Blogs

This weeks readings focused on ‘terror’ in Peru, and its effects on the “peasants” in the highlands. Document 9.1 Vargas Llosa states that “the peasants are coerced by those who think they are the masters of history and absolute truth. the fact is that the struggle between the guerrillas and the armed forces is really a settling of accounts between privileged sectors of society, and the peasant masses are used cynically and brutally by those who say they want to ‘liberate’ them”. To me, this is a useful way of understanding what was happening in Peru in the 1980’s. Dawson points out that university students in Ayacucho “idealized the image of the disciplined, communal, and revolutionary peasant. They imagined that they would lead this peasant in a revolution that would…destroy the capitalist state”. Because “few of the movement’s actual militants were peasants”, and most were former university students, seems to hint that the “privileged” students were the ones who were most passionate about the movement while peasants sympathizers saw Sendero as and “opportunity to form a strategic alliance”. Fujimori on the other hand “cast himself as a representative of Peru’s poor and disenfranchised indigenous masses…in search of votes. Having said this i also agree with Dawson that Vargas Llosa had a superficial view of peasant and indigenous cultures. Vargas Llosa seems to emphasize a ritualistic characteristic of the Iquichanos. Such assumptions, as Dawson puts it, render them as “fundamentally primitive and unaware”.  I do not suggest that the indigenous peoples did not have agency in the movement. First of all i am in no position to make claim either way as i still struggle to understand what exactly was happening. It seems plausible however, that the ‘peasants’ became tied into a movement which was not initiated by them. It would make sense that those who supported either side did what they needed to do to survive in an area immersed in brutality and violence. My heart fell heavy as i read document 9.4. It reminds me that at violence is violence, no matter what side you are on. and in my opinion it should never be justified. dominance and mistreatment over others angers me, naturally, but to celebrate violence as  Chairman Gonzalo does in document 9.2, is to celebrate document 9.4 all the same. 

After a successful grassroots campaign and winning presidency, Fujimori instituted austerity measures just as the people before him. He carried out neoliberal policies including selling off state industries, tax reforms, and cutting subsidies. During this time, the price for basic necessities was extremely high. A key point in Fujimori’s presidency was the MRTA hostage. 14 […]

This chapter is all about the balance between good and evil as well as terror and violence. Throughout the documents there is an underlying theme of the use of violence to induce terror and therefore instigate change. The use of terrorism isn’t only a …

9-The Bloodbath

The Peruvian conflict was one with an intriguing, terrifying violence that horrified all, and was justified by only some people’s points of view. Coping and trying to make sense of violence, with a hint of romanticism, many began to write about the dualism that existed between good and evil in a period of unorganized terror. Along with personal accounts, leaders began to speak of reform in a time when people were looking for an end to such violence.
In “The Interview of the Century,” an interview of Chairman Gonzalo, he spoke of the “need for revolutionary violence,” and that he believes is a universal law with no exception. This made me wonder, is dramatic revolution possible without some form of “awe factor” to get people reacting? And does this movement have to necessarily be violence or could it be something of a more positive, constructive nature?
“A Day in the Trial of the Century” was a very personal and emotional account. Huaman Oyague says something very beautiful and wise that “Real power is internal…” She is finally finding justice as Fujimori is brought to the courtroom. I liked the metaphor of Fujimori leading a circus of clowns, and the masks of these clowns being the cameras that cover people and events in corruption of his choosing. I think that she brings up a very vital contrast between the self-involved quest for power and money, and the persevering love and determination that she sees as reality. I think that this was the essence of what was good and evil in such a chaotic time.
Looking at the maps in the end of this chapter, I definitely agree that natural influences that may appear insignificant must have some kind of impact on human behavior in history. I don’t think it’s the main determinant of how humans in the area will interact, but in areas of high environmental stress and changes, it seems as though conflict is abundant. Peru for example is in an area of high mountains and low valleys, as well as a few different climate zones within the same relatively small area. I suppose this could cause for more isolated groups of people, making it more difficult to communicate. Also perhaps nations which form under varied land regions formulate different needs and goals. I was kind of confused by the last map’s influence on human interaction, especially in Peru: how would having only untouched forest in the region impact the human interactions and conflict? Would people in this area having interest to gain power over these untouched forests be a cause of conflict? 

9-The BloodbathThe Peruvian conflict was one with an intriguing, terrifying violence that horrified all, and was justified by only some people’s points of view. Coping and trying to make sense of violence, with a hint of romanticism, many began to writ…