“Present a project to modify the name of the holiday on March 24: “National Day of Remembrance for Truth and Complete Justice“Because the way the State names history matters. There is no possible memory of partial stories. We need a complete look, without silence and with respect for all the victims,” he stated. Karen Reichardt in your X account.
The legislator from La Libertad Avanza uploaded, on the day that commemorated the 50th anniversary of the last coup d’état by the Armed Forces, a bill in which she intends to modify the name of the national holiday of March 24. An aspect that the parliamentarian, based on the hypothesis of the so-called “theory of the two demons” seeks to include those armed organizations prior to and contemporary with the 1976 coup.
According to the foundations disseminated in legislative spheres and taken up by different media, the proposal seeks to expand the official focus on the seventies, incorporating the recognition of all victims of political violence. Along these lines, Reichardt maintains that the current name would reflect a “partial” view of the period, focused on State terrorism, while his project points to a more comprehensive narrative, which generated strong criticism from human rights organizations and political sectors that consider that said modification relativizes the central responsibility of the State in crimes against humanity.
The support of libertarian sectors for this initiative is part of a critical review of the memory, truth and justice policies developed since 2003, especially during the governments of Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. References linked to Javier Milei’s space have questioned what they call a “unilateral vision” of recent history, suggesting that the predominant narrative makes other forms of political violence invisible.
In this framework, the proposal for “complete justice” dialogues with the so-called theory of the two demons, an interpretation that emerged in the first years of the democratic transition that posits that the violence of the 1970s was the result of two opposing forces—the actions of armed organizations and state repression—equated as responsible for the conflict. This perspective has been widely questioned by human rights organizations and by the dominant historiography, which highlights the systematic, planned and state nature of State terrorism deployed during the dictatorship (1976-1983), differentiating it from other forms of political violence.
In this context, Reichardt’s project not only proposes a nominal change, but is inserted into a broader dispute about the meaning of collective memory and the way in which the Argentine State remembers one of the most traumatic periods in its history.
You may also be interested
Image gallery
