Background Analysis and Modes of Approaching the Study of the Security Forces in Argentina

8/13/2019 Background Analysis and Modes of Approaching the Study of the Security Forces in Argentina

1/15

Background analysis and modes of approaching the study of the security forces in Argentina

Gerardo Halpern

Mariana Galvani

Karina Mouzo

This work examines how the Argentine Security Forces (SF) have been analyzed and presents the

state-o-the-art which serves as the rame o reerence or the ob!ect o our research" the construction

o the sub!ectivity o the oicials# o the Argentine Federal $olice (AF$) and the Federal

$enitentiary Service (F$S)%

Although in the early stages our investigation into this construction was delimited by several issues&

none o these took into consideration a speciic analysis o the meanings o the term 'insecurity To

some extent& we would attempt to leave the game that the ield *according to +ourdieu* invited us

to play The somewhat obvious answer is that i you are within a ield * such as 'doxa or

'heterodoxy * there is no outside and that& should there be any& this is at the expense o staying on

the sidelines o the legitimized debates over meaning& o the existing symbolic disputes and

conse,uently& at the expense o making no legitimate contribution there where our interest lies

n short& relecting on our location and the deinition o the ield o study o the SF resulted in a

change to our irst approach" we relin,uished the na.ve attempt to remain outside the ield where we

are somehow also included

The ollowing text is divided into three sections" in the irst& we go over the meanings o the

paradigm of insecurity in Argentina ($egoraro" #///) and the disputes over the signiicance o

'insecurity At the same time& we account or the way in which the ield o research on the SF in

Argentina gains visibility0 in the second section we present an outline o the ,uestions addressed to

the 'SF ob!ect rom the Social Sciences0 lastly& in the third section& we attempt to ob!ectiy our

,uestions about the SF

1-Prolematizing !insecurity"

1uring the decade o the /2s the intensiication o the neoliberal policies in Argentina brought to

light the apparent paradox o a double process" on the one hand& the dominant discourse on the

'withdrawal o the State and& on the other& the growing presence o the State through its

mechanisms o repression 3e say alleged paradox& because in act the State not only did not

withdraw but created new regulations or those areas in which it consolidated its centrality" a new

#


2/15

and strong presence where the SF gained a leading role The strengthening o the 'repressive arm o

the State was also accompanied by the media discourse about 'insecurity and the imputation o

those who allegedly caused it

+eyond the media simplicity o use o the term 'insecurity as a guiding concept or much o the

contemporary narrative& in our approach the term presupposes a complexity o meaning that re,uires

the reconsideration o dierent deinitions * thus views * which call or its denaturalization as well

as the explicit conceptualization o the theoretical background on which it is constructed

4e (#//5) has put orward a series o deinitions o security by connecting it consecutively with

the 3elare State (social security)& with military strategy (external defense) and with social control

(social protection) According to his analysis& it is the third meaning (social control) that currently

takes precedence& and a close link between 'security and its signiicance as social control is

established 6e understands social control in the 7uropean tradition8& in which the State is

responsible or dealing with any threats to the 'social order by relying primarily on the criminal

!ustice system

Simultaneously& 'insecurity emerges as 'a sense o exposure to danger in a multiplicity o socially

shared orms o discourse (media& political discourse& public opinion pollsters& security orces and

reerents o the so-called 'social orces among others) 3ho are then the oenders 9 potential

aggressors whom society ears: Foucault (#/;/) maintains that oenders are those who& same as the

rest o the members o the population& commit illegalities +ut unlike the rest& they are not tolerated

in spite o the act that they prove useul to hide other tolerable illegalities The logic across the

discourse is& according to this author&social defense A logic that seeks& to the limit& the elimination

o the one who is labeled as 'the enemy o society n this context& and returning to 4e&

'insecurity crystallizes into one o its possible meanings" the lack o protection against crime)

3e have deliberately avoided the institutional access to the interviewees (being authorized restricts

the interviewees to express themselves as members o the institution and thereby prevents them rom

moving away rom the place that the institution 'gives them) n act& we have worked on thetension between the individual and the institution& rather than ollowed the path anticipated by the

latter So much so& that the matter o our concern is not 'the truth that lies in our intervieweesJ

discourse& but being able to account or what these oicials say (and what they mean) in an

interview situation according to the position they hold within the institutional sphere 6ence we

identiy some classiication systems produced by the members o these institutions when they reer

to what appears to be the 'outside as well as when they reer to themselves (inside)

These are not mere positional distinctions& but constructions that enable 9 disable certain practices in

dierent spaces +ut they are also terms promoted by the own institutional structure& as discussed in

the two axes o analysis that ollow

4n the other hand - though on the same line - although access to these institutions hampers

ieldwork& the reason lies not only on sub!ective or institutional culture issues but also on legal

aspects" oicials o the SF need oicial permission to make 'a statement to people outside the

/


10/15

orces Adding to this& there is the oicialsJ excessive caution in accepting interviews& which is part

o the identity that is constructed rom institutions where 'secrecy appears as an asset 6owever& as

in many other paths in social research& we understand that the construction o the ob!ect aces

dierent diiculties n act& these obstacles can arise in other institutional rames #2

The second axis includes the collection and analysis o the discourse that emerges rom the AF$ and

the F$S 3e maintain that these institutions generate two types o discourse" the one produced or

the 'outside and the one produced or the actual and prospective members o the orce (inside)

This record allows us to address two topics" what the institutions say they are& and what the

institutions tell current and uture police and penitentiary oicers they should be

Finally& the third axis presents the analysis o the laws that regulate both orces These are elaborated

on a series o regulations that deine the institutional 'ought to be Thereore& current legislation

sets one o the limits within which the sub!ects o the orces should 9 could move Anyway& or us

the law stipulates what is allowed and what is prohibited 6owever& beyond its proscriptive role&

what the law says can be subverted in practice and actions contrary to these proscriptions can be

legitimated through mechanisms that are not stated by the law

t is on these three axes that we delineate the AF$ and the F$S as 'ields& as this allows us to move

away rom the notion o 'apparatus and analyze the dynamicrelationsthat are established between

oicials o both orces##3hile both are hierarchically structured orces which limit the possibilities

o conrontation between their respective agents& this does not imply that there are no struggles and

tension within them#%oreover& this delineation allows us to relate the practices and relations that

are established within the police or penitentiary ield to the wider network o relations that makes

them possible& as well as identiy the speciic nature o the struggle within these spheres and the

relationships they establish with other ields such as the political and academic ones#8

To think o our ob!ect o study in a relational way allows us to break away irstly rom the

'ndigenous experience& that is& rom the meaning and explanations that the agents give their

practices& since the logical explanations that the interviewees provide cannot account or the

practical logic which is pre-relective in itsel Secondly& the assumptions o the observer are called

into ,uestion +oth ruptures are necessary conditions to carry out in part what +ourdieu

characterizes as the 'epistemological surveillance(%22%)& which is not only a speciic moment in

the research process but must be continuous and permanent

#2


11/15


12/15

+ibliography"

+A??7E7@67& 4svaldo (%22#)/entro de la ley todo. a &usticia criminal de -uenos $iresen la etapa formativa del sistema penal moderno de la $rgentina& 7diciones Al argen y

Bniversidad Eacional de a $lata& +uenos Aires

1BT& @arlos y ?AD7E14?F7?& ?icardo (#//=)" a bonaerense& historia criminal de la$olicKa de la $rovincia de +uenos Aires& $laneta& +uenos Aires

F4B@ABT& ichel (#/;/) igilar y "astigar! nacimiento de la prisi0n! Siglo LL& +uenos

AiresF4B@ABT& ichel (#///)istoria de la sexualidad. ol & Siglo LL& +uenos Aires

DAIAE& ariana (%22=)a marca de la gorra @apital ntelectual

DAIAE& 4BM4& 7T A (%2#2) $ la inseguridad la hacemos entre todos. +r2cticas

policiales! medi2ticas y acad3micas.6ekht ibros& +uenos AiresDA7AE4& 1iego (%22;) " Hrtires e in,uisidores" notas sobre la construcciGn del hNroe

policial I Oornadas de SociologKa de la BE$ y 7ncuentro atinoamericano de etodologKa de

las @iencias Sociales& a $lata& #2& ## y #% de diciembreDAP4& Sandra y C7SS7?& Dabriel (comp) (%22%) iolencias! /elitos y #usticias en la

$rgentina&antial y Bniversidad de Deneral Sarmiento& +uenos Aires& Argentina

CAESCP& Dregorio (%22>) ,iempos inclementes. "ulturas policiales y seguridadciudadana& 7diciones de la BEa& +uenos Aires

CAESCP& Dregorio y DA7AE4& 1iego (%22;) '6acer saber" la entrada de la seguridad

ciudadana en la ormaciGn universitaria argentina en 4stado! democracia y seguridad ciudadana.

$portes para el de%ate.AIA?7M Ale!andro& +7?T?AE4B& OuliHn& et al& $EB1& +uenos AiresC$$6AE& AndrNs (%22


13/15

SAIAT4?7& ?icardo& ADB??7& @arlos (#//5) ,he %irth of the penitentiary in atin

$merica8 essays on criminology! prison reform! and social control! 1:;19


14/15

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

3e use 'member to reer to any employee o these institutions0 'oicer in the case o !unior sta and 'oicial when

reerring to senior sta

%The research that serves as background or the present work is carried out by Carina ouzo and ariana Dalvani

under the supervision o Derardo 6alpern

8This tradition diers rom the American tradition o the decade o the %2s& which understands social control as the

ability o a society to sel-ad!ust and which presupposes a voluntarist and consensual vision o society

< 3e understand ideological signs as multi-accentual n IoloshinovJs view& words are dynamic social signs which takedierent meanings or dierent social classes in dierent historical contexts The meaning o verbal signs is the arena

or continuous class struggle" a ruling class will try to narrow the meaning o social signs& making them 'uni-accentual

but the clash o interests will make the 'multi-accentuality o words clear

>Apart rom Tiscornia and $egoraro several Argentine authors argue about the hegemonic meaning given to the term

'insecurity @ +inder (%22


15/15

#>

Background Analysis and Modes of Approaching the Study of the Security Forces in Argentina

Documents

Transcript of Background Analysis and Modes of Approaching the Study of the Security Forces in Argentina