ABSTRACT
Guardiola Rivera invents new and different categories to describe and analyze the Colombian conflict. He suggests that instead of analyzing the conflict with the common legal redistributive/restorative justice formalist and essentialist categories, we use other concepts such as the performativity of higher law, the clinical critique of justice and its confusion with existing normative orders that make absolute current situations of accumulation and settler-colonialism, public space and negotiation itself as a memorial or the symbolic graveyard of silenced voices, dispossessed environs, and truth, and hopeful viewing-acting or aesthetic justice; peace agreement is thus understood in terms of its symbolic and normative meaning, as the site of historical difference and a different orientation, and not merely in terms of guilt or outrage, judgment or its rule-bound significance. This framework allows the author to answer two questions: “What is the sense of a peace process such as Colombia’s?,” and “Why today, at every level of our flattened institutional hierarchies, is the place of the ruler […] the preferred one that enables psychotics to their erroneous wandering […] by mistreating/sowing hatred of neighbours?”
