CHARLES UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES - Master's Thesis 2021
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
CHARLES UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Institute of Political Studies
Department of Political Science
Master's Thesis
2021 Gabrielle Franck
CHARLES UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Institute of Political Studies
Department of International Relations
Collective trauma and Identity struggle:
underground factors of the 2019 South American
demonstration waves
Master's thesis
Author: Gabrielle Franck
Study programme: International Relations
Supervisors: Prof. Ondrej Ditrych, MPhil. (Cantab) Ph.D, Charles
University and Prof. Luis L. Schenoni, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Research
Fellow, Konstanz University
Year of the defence: 2021
THESIS PROJECT
Univerzita Karlova Fakulta socialnich ved Institut
politologickych studii
Diploma thesis project
Collective trauma and Identity struggle: underground factors of
the 2019 South American demonstration waves.
Double degree with
Name: Gabrielle Franck
Academic advisors: Ondrej Ditrych, MPhil. (Cantab.) Ph.D, Charles University / Luis L.
Schenoni, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Universitat Konstanz
Study program: Double Degree International Relations and Politics and Public
Administration
Year of project submission: 2021Introduction to the topic Although studied within Social Sciences, the field of Collective Memory has been left aside by Political scientists and International Relations Theorists. This gap in the literature remains of crucial importance as scholars have shown in a number of different fields - such as sociology, social neurosciences, psycholinguistics and Social Psychology - that collective memories have political consequences. They have been described, for instance, as shaping individuals’ identity (Schechtman, 2011, Rorlich, 1999, Moody, 2020, Lee & Chan, 2018, Nikiforov 2017) within social groups and their perceptions of nationhood (Rorlich, 1999, Onuoha, 2016). As selective (Coman, Stone, Castano, Hirst, 2014; Stone & Jay, 2019; Hirst & Coman, 2018, Nikiforov, 2017), changing through processes of intentional or natural omission, they diverge from one social group to the other (Heath-Kelly, 2013), paving the way for memory debates (Moody 2020). Contests over the authority to fix the narration of the past (Heath-Kelly, 2020) thus take a political shape as individuals, attaching their memories to their own identities, embrace the fight as their own. Success in fixing the past therefore outlines new power relations but also uncovers current challenges and imagined prospects (Rorlich, 1999). Research question This research will focus on the consequences collective traumas may have on the emergence of social mobilizations and the dynamics within them. Doing so, it will take on the following research question: Does collective trauma facilitate the rise of mobilizations? And if so, how? This research will then focus on the potentiality of considering collective trauma as an “underground factor” of social movements. This idea follows the definition of Svante E. Cornell as “background conditions necessary” for the activation of the studied phenomenon (Cornell, 2002). He differentiates it from catalyzing factors, which trigger events rather than facilitating them. Literature review From the field of Memory itself, is a younger concept that has yet to be studied by Political Science and International Relations. Collective Trauma represents the idea of a latent and still active memory, repressed from consciousness (Freud, 1963) and perceived by a whole community or social group. Leaders, also called social entrepreneurs or carrier groups, then attempt through narration to broaden this
traumatic identification to the collective level (Alexander, Eyerman, Giesen, Smelser, Sztompka, 2004). Attributing the blame, they define the nature of the victim, of the pain and their relation to the broader public (Alexander, Eyerman, Giesen, Smelser, Sztompka, 2004). Doing so, they gather individuals in search for connection (Echterhoff, Higgins & Levine, 2019), which then regroup under Shared Realities made of common beliefs, norms and perceptions of the world (Echterhoff, Higgins & Levine, 2019). These common perceptions may thus affect the likeliness of mobilizations and the interactions within them, through the shaping of common mistrustful perceptions of actors such as the state, the police or the military. Traumas may further influence individuals’ lives through their health consequences. Individuals having been traumatized, for instance, have higher chances of heart disease, asthma, brain development impediments, lack of concentration and ambition (Violence Policy Center, 2017) which leave them facing renewed health costs and lesser chances of upgrading their social status. These consequences may then influence the levels of inequalities, notably if you consider the concept of state terrorism against a state’s own population. Pre-established elites, who happened to be the perpetuators of violence, could have thus been exempted from such consequences, viewing social divides increase between them and the victimized population. With the aim to terrorize and intimidate a population (Walter 1969, Jackson et al 2010, Blakely 2010, Stohl 2006), kidnappings, killings and disappearances may have created an expanded trauma in the communities exposed. In Chile for instance, the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, a military Junta lasting from 1973 to 1988 silenced oppositions and prevented discontent through mass terrorization campaigns. The Comision Nacional de Verdad y Reconciliacion, established a number of 3,428 documented cases of disappearance, killing, torture and kidnapping under the military rule; most of which took place during the period of 1974-1977 as a planned and coordinated governmental strategy. Argentina viewed a similar example, as the military junta, established under the leadership of three main military officers: Jorge Rafael Videla, Emilio Massera and Ramon Agostin, has been accused of torture, abduction of children, mass murder of students, targeted assassinations of intellectuals, death flights, robbery and authoritarian rule. While 9000 disappearances were documented, Human Rights association advocate for the recognition of another number, one which would reach 30 000.
These events, silencing the voices of the population, are likely to have placed individuals to witness, hear or experience traumatic events. As traumas may as well be experienced through witnessing violence and as stories enable identification processes, perceptions of danger are likely to have spread. From one generation to the other, parents transmit (Cherepanov, 2015), lessons they’ve learned throught their survival to traumatic events, over protect and share their beliefs of the world to their children as to prepare them (Breland-Noble, cited in DeAngelis, 2019). Increases in drug abuse substances and PTSDs or decreases in life-expectancies are such examples of legacies which have been documented from survivors of traumatic events to their children (Bombay, cited in DeAngelis, 2019 Danieli, Norris & Engdahl, 2017). Social constructions, such as dialects, built during state terrorism as a way to preserve groups’ solidarity nets may also persist through generations as cultural legacies affect groups’ identities. As fragments of traumatic memories continuously involuntarily irrupt through social life (Visser, Lau-Zhu, Henson, Holmes, 2018, Wardrop, 2004) such as groups’ discussions or the viewing of present similarities remembering the past, individuals’ behaviors and perceptions shift accordingly. I’ll assume here that the greater the past traumatic times’ legacies to be found in the present, the likelier the revival of these memories into the public discourse and thus their influence on the population’s beliefs and behaviors. Unfinished transitional justice processes for instance, or the continuous discovery of mass graves linked to the traumatic times, may then increase the chances of bringing back the topic into the public sphere. This revival may be noticed in examples such as the renewed use of symbols created as resistance tools in the times of state terrorism, or the comparison in public speeches of the present and the past (protestors interviews, street arts, posters). Increasing inter-personal violence, traumas could as well be blamed for an increase in levels of violence over time and the facilitation of violent actions within mobilizations. Living in a space of constant hyper-vigilance, victims of traumatic experiences may have shared their mistrust towards police forces, the military and other state agents, consequently increasing the likeliness of violence use as it becomes normalized (Violence Policy Center, 2017) through speech as a legitimate survival mean. Empirical data and analytical technique
Since proving the influence and the presence of collective traumas may pose a methodological problem, this study will use several methods as a way to outline its potential consequences over time. The method of agreement will be used as a way to outline common management/mismanagement of the collective memories and the resulting remaining legacies which might trigger memory revival and thus pursue related perceptions of actors such as the state. This would allow the diagnosis of what could be an environment facilitating the rise of challenges to the state. The two chosen cases, viewing state terrorism around the same times, have also viewed the rise mobilizations in 2019, which allows this study to witness potential recent reminders of these times within mobilizations. Revivals of memories will be outlined through iconographic studies of mobilizations pictures’ and the use of journalistic reports depicting protestors interviews. It will attempt to discover the various uses of the past in mobilizing individuals and reintegrating the past into the public discourse. Through the conduct of a survey, sent to universities in the two studied countries (Argentina and Chile), the influence or inaction of past stories of state terrorism over the younger generations’ perceptions of society will be uncovered. Students represent a relevant sample as the 2019 mobilizations viewed a high number of protestors coming from universities. In-depth interviews will complete this study’s understanding of collective trauma’s legacies in shaping world perceptions. Experts analysis and the evolution of metrics such as the levels of inequality, of health expenses, of violence and education over generations, will allow a general overview of the politics of memory and political actions put into place following state terrorism as well as the potential remaining legacies. Planned thesis outline - Introduction - Conceptual/theoretical framework - Data - Methods - Analysis - Conclusions
References BLAKELY, R. State Terrorism in the Social Sciences. Theories, methods and concepts. in JACKSON, R. – MURPHY, E. – POYNTING, S. Contemporary State Terrorism. 2010, Routledge London and New York. CHEREPANOV, E. Psychodrama of the Survivorship. The Journal of Psychodrama, Sociometry, and Group Psychotherapy. 2 0 1 5 , V o l . 6 3 . N o . 1 . https://doi.org/10.12926/0731-1273-63.1.19 COMAN, A. - STONE, C. B. – CASTANO, E. – HIRST, W. Justifying atrocities: The effect of moral- disengagement strategies on socially shared retrieval- induced f o r g e t t i n g . Psychological Science. 2 0 1 4 , 2 5 ( 6 ) , 1 2 8 1 – 1 2 8 5 . https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614531024 DANIELI, Y. - NORRIS, F. H. - ENGDAHL, B. A question of who, not if: Psychological disorders in Holocaust survivors’ children. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy. 2 0 1 7 , 9(Suppl 1), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000192 DEANGELIS, T. The legacy of trauma, An emerging line of research is exploring how historical and cultural traumas affect survivors’ children for generations to c o m e . A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n. 2019, https://www.apa.org/monitor/2019/02/legacy-trauma. ECHTERHOFF, G. – HIGGINS, E.T. – LEVINE, J. Shared reality: experiencing commonality with others’ inner states about the world. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2009, 4(5):496-521. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01161.x LEE, F.L.F – CHAN, J.M. Memory mobilization, generational differences, and communication effects on collective memory about Tiananmen in Hong Kong, Asian J o u r n a l o f C o m m u n i c a t i o n. 2 0 1 8 , 2 8 : 4 , 3 9 7 - 4 1 5 , D O I : 10.1080/01292986.2018.1425465 FREUD, S. Introductory Lectures on Psycho-analysis, in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. 1963, vol 3, p 243-463, ed. J Strachey. London: Hogarth Press. HIRST, W. - COMAN, A. Building a collective memory: the case for collective f o r g e t t i n g . C u r r e n t O p i n i o n i n P s y c h o l o g y. 2 0 1 8 , 2 3 : 8 8 – 92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.02.002 HEATH-KELLY, C. The political use of victimhood: Spanish collective memory of ETA through the war on terror paradigm. Review of International Studies. 2021, 47: 1, 1–18 doi:10.1017/S0260210520000182 HEATH-KELLY, C. Politics of Violence: Militancy, International Politics, Killing in the Name. 2013 Abingdon, Routledge (1st ed.) https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203727560
JACKSON, R. MURPHY, E. - POYNTING, S. Contemporary State Terrorism. 2010, Routledge London and New York. ALEXANDER, Jeffrey C., et al. Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity. 1st ed., University of California Press, 2004. MOODY, J. From History to Memory: The Discursive Legacies of the Past. From The persistence of memory. 2020, Liverpool University Press. NIKOFOROV, A.L. Historical Memory: The Construction of Consciousness. R u s s i a n S t u d i e s i n P h i l o s o p h y. 2 0 1 7 , 55:1, 49-61, DOI: 10.1080/10611967.2017.1296292 ONUOHA, G. Shared Histories, Divided Memories: Mediating and Navigating the Tensions in Nigeria–Biafra War Discourses, Africa Today. 2016, Indiana University Press Vol. 63, No. 1 (Fall 2016), pp. 3-21. RORLICH, A. History, collective memory and identity. Communist and Post- Communist Studies, December 1999, Vol. 32, No. 4 (December 1999), pp. 379-396, University of California Press. SCHECHTMAN, M. Memory and identity. Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, March 2011, Vol. 153, No. 1, selected papers from the American Philosophical Association, Pacific Division, 2012 meeting (March 2011), pp. 65- 79 STOHL, M. The State as Terrorist: Insights and implications. Democracy and Security. 2006, 2(1), pp. 1-25. DOI: 10.1080/17419160600623418 STONE, C.B. – JAY, A.C.V. From the individual to the collective: The emergence of a psychological approach to collective memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2019;33: 504–515. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3564 CORNELL, S.E. Autonomy and Conflict; Ethno-territoriality and Separatism in the South Caucasus – Cases in Georgia. Uppsala University. 2002. VIOLENCE POLICY CENTER. The Relationship Between Community Violence and Trauma; How violence affects learning, health, and behavior. 2017. VISSER, R.M. – LAU-ZHU, A. – HENSON, R.N. HOLMES, E.A. V. Multiple memory systems, multiple time points: how science can inform treatment to control the expression of unwanted emotional memories. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2018, B 373: 20170209. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0209 WALTER, E.V. Terror and Resistance. 1969, Oxford: Oxford University Press. WARDROP, J. The politics of convenient silence in southern Africa: relocating the terrorism of the state. in JACKSON, R. - MURPHY, E. – POYNTING, S. Contemporary State Terrorism. 2010, Routledge London and New York.
Declaration 1. I hereby declare that I have compiled this thesis using the listed literature and resources only. 2. I hereby declare that my thesis has not been used to gain any other academic title. 3. I fully agree to my work being used for study and scientific purposes. In Prague on 21/07/2021 Gabrielle Franck
References FRANCK, Gabrielle. Collective trauma and Identity struggle: underground factors of the 2019 South American demonstration waves. Praha, 2021. 62 pages. Master’s thesis (Mgr.). Charles University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Political Studies. Department of International Relations. Supervisors Prof. Ondrej Ditrych, MPhil. (Cantab) Ph.D. Charles University and Prof. Luis L. Schenoni, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Research, Konstanz University. Length of the thesis: 126 790 characters, spaces of 1.5.
Abstract Collective trauma infuences the political scene in an often unnoticed way. By focusing on the cases of Argentina and Chile, this study analyses which consequences traumas, experienced simultaneously by a collective, may have over time on generations, the state and its institutions. Linking it with social mobilizations, it outlines how the updating of perceptions, having emerged through the narration of stories of the past, creates distrust towards the state’s institutions. This, in turn, increases the likeliness of mobilizations and violent outbreak within them. Interactions between the crowd and institutions such as the police, the military or other political actors could thus change with the depictions’ elder generations make of them. These descriptions themselves, as this study shows, are shaped according to one’s own experiences, past and present. Through a mixed methodology of quantitative and qualitative tools, this thesis aims to underline how the new generations, having not lived these times, may still be affected by their elders’ collective traumatic experiences. While social, economic and political reasons may trigger the rise of mobilizations within a country, collective traumas, and the ensuing perceptions they produce, will be described as an underlying factor, preparing the perfect soil for discontent to rise into protest. Keywords Collective Trauma, Social Mobilizations, Perceptions, Politics, South America Title Collective Trauma and Identity Struggle: underground factors of the 2019 demonstration waves
Acknowledgement By this small text, I would like to thank my two supervisors for their insightful support during the writing of this thesis. You both helped me understand a greater perspective of how research was led and applied. Thank you for your patience and attention, for your advice and your time. I would also take the opportunity to thank all my peers from both Konstanz and Charles university for their support. A special thank you to Martin Schlatte, Felix Backstedt, Camila Montero, Meghan Maxwell, Oran O’Connor, Daria Solomina and Camila Lyra de Magalhães Melo for your continued presence. One’s work is nothing without the encouragements of its surroundings. I would finally like to take the time to thank each and every interviewee. Thank you for granting me with your time and your insightful answers, they were valuable and taught me beautiful lessons.
Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENT INTRODUCTION 1-2 1. LITERATURE REVIEW 3-16 1.1. Mobilization studies 3-5 1.2. Symbolic predispositions 5-6 1.3. Collective Memory 6-8 1.4. Collective Trauma 8-11 1.5. Narratives 11-14 1.6. State Terrorism 14-16 2. THEORY 17-20 3. METHODOLOGY 21-23 4. CASE SELECTION 24-27 2.1. Argentina 24-26 2.2. Chile 26-27 4. ANALYSIS 28-59 4.1. Memory revivals 28-34 4.2. Logistic regressions 34-42 4.3. Interviews 43-60 5. CONCLUSION 61-62 6. APPENDIX 63-64 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY 65-72 9. WEBOGRAPHY 73-75 10. ATTACHMENTS 71-73 10.1. Questionnaire for in-depth interviews 76-78
Introduction
Traumas have been studied for a long time. However, their consequences on
collectives are just starting to be noticed, and their repercussions on the political
scene remain disregarded. The problematic of this statement was outlined this year
by Pierre Haski: “Ces blessures historiques (…) pèsent sur le présent et l’avenir (…)
Elles surgissent quand on ne les attend pas »1 (Géopolitique, 2021). A
misunderstanding or undervaluation of their effect could thus have political
consequences on the countries’ present and future situations themselves.
Individuals may be influenced differently by a diversity of events. However,
traumatic experiences, perceived by a whole community at the same time, may serve
as political tools for public figures, diplomatic interactions and popular legitimacy. If
these memories did not have any consequence on politics, how could one explain the
regular appearance, on the news, of the Armenian genocide in the context of the
country’s interaction with Turkey? Why would one hear about France refusing to
excuse itself for its Human Rights violations in Algeria or its participation in the
Rwandan genocide? All these examples highlight the continuous present of traumatic
pasts, and their political implications. While some may be covered up by political
elites, we could think here of the 1989 Tiananmen square massacre for instance,
others remain within the political sphere, instrumentalized for the sake of political
and diplomatic bargains.
Nonetheless, no attention is given to the potential repercussions these alive memories
may have on the populations themselves, and on the political legitimacy they grant.
Political scientists and International Relations experts, have thus left separated the
concepts of social movements and collective traumas, let alone collective memory.
Being a citizen, according to John Rawls, takes its basis in the popular feeling of
basic institutions as just, independent and made with integrity (cited in Ogien &
Laugier, 2011).
1Translation: These historical wounds (…) weight on the present and the future (…) They resurface
when we don’t expect them.”
1May we assume then, that if these conditions do not apply, a certain level of
illegitimacy may arise? Would this induce the breaking of any consensual social
contract between the population and its state? If this is the case, measuring the
influence of collective traumas, and their ensuing memories become relevant.
Possibly affecting perceptions of the state and its institutions, it could encourage
challenges to the state, political instability and violence outbreaks.
This study’s aim is to fill up this gap by focusing on two particular cases usually
unconsidered by European scientists: Chile and Argentina. Both countries, having
experienced state terrorism in the 70’s/80’s, are perfect cases to consider the legacies
of collective traumas on social mobilizations’ likelihood.
Consequently, this thesis will answer the following research question: Does
collective trauma facilitate the rise of mobilizations? And if so, how? To do so, it will
embrace a mixed methodology of quantitative and qualitative methods. As will be
shown in the literature review, to survive over time, memories need constant
repetition within social groups. An analysis of the possible triggers of the
dictatorships within both societies will thus allow us to determine whether memories
of these times are kept close to the public discourse, and indirectly to the collective
consciousness. If this is the case, we could assume that collective trauma, regularly
raised within the public discourse, shapes the perceptions of the new generations
concerning the political sphere and its different actors. This will be shown in the last
section, through in-depth interviews. However, for these interviews to be relevant,
looking at whether these same perceptions may have an effect, whether positive or
negative, on the likeliness of mobilizations remains a first step. This will be done in
the second section of analysis, through the use of logistic regressions.
21. Literature Review
1.1. Mobilization studies
In order to better understand the logics behind mobilizations, it is important to
remind possible reasons explaining the rise of collective action in Chile and
Argentina. Taking a look at explanations from the social movement studies makes a
relevant contribution. Two diverging views explain the rise of individuals into
collective constructions of discontent (Martin, 2015).
The first, called Resource Mobilization theory, describes mobilizations as collective
rational actors depending on resources and capabilities. Resources such as domestic,
transnational (Soule, 2009) or international (Meyer, 2003) political structures
(McAdam, 1982), also defined as a degree of openness in the present political
environment, are believed to facilitate the emergence of challenges to the state.
These opportunities fluctuate within time and across political actors. Pre-existing
networks of everyday life (Obershall, 1973), material resources such as income, non-
material ones such as moral commitment, developed skills (Finkel, 2015) or
Repertoires of contention (Tilly, 1986) are other illustrations of such resources.
According to the second perspective, emerging as a critic of the first view’s
overrepresentation in the literature, the industrial era created a shift in the
population’s motivations. Individuals are thus less dependent from strategies and
organizational structures and focus more on their quality of life (Inglehart, 1977).
Touraine, for instance, reported a struggle for “historicity”, which is usually
controlled by the ruling class. He defines here historicity as “the capacity to produce
historical experience through cultural patterns”, such as knowledge, ethics and
investment (Touraine, 1985). Nowadays, in a “complex society” focusing on culture
and identity (Melucci, 1988), in which the state exercises constant surveillance and
control (Habermas,1981), people seek a renewed social management over their social
life (Touraine, 1985).
The cultural turn, having emerged recently in social movement studies, embraces the
idea of emotions and narratives as strengthening social bonds and identity (Fine,
1995), consolidating the movements over time (Goodwin et al, 2001) and allowing
3the construction of collective identities (Benford, 2002). This paper will contribute to
this body of literature, viewing emotions and narratives as reflecting past memories.
Recently another main explanation has emerged. With non-violent movements
increasing worldwide, also found to be more successful than violent ones (Karakaya
2018, Edwards 2020, Chenoweth & Stephan 2011), researchers and activists have
started to consider globalization as a trigger of discontent. Transnational injustice
frames are thus increasingly witnessed as narrating the economic, political and
cultural effects of neoliberalism (Olesen, 2005). The rise of transnational opportunity
structures (Murphy, 1998) such as the growth of Human Rights regimes, NGOs,
international organizations and the emergence of new technologies (social media, the
internet) procure new sources of support, allowing cross-border coalitions and
promoting greater awareness over globalization’s consequences (Martin, 2015). It
also leads the creation of a “cosmopolitan memory”, shaping solidarities, promoting
mutual recognition and universal solidarity (Mitzal, 2010). Doing so, portraits of
victims, through the mass media, as “universal sufferer” and “universal humanity”
unify individuals across borders (Hinton, 2002, cited in Alexander, Eyerman, Giesen,
Smelser, Sztompka, 2004). New technologies for Olesen, also brings about new
chances of a global consciousness, representing a platform for the establishment of
collective identities (Olesen, 2005). Through the circulation of stories via the social
media and direct proofs of violence, contests over the authority to narrate levelled-up
(Heath-Kelly, 2020). Authorizing individuals to speak up their truths, new
technologies and their spread through globalization enables memory debates to
become more complex. However, with a growing flow of information, a culture of
forgetting started to emerge, rendering national memories as unstable sources of
identity (Mitzal, 2010). This paradox between “a passion of memory” through the
past’s numerous engravement in commemorative places, and the high status granted
to forgetting, increased “the growing decoupling of nation and identity”, leading the
legitimacy of society by the future (Mitzal, 2010). This idea is further outlined by
Koopmans et al, describing a loss of identity experienced by individuals as the
outcome of globalization. Threatened economically, culturally and in terms of
identity, individuals would thus likely mobilize through these new opportunity
4structures, as a way to preserve their futures. As nonviolent mobilizations have been
perceived as a more successful strategy for political change, pressurizing the state
through means affecting its legitimacy or its ability to govern (Chenoweth and
Stephan, 2011) community ties could strengthen against the state and the global
system it is established in.
Although all of these theories present relevant arguments, none preclude collective
traumas and memories to influence, facilitate or accompany the occurrence of a
mobilization nor its dynamics. This paper will thus take as its objective to fill this
gap and study the possible consequences that collective traumas in Chile and
Argentina may have on their culture of protest.
1.2. Symbolic predispositions
Before taking a look at the collective, understanding how memories may affect
individuals present a relevant source of information, granting new insights into
human behaviour and choices regarding collective actions.
Recently elaborated, the Symbolic Politics Theory defines individuals’ choices as
intuitive, driven by emotions and predispositions. Predispositions are here defined as
“stable affective responses to particular symbols” (Sears, 2001). Following these
predispositions, individuals may mobilize into active communities and challenge the
state. Intuition serves the individual in his choices when threat perceptions are high,
however, rationality predominates when they are low.
This idea, bringing emotions into politics and the realm of Political Science, is far
from the usual consensus of realist theorists. Viewing individuals, and their state
representation, as sinful, they further depict their choices as rational. The influence of
emotions, although so far mainly opened to the fields of ethnic conflicts, represents
an insightful optic to consider social mobilizations.
Following this concept of symbolic predispositions, this paper will argue that
predispositions emerge from past experiences and their lasting memories, notably
when they are traumatic. When these traumatic events are perceived collectively,
these predispositions take a collective dimension, which is later reinforced by
5socialization practices. Shaping individuals’ perceptions of the present, and their
related behaviours, they could thus affect groups’ perceptions of the state and its
institutions. This, in turn, could affect their legitimacy and the willingness of social
groups to protest.
1.3. Collective Memory
To consider collective action as possibly influenced by memorial legacies and their
traumatic dimension, one needs to take a look at the literature focusing on collective
memories and their overall functioning.
Collective Memory is a relatively recent subject of study. Introduced at the end of the
20th Century by Maurice Hallbwach, in his book On Collective Memory, it has now
taken a multidisciplinary character. Studied in the fields of Social Psychology,
Cognition, psycholinguistics, sociology, social neuroscience, social sciences,
philosophy or even biology, it has long been left aside by Political Scientists and
International Relations experts. This gap in the literature remains important as
researchers have been linking collective remembrances of the past to the construction
of social groups’ identity (Schechtman, 2011, Rorlich, 1999, Moody, 2020, Lee &
Chan, 2018, Nikiforov 2017) and thus affecting conflicts such as ethnic-related ones
(Lake & Rothchild 1996, Kaufman 2009) and social mobilizations (Apaydin 2020,
Lee & Chan, 2018).
If we can consider the past as a “social field subject to conflicts and tensions”
implying divergences of interpretations (Garcia Jerez & Muller, 2015) and based on
shared symbolic resources (Aden 2017, Olick 1999) which can be manipulated, the
cruciality of memory becomes evident. Of interest to numerous actors, such as the
state or symbolic entrepreneurs (Armstrong & Crage, 2006) - also called leaders (Le
Bon, 1985) or Carrier groups (Alexander, Eyerman, Giesen, Smelser, Sztompka,
2004) - collectives memories and the politics surrounding them can serve as an
instrument of power.
Selective (Coman, Stone, Castano, Hirst, 2014; Stone & Jay, 2019; Hirst & Coman,
2018, Nikiforov, 2017) memory is described by Maurice Hallbwach as a social act.
6One remembers particular moments in time, which may not be recalled in a
historically linear manner, byft belonging to real or imaginary social groups
repetitively narrating these same past events (Hallbwach,1997). These
representations of the past thus vary from one group to another (Heath-Kelly, 2013)
and allow omission through what researchers have called Socially Shared Retrieval-
Induced Forgetting. Through discussions, individuals selectively leave behind
unmentioned memories and strengthen the ones recognized within the group. As
Hirst & Coman outlined, incentives to modify one’s speech according to the
listener's expectation, the fact of speaking to another member of a common group, or
the feeling of one’s social identity as being threatened, can lead to the distortion of
memories and the selective forgetting of others (Hirst & Coman, 2018).
Memories, as a set of “organized cultural practices”, allow for the sustenance of a
given political and social system. These societal frameworks, as well as groups in
their entirety, depend on reinterpretations of the past generations’ beliefs, transmitted
as time passes by (Mitzal, 2010). They create collective memories and feelings of
belongings to a group, to a community, to a nation.
In 1999, Rorlich described memories as consolidating statehood (Rorlich, 1999).
Indeed, as Benedict Anderson declared in Imagined Communities, nation-ness and
nationalism are cultural constructions. Once established, they change with time and
deliver emotional legitimacy. Nation would then be an “imagined political
community”, one both limited (having finite boundaries) and sovereign (Anderson,
1983). This idea is crucial when one thinks of social mobilizations. Elgenius &
Rydgren, illustrated the nation-state as an anchor for collective identities (Elgenius &
Rydgren, 2019), while Onuoha highlighted the importance of memories over the
construction of national identities (Onuoha, 2016).
If memories indeed organize and sustain political practices within society, we could
assume that traumatic experiences, as disorganized and irruptive, potentially impede
the collective identities and feelings of nationhood. If the feelings of belonging to
the nation weaken, individuals are likely to turn to their social groups. Reviving these
traumatic memories would thus shape collective perceptions of the state and its
institutions, potentially giving rise to perceived illegitimacy. This could be
7aggravated if memories are continuously debated, leaving a void for opposition and
discord to rise between social spheres. Discontent could thus rise, waiting for
mobilizations to be triggered by an outside event. Understanding the functioning of
trauma, and its collective dimension, becomes thus relevant to the study of social
mobilizations.
1.4. Collective Trauma
Psychological trauma has been defined through the early works of Sigmund Freud as
the association of memory and a related affect, repressed from one’s consciousness.
Left in a state of latency, these memories remain active, influencing one’s actions
unconsciously. To free oneself from the past, one would thus need to completely
retrieve the repressed souvenir (Freud, 1956, 1986). Intrusive in their character,
individuals revive fragments of these memories unwillingly, experiencing the same
emotional and physical senses once again (Visser, Lau-Zhu, Henson, Holmes, 2018).
This is notably the case following post-traumatic stress disorders, emerging from
experienced or witnessed traumatic events. Affecting their behaviours, these
irruptions contain negative consequences for individuals’ social relations, mental and
physical stability.
More recently, notably following the Holocaust, researchers have started to focus on
traumas affecting collectives. Multidimensional or/and multigenerational in their
character, they influence society at the individual, family and community levels
(Danieli & al, 2015).
Collective traumas, namely traumas perceived simultaneously at the collective level,
would thus occur when:
“members of a collectivity feel they have been subjected to a horrendous event that
leaves indelible marks upon their group consciousness, marking their memories
forever and changing their future identity in fundamental and irrevocable ways.”
(Alexander, Eyerman, Giesen, Smelser, Sztompka, 2004)
8The dislodgement of patterned meanings of “collectivity” would thus engender
traumas. The enlightenment thinking and psychoanalytic thinking theories, depict
traumas as occurring naturally from abrupt changes. Contradicting these views,
Alexander, Eyerman, Giesen, Smelser and Sztompka described what they called
“cultural traumas” as being socially constructed. Indeed, communities raise their
traumatic perceptions at the collective level, identify the sources of suffering and
define solidarity relationships between members. Through this social process of
cultural trauma, social groups thus expand their notion of “we” and integrate their
traumatic experiences within the community. Firstly exposing their injury through
symbolic representations and demands of reparations (claim-making), leaders (called
carrier groups) define the nature of the pain, the nature of the victim, the relationship
between victims and wider audiences, and attribute the blame. Doing so, they bring
the trauma to the level of master narrative. These narrative processes, mediated
through the different stratified societal institutions (religion, aesthetic, legal, mass
media, state bureaucracy, scientific) lead the revision of the pre-established
collective identity. fThis new identity is, in turn, integrated to the national landscape
through ritualized places of remembrance and routinized within individuals’
interactions with them (Alexander, Eyerman, Giesen, Smelser & Sztompka, 2004).
Having identified 13 types of traumas, possibly adding themselves into Complex
Traumas, the Violence Policy Center described their possible consequences on
society (Violence Policy Center, 2017). Through the perception of toxic stress
(“Prolonged activation of stress response systems in the absence of protective
relationships”), experiences may increase the risk of individuals suffering from
PTSDs, alter brain development, sleep patterns, concentration and thus a
population’s education. Traumas also deepen the risks of obesity, heart disease,
diabetes, cancer, and asthma, leaving individuals with higher health costs. Finally,
traumas affect individuals’ well-being and behaviours. Levels of suicide, depression
or anxiety, as well as aggressive behaviours and desensitization to violence are likely
to be influenced through it. Victims become hypersensitive and hypervigilant to
threats, increasing individuals “acceptance of violence as a legitimate response”
(Violence Policy Center, 2017).
9In result, inequalities between the perpetrators and the victims, notably if the first
ones remain part of a pre-established elite, may deepen. As carrier ambitions
decrease with low school records, hopes of social status change follow. Increases in
health costs, further economic divides between those who can afford and those who
can’t. Moreover, substance abuses and the perpetuation of cycles of violence within
communities pursue interpersonal trust issues and destabilizes communities. From
these realities, hopes may disappear and discontent rise.
If memories can be shared, so do traumas. Indeed, as emotional experiences possess
greater likelihood of transmission (Harber and Cohen 2005) we can assume traumas
to jump from one generation to the next. Interpersonally shared through the same
patterns as usual memories, they can transcend generations. Theories focusing on the
transgenerational effects of trauma, however, remain recent and mostly interested in
the Holocaust. Transgenerational consequences of trauma appear t o b e
multidimensional, possibly including psychological, social, genetic, cultural, familial
and neurobiological repercussions (DeAngelis, 2019).
When parents face traumatic challenges for instance, they interiorise a number of
renewed beliefs and fears, which affect the way they educate their children. Creating
distrust through subjective pictures of what they are going to encounter in the world
(Breland-Noble, cited in DeAngelis, 2019), parents enunciate fear-based “survival
messages” to which their children identify (Cherepanov, 2015). These messages,
directed through behaviours such as over-protection, constant search for control,
obsession or silencing about the past (Danieli, Norris, & Engdahl, 2016), have been
found to increase health related issues of the younger generations. Life expectancy
reductions (Costa, Yetter, DeSomer 2018), learning difficulties and drug abuse
(Bombay, cited in DeAngelis, 2019), anxiety disorders and PTSDs (Danieli, Norris
& Engdahl, 2017), or anxiety-related genetic transformation transmission (Yehuda &
al, 2014) are examples of such consequences.
As trauma’s update individuals’ beliefs and their ensuing actions, younger
generations may also be influenced through observation of their relatives. In that
sense, Bandura’s social cognitive theory exposed the power of imitation through
observation. Witnessing an adult violently acting towards a doll, children replicated
10this mode of action, while others witnessing a calmer model disregarded violence as
an option. (Bandura, 1986) Hyper-vigilant individuals, with a lower stress resistance
and propensity to violence resulting from earlier traumas may thus influence the
following generations’ attitudes.
If traumas shape individuals’ perceptions and behaviours, they further affect the
content of the messages they share within their social groups. Hypersensitive and
hypervigilant, the traumatized people are thus likely to unconsciously share their
fears to the new generations. Highlighting potential threats as a way to warn an
protect them, they influence their predispositions, and ensuing perceptions of the
political scene. Attaching them with emotions such as fear or anger, these
perceptions are later expressed and reinforced within social groups. Deepened by
present experiences of danger, they are to be revived within mobilisations, when
perceptions of immediate threats occur. Taken to the collective level, they would
thus affect social groups’ perceptions of the state and its institutions, potentially
creating illegitimacy. Collective traumas could further influence the levels of
violence within mobilizations, through the unconscious emotional outbursts these
newly established perceptions could create. As will be seen in the next section, these
traumatic memories could also be manipulated by protest leaders, and inadvertently
distorted through narratives.
1.5. Narratives
Shared reality theorists depict individuals as needing connection with others. Seeking
to “obtain a sense of other’s inner-state”, they thus create shared realities, through
which common beliefs, norms, values, identifications of others and a common
subjectively reliable and valid perception of the world are created. (Echterhoff,
Higgins & Levine, 2019). Through these lenses, ambiguous information is
interpreted positively or negatively (saying-is-believing effect). Interpretations of the
past are likely to join the list of common grounds between individuals within a
similar shared reality, refuting contradicting views. Individuals materialise their
experiences in the real world through the words they use, embedding them with
11meaning and negotiating reality (Bar-Tal, Oren, Nets-Zehngut, 2014). Doing so, it
unifies them into a newly socially constructed identity.
These interpretations and the remembrance of past common experiences could be
used as a tool of influence. More than state legitimacy or identity, Rorlich defined
memories as reflecting power relations, former structures of domination, present
challenges and imagined futures (Rorlich, 1999). In International Relation theories,
Poststructuralism recognizes language as an open structure, one reflecting power
relations. Through the subjective use of history and its denaturalization, actors
construct these relations. Moreover, the Framing theory, used in mobilization studies,
depicts movement entrepreneurs as transforming cultural schemas in order to
mobilize individuals (Martin, 2015). Condensing and simplifying present facts, these
leaders shape common definitions of social problems and possible answers to them
(Goodwin et al. 2001). Inspiring new common beliefs and imbuing their narratives
with meaning, they legitimize collective actions (Snow et Benford: 2000). However,
to be proficient, they need to do more than simply belonging to the group. They also
need to “do it for us” (identity advancement), “craft a sense of us” (identity
entrepreneurship), “embed a sense of us” (identity imperiorship) and direct
protestor’s energy once accumulated (identity prototypicality) (Steffens, 2004).
Memories and past traumatic events have a good chance of being manipulated
towards the legitimization of one’s actions. Four different strategies, used by
counter-narratives, are thus depicted. As a way to consolidate their narratives, actors
marginalize opposing stories by assigning them minimal importance, magnifying
proofs of their own claims, fabricating supportive elements, omitting contradictory
comments, and framing speeches as to appeal to one’s emotions, memory or
cognition (Bar-Tal, Oren, Nets-Zehngut, 2014).
Collective memories themselves are described by Wertsch, as being constituted of
‘specific’ and ‘schematic’ narratives (Wertsch, 2008). Specific narratives would be
organizing the recognized facts surrounding the memory itself, while ‘schematic’
narratives would depict broader frameworks to which individuals would then refer to
as to create their own narratives of an event.
12Taking the example of Liverpool, Moody describes the creation of memory debates
about the slave trade character of its history, and the interactions of “framing
narratives” within them If memory-linked narratives compete, so do power relations
and identities. These debates oppose multiple discourses describing different
perspectives of one single event. Sometimes accurate, sometimes distorted, groups
embody these perspectives as their own, attaching them to their social identity
(Moody, 2020). Doing so, they increase their importance and the need to defend
them. However, facing opposing narratives contradicting your own views of an event
has been described as increasing memory distortion, simplification and disregard
(Wertsch, 2008). Not aligning with other’s narratives, individuals may be tempted to
delegitimize the other (Onuoha 2016, Salomon, 2004). This process of reciprocal
delegitimization would, consequently, justify one’s actions and intensify a group’s
self-identity through the invalidation of others (Salomon, 2004).
Memories distortion deepens as past memories are reconstructed with present
information. This may happen through the disappearance of the direct witnesses of
events (Nikiforov, 2017), leaving behind them subjective stories of the past, or
through narratives. Indeed, through the shaping and reshaping of collective
memories, taking place within the continuous reconstruction of a group’s identity,
narratives, order the past (Moody, 2020). Through their structure, they organize the
past and convey them with meaning. This worsens through the natural or intentional
character of memory as selective, and its processes of omission. As culturally and
historically constituted (Moody, 2020) they may also differ from one historical
period to another.
Through these narrations of memories, individuals thus share, transmit and update
representations of the past. However, certain transmissions seem more effective than
others. The natural personal characteristics of the transmitter, of the message or of
the listener might impede the message’s spread. Emotional experiences, stories given
by anxious communicators or talkative individuals, making sure their narration will
be adopted, and receiving attention from their audience are more likely to be socially
accepted (Stone & Jay, 2019).
13Insights from communication studies may also contribute to the understanding of
discursive powers. Words may indeed exert persuasive influence through processes
of identification, and change individuals’ behaviours (De Graaf A, Hoeken H,
Sanders J & Beentjes JWJ, 2012). Green and Brock for instance, defined the concept
of “transportation” as embracing emotions, attention and imaginary to a particular
narrative. (Green and Brock, 2000). Through the stimulation or the imagination of
one’s past experiences, individuals may put themselves in a position to understand
other’s reactions, rendering the narrative more real for them. Shifting attitudes,
stories also influence populations’ beliefs about the world, rendering abstract ideas
more concrete (Green 2016). Although these studies aim at explaining processes
linked to the discovery of written stories, I’d argue that narratives may be
constructed in one’s imagination from the simple listening of one’s adventures.
Grand children for instance, notably through the close relationships they’ve
developed to their loved ones, might identify themselves to their grandparents when
telling stories about these past events. Attempting to understand them, they may
shape their own version of the story and share it with others, spreading updated
versions of one perspective.
Considering mobilizations, leaders and social entrepreneurs may instrumentalize
common predispositions and perceptions, shaped by the stories told through
traumatized perspectives, to inspire and legitimize collective actions. Pre-established
perceptions of the state and its institutions could thus be manipulated into the
organization of protests and trigger the use of violence within them. The presence of
memory debates, between the state and the crowd or within society, could further
create oppositions of realities enabling violence and disconnection between social
groups.
1.6. State terrorism
The two chosen cases of this study have both experienced state terrorism. To
understand the level of which these events may have traumatized individuals,
14affecting collective perceptions, behaviours and narratives, a quick look at the state
terrorism literature may be of relevance.
Violence affects the pre-existing power relations of a society as certain groups are
“authorized” or considered “authentic enough” to fix a particular memory of past
abuses (Heath-Kelly, 2020). This political authority thus affects language,
subjectivity, memory and politics, influence which has been disregarded by terrorism
studies. (Heath-Kelly, 2013).
Daniela Pisoiu and Sandra Hain give a good description of the existing gaps in the
terrorism literature. Conceptually and theoretically disputed, the concept of state
terrorism remains understudied by most terrorism scholars. This is understandable
when seeing most of these studies being funded by state institutions, usually
uninterested by the subject, and focusing on violence targeting northern democracies
(Pisoiu & Hain, 2018).
State terrorism has been defined as the use of instrumental violence - or threat of
violence - against victimized individuals as a mean to terrorize, intimidate or frighten
a broaden public (Walter 1969, Jackson et al 2010, Blakely 2010, Stohl 2006). Used
as a weapon of domination, repression becomes state terrorism by indiscriminately
targeting innocents and perpetrators through counter-terrorism campaigns. (Jackson
& al, 2010) Claiming their actions in the name of political progress (Miller, 2013)
states may use violence directly or indirectly (via paramilitary or vigilante units)
against their own population, the one of another state or other’s resources (Pisoiu &
Hain, 2018). The ideological, military or financial support given from one state to
another actor using terrorism, whether it be the state or insurgents, is also considered
as a form of state terrorism (Pisoiu & Hain, 2018).
State terrorism is further described as a pre-determined strategic decision. Incentives
for the use of state terrorism differ from spreading a message of strength, enhancing
obedience, discouraging rebellion and eliminating a threat (Stohl, 2006) to seeing no
other alternative because of a lack of resources and viewing public unresponsiveness
to the state’s information (Pisoiu & Hain, 2018).
More important to this study, however, remain the legacies. Joan Wardrop, depicted
one such example of Zimbabwe as being continuously embedded in a condition of
15state terror, established through the naturalization of violence as a political tool and
cultural practice. Terror, as internalized and transmitted from one generation to the
other, is remembered and collectively revived throughout social life, although its
public expression remains forbidden (Wardrop, 2004).
If this state of terror impeded Zimbabweans to gather as to express themselves on the
topic, the return to democracy, in Chile and Argentina, sparked a collective search
for truth about these times. Through actions of memory retrieval (Transitional
Justice, Politics of Memory, Mobilizations…), these countries opened new prospects
of public expression. The need for expression itself, however, may differ from one
generation to the other, as traumatic legacies remain for the elder generations.
Potentially affecting their own mobilizing behaviour, their lack of expression on the
subject or lack of freedom of expression back then, could have affected the new
generation’s choice to mobilize. The establishment of state terrorism in both cases,
knowing its ambition to traumatize the population, thus guarantees a collective
trauma to be noticeable. This state’s ambition to control his population through
terrorization, could have thus shaped popular views of the state, sharing them and
transmitting them to the new ones. Raising or decreasing its popular legitimacy, this
could play in the rise of mobilizations.
162. Theory
Following this literature review, we could argue that collective traumas shape
traumatized individuals’ predispositions, their perceptions of society as a whole and
their behaviors. Sharing warnings through which fears may be perceived, the
terrorized generations could thus unconsciously socialize the new generations into
acquiring similar predispositions and perceptions.
Indeed, people’s memories depend on their constant revival within their social
groups. Friends and other community members thus represent potential actors of
influence. Through the communication of their own relatives’ experiences, they may
participate in the shaping of others’ beliefs. In consequence, even if one’s own
relatives did not suffer from the period of state terrorism, hearing stories of others
who did, might have the same influential effect.
Perceptions about the state and institutions such as the police or the military could be
shaped by these pre-existing beliefs, filled with emotional background. Raising
distrust, it could affect the government’s own legitimacy. It could in turn negatively
shape political instability and encourage the rise of mobilizations. This may be
worsened by the persistent polarization within these countries. Indeed, state terrorism
divided the Argentine and Chilean populations in two. On the one hand, the left,
described by the right as posing a threat to the state. On the other, the Right, mostly
supportive of the past regime. The memories of these divides and the roles each side
played during the dictatorship may as well affect the current equilibrium of political
forces. As a legacy of these times, equal access to resources might differ between the
two groups, creating resentment and frustration. The viewing of actual inequalities,
linked to the past, and the remembering of these times, could thus build popular
discontent and prepare the terrain for mobilizations to rise. Consequently, narrations
of these times might differ from one political side to the other, increasing public
memory debates and memory revival.
17You can also read
