Tambien en español: Buenas intenciones en malas manos

Congresswoman Mercedes Cabanillas has demanded the resignation of the Vice Minister of Education, Idel Vexler, over the content of social studies textbooks distributed by the Peruvian state. From her point of view, parts of the text, aimed at 5th year secondary school students, come close to “contraband” ideologies, because of a series of inaccuracies they contain. Among the statements published which provoked the enraged protest of the Aprista politician are those related to the era of armed subversion which Peru endured over a number of years, propelled by bloodthirsty groups like Shining Path. “[The text] talks about internal war, when what Peru faced was actions of violence and crime from subversive groups,” Cabanillas criticised indignantly.

In fact, in this discussion - aside from the necessary scruples of a basic educational textbook in this case - almost imperceptibly a line dividing historical truth on one side and official truth on the other is being constructed. Without taking away from the importance of “factual” truth (upon which society builds its moral code, supported by its past experiences, to give rise to ideas and actions which allow it to progress), this concept is best assured in the hands of historians and researchers – not politicians. An interesting analysis of the responsibility of debating this type of contradictory truths, as Isaiah Berlin calls them, is given in the article “Lying Prohibited” by Mario Vargas Llosa in April 2007. It’s this brief essay that I use to support my unease for the moment, when I addressed the complaint of this Congresswoman, because I considered, in the words of the author of The time of the hero, that those who hold political power are not in the condition to decide with scientific rigor and the disinterest that a responsible intellectual task – nature and historical significance – requires.

This is not a matter of putting the facts in perspective, nor to deny what every one of us, as witnesses and victims, knows about the terror of bombs and mass killings. Rather, it is a matter of giving responsibility for the task of examining all the corners of our history to those with the support of knowledge and without bias who can offer the most loyalty to the facts and the best-aimed interpretations - although they, too, can make mistakes. History in the hands of politicians, as Vargas Llosa notes, stops being an academic discipline and becomes a tool of the political fight to promote one’s own image. That’s why, equally, it becomes so hard for many bureaucrats subscribed to the current regime to recognise the validity, not ideological (of which they are absolved), but rather historical, of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s report.

As for the rest, the confusion of voices that push for the word “terrorism” in the United Nations is also known. An obstacle of definitions that impede some states stopping and acting against armed groups with the guarantee of international support. This demands greater efforts, greater will from the powers. For now, let’s be satisfied that the task of sorting a country’s history of failures and victories doesn’t come from any political party nor from well-intentioned congress members, fortunately.

Other posts by jorgeluis