Doc 9.1 Mario Vargas Llosa, “The Massacre”
This excerpt represents the type of violence that has been going on for centuries in Latin America. There is indeed a socio-cultural barrier between those who live in the bigger cities in Peru, and those who live in the Andes, or poorer regions. I have lived in Peru for several years and I know of and to a certain extent understand the type of violence that goes on in these countries, not only triggered by racism, but by religion, politics and culture.
In this excerpt, the Iquichanos massacred and mutilated the eight journalists in a horrendous manner. They were buried face down in pairs, after having their eyes and mouths mutilated. In addition, to highlight their hostility, they were buried outside the community limits. However, how can this massacre be justified? Should a murder be justified based on the beliefs of a culture or from a perceived fear?
I remember once I was travelling with my parents in Callao and we went through a small alley, where we encountered local limeños that lived in barrios. They all looked at us in the car as if we were not welcome there because they knew were outsiders. I would assume they all knew each other and were not used to “gringos” driving through their alleys. In this occasion, we felt threatened as people walked up to our car, so we had to drive away. I can therefore relate to how these journalists were seen as outsiders and why the Iquichanos could have perceived some sort of fear from them, in addition to having dealt with centuries of oppression. More importantly, they lived alienated from modern society because of their geographical region, which was located in areas great of poverty where “ignorance” was an issue as a result of the lack of education.
I don’t believe any massacre or violence can be justified.
I have to say feeling threatened and afraid of someone is no justification for murder. In the text Vargas states that the reporters were unarmed and that communication between the reporters and their attackers did take place. Yet why were they still murdered? Simple fear? Eight unarmed journalists hardly seems threatening. Especially when confronted by an entire village. I think its safe to say that while a village may have experienced oppression and or isolation it was not sufficient to justify such a massacre. This event took place in 1983, the village was not sufficiently isolated and cut off from the rest of Peru to be able to justify isolation/ignorance as a defense in this case. The members of the village who committed this crime knew what they had done was wrong in the eyes of society and later tried to rationalize and justify it. We most likely will never know the exact details of what occurred but I believe we can say that it was a unjustifiable crime.
I do not believe any massacre or any type of violence can be justified. What I was trying to say was that these cultures, based on their history and alienation from the outside world, do not quite understand how modern societies see violence. Therefore in their eyes, their massacre was justified, but this does not mean the rest of society approves. On the other hand, we all know they should be punished because it breaks the code of conduct in our modern society.