Ethnic diversity and State violence: Cohabitation and Mourning in Argentina's Jewish and Indigenous Communities

IGNACIO RULLANSKY

Moscú

Congreso; Modern and New Times. 27th International Annual Conference on Jewish Studies; 2021

Sefer Center for University Teaching of Jewish Civilization

Two of the greatest thinkers of our time, Hannah Arendt (2007, 2003, 1976) and, taking up her writings, Judith Butler (2021, 2012), reflected on an aspect prior to any form of social or political contract: the condition of not being able to choose with whom we cohabit the planet. Both inquired about it to think of a form of social bond based on mutual human belonging. Butler made a point of distinguishing that the historical experience of each group and people is unique and that, according to that history, they will observe ways of making sense of the present by actively recalling the milestones of the past. This preservation of memory will imply that different sufferings are observed and mourned by each people.It is the recognition of the plurality of experiences derived from the non-elective nature of our coexistence with others, the foundation that for Butler enables an understanding of the emergence of ethical prescriptions and norms. Therefore, it is not a question of elucidating a mere adjacency between groups, but rather of perceiving the conditions for the formulation of limits between them, of reciprocal affectation of the histories and temporalities between each other. Hence, the convergence in forms of coexistence that do not suppose the subsumption of heterogeneity in a whole that annuls the singularity of said experiences, will allow us to reflect upon the present of what I will call "golems": the concrete pillars located on the streets to prevent attacks against synagogues or institutions that belong to the Jewish community in Argentina.In this presentation, I propose to interrogate the current and inapparent interrelation between histories of institutional violence in Argentina against the Jewish and the indigenous communities. These stories suppose temporalities and narratives of mourning that have a certain specificity, but that are not currently shared outside of their most directly affected groups: they are not mourned by the Argentine community as a whole. Thus, I aim to apprehend the main dimensions of a dominant discourse on mourning.Accordingly, and as part of my post-doctoral project at CONICET (National Research Council, Argentina), I will explore the current thematization of institutional violence towards ethnoreligious minorities in Argentina. It will be of interest to take July 18, 2020, date of commemoration of the 26th anniversary of the attack against the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association, as the axis to reflect upon a multitude of events that expose the precariousness of the lives (Butler, 2004) of the Qom, Wichí and Toba communities of the Provinces of Formosa and Chaco in the face of institutional violence. It will be of interest to analyze to what extent, visible and invisible golems institute the terms of cohabitation in the speeches of official authorities belonging to the National and Provincial administrations with respect to cases of State violence against these communities, as well as if the associations that demand Memory, Truth and Justice for the victims of the AMIA case, extend their demand for those others Argentinians that suffer their own mournings.