Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

This article aims to analyze the bibliography of extreme-right organizations that were identified with the Argentinian nationalist movement and their parastatal role during the 1920s and the 1930s in Argentina. From the three generations of nationalist organizations, we will first examine how the bibliography studied the relationship between these organizations and the State in order to understand repressive politics. The degree of official recognition, the use of leagues and legions by provincial states, and the violence in their para-statal role are also some aspects of this text. These considerations take us to structure the following questions: Was the parastatal role of these organizations the same over these twenty years? Was this relationship exclusively linked to security forces? How were these parastatal roles connected with nationalists’ political projects?

This text analyzes the repressive mechanisms and the ideological and discursive devices used by that organization in Territorio Nacional de La Pampa, with the purpose to make a contribution to the historiography that, from different approaches, has studied this organization performance. We seek to approach the forms through which the parastatal repressive practices took against mobilized workers during 1919-1922 period. For that, we inquired in the relations that exist between the Liga, the elites and state institutions, like the police and judicial power of the Territorio. With this objective, we examine repression cases against stevedores in pampean towns of Vértiz, in 1919; and Alpachiri, in 1921. We sustain that Liga Patriótica, to instrument its repression actions, appealed to territorial police and judiciary, which applied the Defensa Social law in several opportunities as part of the anti-maximalism repressive policy. To perform the analysis, we have come to various sources (legislatives, journalistic, workers press, police and judiciary documents), and we analyzed the ideologemes used to justify repression, as well as the police and judiciary mechanisms used to make it effective.

Since the 1980s, there has been a common sense in Argentine society about the Alianza Anticomunista Argentina (Triple A) that tends to regard it as the organization that coordinated the illegal repression during the third Peronism (1973-1983) and whose actions depended exclusively on the designs of the minister José López Rega. This article seeks to problematize these interpretations from two thematic axis: the historical trajectory of Triple A, and the articulations established with other repressive agents of the time. These themes will allow us to observe the complexity of this death squad from the procedural nature of its organizational and repressive evolution, as well as from the strategic interests that guided its relations within the repressive framework. The work shows how Triple A evolved in its structure and violent practices according to the changes in the political context and the counterinsurgent repressive process. In addition, three interpretive models of the type of sustained articulation were formulated by the squad: rapport, complementarity, and divergence.  

In order to rethink political violence in medium-term, this work addresses the practices of state and parastatal control as well as the recovery of the repressive experience in the voice of the complainants during the first Peronism. Remarking the confrontation between Peronism and anti-Peronism as well as the radicalization and implantation of a context of political violence in the country, we will review the state agencies created during the first Peronism to control an enemy defined initially as "communists", and later as anti-Peronists, an identity judged to radicals, socialists and conservatives. With this objective, the complaints against the democratic government in the Chamber of Deputies regarding the violation of human rights and one of the key figures in the restrictions on opponents are dealt with, in a frank rise in repressive control, like Major Jorge Osinde's. His actions as head of the Federal Coordination show the blurred boundaries that existed between ideological repression, intelligence services, shock forces, and the old and established practices of police torment. These aspects analyzed here are within the historical context of the 1950s, but they survived in the Argentine political culture and continue to exist.

The article explores the participation of the private sector in generating a public security response against actors that became the protesters of the state violence during the latest commodity boom in Peru. The literature highlights the significant threats to business, the institutional strength, the ideological coincidence with the government, and the ties with officials as determinants of business’ preference for formal and public strategies to defend their interests. Although these factors help to understand, on the whole, the participation of the private sector, we argue that the formation of linkages is a fundamental determinant for the co-production of security policy in Peru. The primacy of linkages is illustrated by a comparison between a narrative and a subnational private participation in policing responses to extortions in the construction sector, between 2004 and 2015.

This article is a case study on the repressive actions of a parastatal squadron comprised of soldiers in 1970 in the city of La Plata. The study is mainly based on the discovery, in the Archivo General de la Nación, of a summary of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces made to the members of this group, who were condemned by the military justice but then pardoned by the de facto president Alejandro Agustín Lanusse and later amnestied. This summary, as well as materials from the Intelligence Directorate of the Police of the Province of Buenos Aires (DIPPBA), testimonies of survivors and newspaper articles, allow us to reconstruct the individual trajectories of the military involved in clandestine repressive actions, their ideological convictions, and established sociability networks. Also, the analysis of the individual journeys of these subjects raises a series of questions regarding the way of analyzing parastatal actions, the periodization of repression and political ideologies during the 1970s.