Legacies of violence are important for a country in terms of collective memory. While it is incredibly difficult to consider creating a state in which oppressors continue to rule alongside the once-oppressed, it is often necessary, as we have seen. It is important for everyone, from the government through the citizenry, however, to retain the memory of what once was. As we discussed in class, it seems as though it would be too de-stabilizing to immediately prosecute and imprison torturers and dictators, especially in the case of a pacted transition. Unfortunately, this means that people must accept tactics that may seem inadequate to get to a stable, free future. In the film No, it is clear that peoples’ everyday lives were shaped and drastically distorted by living under dictatorship, as when the elderly No-group member was utterly offended by commercials displaying the message of happiness, over those memorializing the dead and abused. However, the movement is ultimately successful because of their happiness, somewhat irreverent though they may be, tactics. What is most important is that all Chileans maintain the memory of what had happened in their country, so that when the time is right, justice can be served. Memory can be retained on both an individual and a societal level, but is of the utmost importance for long term peace and democracy. The Brasil: No Mais project knew this: the past must be preserved in as many ways as possible, so that when the state is fully prepared, the correct actions can be taken toward justice.
I think you use good examples from the film and the book to help illustrate your point and I agree with your overall argument. I particularly like your distinction between the individual and the societal memories that play a different role in situations like this. For me, it is particularly poignant to read how individuals are directly affected by having to coexist with the remnants of a brutal regime and it makes me wonder if memory without action just makes it harder on the survivors. These accounts are so painful and personal, that it does devastate me to think about how these people will have to live with constant reminder of these horrors. However, I also recognize that such inaction is for the good of the nation as a whole, and that societal remembrance helps societies to heal, as is your main argument.