¿Pueden los hechos históricos resistirse a la mendacidad?: Sobre la matanza de las bananeras

in this paper i discuss the possibility of finding sense to the difference, stated by hannah arendt, between facts and factual truths. one consequence of the difficulty in distinguishing these two terms is that it turns equally difficult to see if it is factual truth, instead of facts, that can be substituted by the power of lies. from this derives an additional problem related to the first, i.e.: what does arendt understand under what she calls "the stubbornness of facts". to show these difficulties i use an example from the colombian history and trace the path which leads from systematically denying a series of facts, talking about them as if they were unimportant and finally allow them to be entirely replaced by pieces of the fantastic literature until they lose their stubbornness.