were strangers. (In the Andes, the Devil merges with the image of the stranger.)"

According to him, the journalist were perceived as "enemies" because the indigenous thought they were the "Devil". He claims, that the indigenous merely came up with a story of them mistaking the journalists as Sendistas. 

In another source, it was stated that the police had told the people that they would come in helicopters and wearing uniforms, while the strangers who came overland without a formal uniforms were terrorist and therefore their enemy. If this was the case, the misunderstanding seems a lot more understandable. 

Furthermore, the indigenous are described as savages, who were completely different from the rest. He states: "The violence stuns us because it is an anomaly in our ordinary lives. For the Iquichanos, that violence is the atmosphere they live in from the time they are born until the time they die.". To me this appears as an interesting statement, taking into account the violence and conflict that was taking place in the entire society of Peru. Finally, when he says: "Augusto Pinochet in Chile and the model of Fidel Castro in Cuba—will continue to haunt democratic government as long as people in our countries kill for the reasons that the peasants of Uchuraccay killed." he leaves the reader with the sentiment that the murders were an unjustified mystical ritual, propelled by a fear of a "stranger". 

Overall, this text leaves me with a sentiment of bias and hatred toward the Indigenous. 

Question: 

What purpose do you think portraying the event and the indigenous this way serves?

Reference: 

https://stmuhistorymedia.org/the-uchuraccay-massacre-a-consequence-of-shining-path-terrorism-in-peru/