Perú's Historical Memory is at Risk

08 Oct, 2026

The last two decades of the 20th century in Perú saw a lot of turmoil due to an economic crisis of hyperinflation and the Internal Armed Conflict Between terrorist groups Sendero Luminoso and MRTA and the government forces. The conflict, instigated by the subversive terrorist groups, had its symbolic end with the capture of Abimael Guzman in 1992.

This period has left deep scars in Peruvians that still have ripples in present days. Not only due to the Atrocious violence committed by the terrorist groups against citizens, especially rural communities, but also because of the human rights violations committed by the government forces, which conducted extrajudicial killings, kidnappings, and forced sterilization of rural women. Alberto Fujimori’s government, venerated by some for bringing an end to terrorism, was profoundly corrupt, stealing millions from the Peruvian state, controlling media outlets, bribing congress, changing the constitution to remain in power, and using the force of the military against its own citizens to secure control and deal with opposition. Suffice to say that, While terrorists caused deep harm and trauma to our country, the government forces were far from saintly saviors or heroes.

A question of class peeks its head here. Because most of the violence occurred in rural regions in a country where wealth is centralized in the capital, and because the counterterrorist action happened mostly within rural communities (where the terrorists were presumed to be), wealthy Peruvians rarely experienced the oppression or human rights violations that the government forces carried out in their fight against terrorism. This has led to a historical lack of perception by that class of the seriousness of those crimes, making them a lot more willing to justify their atrocities because they “freed us from the pesky terrorists that were setting bombs in out city”, a perception that they “did what they had to do to set order in the country”. A position that is a lot easier to take when one isn’t affected by those crimes. To many of them Fujimori was a savior.

I grew up amongst many of these fuckers with an atrophied moral conscience. Admittedly, we were kids during the end of these historical times and have mostly received an understanding of what happened from our families and school sine we didn’t live the terror. But I think it’s inexcusable to find refuge in your social position to avoid extending empathy, consideration and reconciliation to a whole country that went through multiple traumas, only because its comfortable to you and yours.

This year, Keiko Fujimori, the daughter of dictator Alberto Fujimori, has become president of Perú after 3 previously failed campaigns. A sad affair. As a consequence of this, the LUM (Lugar de la Memoria, Place of Memory) A museum that incorporates the findings of the CVR (commission for truth and reconciliation) and testimony of many of the affected and their families, has once again come under scrutiny by reactionary forces.

The LUM is a heartfelt, solemn, respectful and deeply honest portrayal of the suffering and harms that scarred our society, perpetuated by both sides of the conflict. The exhibition clearly identifies Sendero Luminoso as the main responsible for the violence and murders and as the principal instigator of the conflict, while also presenting the harms perpetrated by other actors such as MRTA and the government forces, and the responses from resilient communities in the fields that where many times left to fend for themselves against violence from both sides. It is heartbreaking to confront the suffering that many people had to go; having their community leaders and family members murdered by terrorists for not supporting their cause, only to then see kidnappings from the government because they were suspected of aiding terrorists.

With Keiko as president, these reactionary right wing sycophants are emboldened to question once again whether the LUM is not actually an ideological tool of the far left used as apologia for terrorism. A Preposterous claim that has seen the rounds many times in Perú but now risks real consequence as party interested in washing their crimes from history is now in power.

A politician from what we in Perú call the DBA (something akin to “the brute and aggressive Right”) recently published a piece on the LUM. In it, she claims the the LUM Exhibition claims that both sides where equally at fault for the conflict and seeks to erase the fact that Sendero Luminoso was the primary instigator in the conflict, thus making some form of apologia. This is false. It is absurdly and obviously false to anyone who has actually taken the time to engage with the exhibition in any intelligent manner. Showcasing the crimes the state committed, an important part of truth and reconciliation, is in no way an erasure of the instigations and violence from Sendero Luminoso or a diffusion of responsibility. What these people would want is an exhibition that minimizes and justifies the harm of the state, with a narrative that emphasizes the necessary but difficult decisions that the military forces had to make in order to bring peace and order back into our country.

They despise being forced to consider what that peace costed and who had to pay for it. Instead, they’d rather the LUM were closed, or serve as an ideological indoctrination on why once side was the “good side” in the conflict, instead of confronting the complexity of the reality we lived through as a country.

I saw a childhood friend share this article on social media. I know the author is his cousin. Not seeking to be disrespectful but unable to stay quiet I couldn’t help but messege him; “hey, what she says here is just not true. I’ve been to the exhibition and it very clearly blames Sendero for instigating the conflict.” The response I got: “I trust my cousin. I have never been to the exhibition but she knows what shes talking about. Lets agree to disagree. How are you doing these days?”.

I did not see the sense in pressing the conversation with someone who did not want to have it, so I let it be and shifted to polite catching up. However, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t shocked by his attitude. He admittedly has no experience of the exhibition first hand but choses to believe someone on the basis of ideological resonance and familial ties (admittedly the second one is a lot more understandable to me). The thing is, this is the type of person that will then share a clip from Lex Friedman and attempt to be intellectual while remaining ignorant of the topic they discuss. Presenting as “open to thought or debate” but entirely incapable of actually engaging with the reality of the topics that are discussed.

To me, and in the context of such an open wound and important historical events, this is an abdication of responsibility. A choice to remain epistemically ignorant and not live up to the epistemic responsibility ¹ of being Peruvian, particularly because a certain version of events align with your class interest and/or ideological bias.

At a time where illustrious people like philosopher Salomon Lerner, Who worked on the CVR report, are receiving letters denouncing them for terrorist apologia for having authored that report (not the first time it happens, but given the current context, worrysome), it feels entirely absurd to have do deal with these claims and accusations made by people with no actualy interest in engaging on the matter. It saddens me and worries me not only how emboldened the parties interested in revisionist history are, but also how willing to be duped some sectors of the population are, how willing to eat the ideological slop and follow suit.

There is no doubt an aesthetic component in being “on the winning team”, on affirming a reality that makes you feel like your life, your decisions, and your positions make sense because there’s economic success and political support structures to facilitate it. But its also cowardly when you must avoid self introspection and questioning the foundations of that position in order to feel tat way.

The LUM is at risk and revisionist forces are actively seeking to use their political position to make changes to law and memory to favor their version of events. I stay hopeful that people will fight back to preserve the exhibition and combat these efforts. A friend of mine has requested all the digital documents and transcripts from the exhibition to build a virtual museum, and like him, many others fight to preserve and combat.

#blog