Chiapas Ten Years Later

Jan 26th meeting minutes

2006-01-31T07:01:00.000-08:00

STAC General meeting - January 26, 2006

In Attendance - 7 people
Laney, Chris, Bronwin, Paddy, Dennis, Yates, Mat - plus Mathew and Art
filming

Agenda
1.Introductions
2.Caravan
3.Katimavik Interns
4.Logo Design
5.Fundraising Brainstorm


1. This was our first meeting for the 2005/2006 year so we spent a bit of
time on introductions and STAC/ZEN/BSBC history

2. Several new members expressed interested in the caravan this summer
-  We discussed what we want to get out of a caravan and what we'd like to
get out a caravan this summer.
-  made several proposals to present to STAC Montreal concerning the
details of the caravan this summer:
        1. a caravan fee of $460 which includes all transportation in
chiapas, leaving from mexico city. $200 of the fee would be for
donation.
        2. applications due with non-refundable downpayment of $230 due by
     April 30, 2006. This will allow Antoinne the time and
resources he needs to make arrangements in Chiapas.
        3.We meet in Mexico City as early as the 3rd of August. We can try
to arrange cheaper group transportation down to San Cristobal. We
are in San Cristobal by Aug 6 and officially begin caravan here.
Some people might just want to meet in San Crist.
        4. We follow the itinerary suggested by Antoinne: a couple days in
San Crist visiting NGOs n stuff. a couple days in Oventic visiting
coops and the boot factory. The remaining time in a smaller
community, perhaps to be determined by where the Junta wants
something done.
        5. If necessary we use the caravan donation money to fulfil the  
balance of STAC's commitment to raise $7000 for the 1st of January
Boot Cooperative in Oventic for factory improvements etc.
Otherwise we can use it to take on a new project while we are
there like rebuilding a market, etc.
        6. We liked the idea of an orientation weekend like STAC Montreal
has done in the past before caravans. It might be something we
could organize together if there is interest.

3. Katimavik Interns
- NSPIRG may be getting a couple Katimavik Interns and if so they would
be available to us and other working groups to help work on things such
as postering, writing applications, tabling etc.
- we can brainstorm more things we could use a hand with

4. Movie Showing
- we had some amazing feedback from our last movie showing, so we decided
to show more soon.
- we have "The Real Thing" booked with NSPIRG for February 28th with a
Panel Discussion with John Cameron.
- We also want to show "The Revolution Will Not Be Telivised" as soon as
possible. We don't have a date yet.
- other movie suggestions - "Chile: Obstinate Memory"

5. Logo Design
- Dennis proposed Al Barbour be asked to design an "identity" for the
Black Star Boot Coop in exchange for a deal on boots
- Bronwin offered to work on it instead.

6.Fundraising Brainstrom
-canvasing
-movies
-non profit status - Laney offered to start the process
-Tabling in the SUB
we decided to table every monday in the sub where we can do outreach,   
sollicit donations, and sell boots and women coop stuff
11:30-12:30 Bronwin
12:30 - 2:30 Paddy
12:30 - 1:30 Yates
1:30 - 3:30 Dennis
3:30 -      Paddy

Tasks
-look up non-profit status info - Laney
-info coordinate with STAC Montreal - Yates
-minutes post on blog - Chris
-Logo - Bronwin
-bring Coop papers to next meeting - Chris
-fill out tabling form and submit - Bronwin
-poster for tabling - Bronwin
-start designing a display stand for boots - Dennis
- find a date for showing "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" - Chris

Next Meeting - Sunday February 5, 2005

Zapatista's New Direction: Zmag

2005-12-26T20:36:00.000-08:00

The Zapatista's New Direction
Originally Published in Zmag, December 2005
Chris Arsenault

After a few years of relative quiet, relegated to their misty mountain strongholds in southern Mexico, Zapatista rebels recently tried to re-assert their presence on the international stage,
continung a unique military strategy based more on words than weapons.

Throughout July and August, during a highly publicized red-alert and a series of communiques, the Zapatistas announced a broad new political initiative-for now, called "the other campaign"-to break
out of a stalemate with government forces.

What began as a "scandalously Indian" uprising in Chiapas, Mexico's southernmost state, is metamorphosing into a "national campaign for building another way of doing politics, for a program of national struggle of the left, and for a new Constitution," according to the Sixth Declaration of the Lacondon, issued by the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee (CCRIG), the military commanders of the Zapatistas' armed wing.

After a series of September meetings in the Zapatista strong hold of la Garrucha with 91 social organizations from throughout Mexico, 36 political organizations, 129 groups, collectives and NGO's, and 26 indigenous organizations, it was decided that a national tour should begin in January to hear from different sectors of Mexican society.

Subcommandante Marcos, the rebels iconoic mestizo pip-smoking former-spokesman (he's stepping down as spokesperson for the EZLN to work the campaign) will essentially be going it alone across Mexico consulting and listening to help build a non-parliamentary leftist movement.

It won't be the first time the Zapatistas have taken their show on the road. In 2001 the comandantes toured through Mexico, rallying for constitutional changes to guarantee indigenous rights to land and self-determination. The march was hugely popular, cumulating with a rally of 400 000 in Mexico City, but failed to gain the constitutional changes the rebels demanded. This time around the tour will have a broader focus, the politic from The Other campaign belongs "to everyone who embraces them", according to Marcos.

Politically, the timing for a national grassroots movement couldn't be better. When the Zapatistas first called NAFTA a "death sentence" in 1994, they were at odds with the majority of the Mexican
population; 68 percent of Mexicans supported the agreement. Ten years later, less than 45 percent support NAFTA, according to polls published in Business Week. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace notes that by 2004, 1.3 million farm jobs had disappeared in Mexico, as heavily subsidized corn, pork, poultry, and other foodstuffs from the U.S. competed with products from rural communities.

Internationally, the "intergalactic committee of the EZLN" will be bringing corn and other donations to the Cuban embassy in Mexico City, in violation of the US embargo. Zapatista women's co-operatives will send woven blankets and coffee to Europeans fighting for social justice. And Zapatista GMO-free corn will be delivered to people's movements in Bolivia and Ecuador.

Moving beyond just international solidarity or national movement building, the new initiative is key to combating the line, towed by Vincent Fox's government: the Zapatistas are a revolution that
couldn't deliver.

Without headline-grabbing massacres, like the 1997 slaughter in Acteal (when 45 unarmed indigenous villagers were massacred in their church), troop incursions, or major political initiatives, the
strategy saw some success outside of Chiapas. The New York Times, which in 1994 gushed about the Zapatistas as "the first-postmodern Latin American revolution," deemed the insurgency "stalled" at the beginning of 2005: Subcomandante Marcos was co-writing a mystery novel.

Even Elena Poniatowska, Mexico's leading feminist and founder of the left-leaning La Journada newspaper, told Democracy Now in April 2005 that, "I think they [the Zapatistas] have lost power. When time goes by, you lose power."

It's remarkable that a movement of 100,000 peasants in southern Mexico (some sources on the ground estimate their number at closer to 500,000) became a lasting media phenomenon in the first place.

"Thank you for listening to the thunder of our arms on New Year's Day," said a masked representative from the Zapatista's Juntas of Buen Goberino, (good government boards), the Zapatista movement's elected civilian administrative wing, speaking to international solidarity activists from his sparse office in San Andres de Los Pobres.

The importance of a new constitution, links with other social movements, and media attention notwithstanding, what will insure their lasting survival is the Zapatistas' ability to improve the
lives of people living in their base communities. To combat the movement, the State and Federal governments use a combination of low-intensity warfare against Zapatista supporters and targeted aid for those loyal to the state.

"People in Chiapas were very poor and forgotten but the Zapatistas didn't change anything and most people have moved on. The revolution couldn't deliver," said Luis Alvarez, the Mexican government's chief negotiator for Chiapas, during a 2003 lecture at Trent University.

In some cases, Alvarez is correct. " Truthfully the situation is still the same," said the rep from San Andres (Zapatista supporters almost never give their names in interviews).

Economically, the Zapatistas are facing a dilemma, how do you get something from nothing?

When America was created it had a fewmajor advantages: foreign capital to finance development and an almost infinite supply of farm land- obviously stolen at indigenous expense, along with a huge pool of slave labor.

"At present [in 1997, but little has changed since then] some 6,000 cattle ranching families hold more than three million hectares, which is almost one half the area of the state," notes a report by
CONPAZ, the Coordination of Non-Governmental Organizations for Peace. Unless an unlikely constitutional break-thorough is reached through 'other other campaign' the Zapatistas can't move onto anymore productive ranch land without re-starting the war. Small farmers are forced to grow corn on steeped elevations eking a precarious existence from rocky soil.

And unlike other regions striving for 'development', it's unlikely the Zapatistas will get a bank loan for new capital; a 1994 memo from the Chase Manhattan Bank urging the Mexican army to, 'eliminate
the Zapatistas' elucidates how global capital evaluates those who seek alternatives. With no access to capital and no new land, the Zapatista's are in a difficult economic spot.

Still, activists, especially youth who were first involved in planning the insurgency or grew up with it, are taking on the tasks of economic development, teaching in autonomous schools with radical
pedagogy, and creating a viable health-care system.

In a 2003 report, the World Bank notes that the key to Latin American prosperity is to "Increase access by the poor to high-quality public services, especially education, health, water and electricity, as well as access to farmland and the rural services the poor need to make it productive." Ironically, the anti-capitalist Zapatistas are following the Bank's fluffy dictum's better than any of the remaining neo-liberal governments in the region.

"The biggest problem is health. Before, people in the bases of support had to pay for their own medicines, now they are free," said one Zapatista supporter after getting a check-up at the rebel-run clinic in Ovenitc Caracole, a Zapatista stronghold two hours outside
the colonial tourist city of San Cristobal de las Casas.

The clinic is a thriving example of the kinds of "high quality public services" the Zapatistas are trying to create. It prominently displays a picture of campesinos washing vegetables in river water with a large X though it. People are advised to boil water and leave limejuice and ash in their latrines to prevent dysentery and other all-too-common curable diseases. Young "promoters of health" receive medical training from Mexico City-based doctors, and have been traveling to tiny, distant communities to convey life-saving messages.

"Communities give food-beans, tortillas, and fruit-to the workers of the clinic, so the clinic decided they couldn't charge them," says Anastasio, a health promoter, community organizer, and well-known basketball talent who never attended primary school.

In Anastasio's home region of Los Altos, a rebel stronghold divided into seven administrative regions, the Zapatistas run eight micro-clinics along with the major facility in Oventic, which boasts a small operating room, dentistry equipment, herbal remedies, and an admittedly sparse pharmacy. "It isn't only the Zapatistas who don't have medicine; the government hospitals don't either," says
Anastasio.

"Women want work and markets for their art-crafts. They are being exploited by coyotes [middlemen] and need a just price for their products," said a representative from the Municipality 16 de Febrero community. Mujures por la Dignidad, one of the largest co-ops, is by self-organized women, with more than 1,000 members producing shirts, blankets, hammocks, and other weavings.

"When there are meetings for the co-op, we leave our homes, our children, and our husbands. We also walk many hours and some of us on the board [fo directors] live far from our homes," said an
elected board member from Mujures Por la Dignidad between forkfuls of rice and beans.

Coffee workers are also organizing themselves into fair trade co-operatives-or what farmers in Mutz Vitz, the largest Zapatista coffee operation, call "fairer trade"-they are still working long
days and living in poverty. Coffee farmers are among the most radical elements of the Zapatista movement, representing a large portion of those who were armed on New Year's Day 1994.

Throughout the 1970s, the federal government and the IMF used marketing boards, training incentives, and loan guarantees to entice subsistence corn farmers to grow coffee for export. When Vietnam entered coffee production under IMF dictums, causing a massive devaluation of world coffee prices, coffee growers became among the most angry and desperate of a population already facing "acute marginalization", as defined by the Mexican government.

The state of Chiapas produces 55 percent of Mexico's hydroelectric power, yet 30 percent of homes lack not only electricity, but also running water and sewage. "Power here is taken from the grid. They are always trying to take our electricity. When they cut one [power line] we just set up another," said a representative from Santa Catalonia.

When electrical workers come to cut the power, as they tried on February 16th, 2004, women in Santa Catalonia surround the poles, physically stopping the electricians from climbing down until the
power is reconnected. Many electrical workers now refuse to enter autonomous municipalities for fear of living indefinitely atop a power line.

Red alerts, international networking and a new constitution are important, and will determine what kind of role the Zapatistas will play as a political movement outside their Chiapenco strongholds.
But it is the schools, clinics, co-operatives, workshops, "high quality public services" and community organizing that rebut the rhetoric of "a revolution that couldn't deliver"-and prove another
world really may be possible in the Zapatistas' Chiapas.

New York Times on Zapatistas: 2005

2005-12-26T19:46:00.000-08:00

Where Poverty Drove Zapatistas, the Living Is No Easier

New York Times
September 11, 2005

By James C. McKinley Jr

PATIHUITZ, Mexico - The shooting war between the Mexican government and Zapatista rebels in these fertile hills ended long ago, but the struggle for the hearts and minds of ordinary people like Rigoberto Alvarez goes on, with no clear winner in sight.

Mr. Alvarez spent 15 years in the Zapatista rebel army, training in the mountains of southeastern Mexico, but quit four years ago, at the age of 46. Why? He had eight children he could not afford to educate. The government was offering cash incentives for each one in school.

"If I don't find a way to put them through school, my children won't learn to read and write any more than I do," he said as he waited for hours recently under a broiling sun for the chance to enroll his son in a new secondary school. "The struggle is too long. I am already old."

In recent years, the government has poured more money into roads, health clinics, schools and electrification projects in the mountainous backcountry where the Mayans live. Patihuitz, for instance, has electricity, running water and the new secondary school (the classes are to be held in a borrowed house). Officials have handed out cash scholarships and roofing materials.

The Zapatistas, who long ago ceased to be a military threat, have set up communities that reject government aid and organize community projects. In some places, they have also set up farming cooperatives and small factories.

But the grinding poverty that provoked the first rebel uprising in 1994 continues to trap the Indians. Neither the rebels' attempts at self-government nor the government's antipoverty programs have done much to change the odds against indigenous children in these rugged, jungle-covered mountains, according to Mayan farmers inside and outside the Zapatistas.

"It's the same as it ever was," said Manuel Marín, a 46-year-old farmer in Patihuitz, as he gathered beans from one of his fields. "There is no way to change this life."

Many adults are barely literate and speak little or no Spanish. Most of the schools the government has built are too small. Secondary schools are scarce and charge enrollment fees.

The new clinics are often short of medicine. And while the cash grants for children in school buy food and clothes, they are not large enough to make saving possible, many parents say.

"Chiapas continues to be the poorest state in the country, as it was in 1990," said Julio Boltvinik, a professor at the College of Mexico who studies poverty. "The indigenous people really don't have anything that we would call a humane, dignified, modern developed life. They are living in an abysmally precarious state."

Nearly everyone works hard, but there is little profit for most. The 1994 free-trade agreement with the United States has driven prices for corn and beans brutally low. Government crop subsidies and supports have disappeared, erasing any gain from new welfare programs.

As a result, farmers here must spend more to grow crops like corn than they can make selling them. So most now farm only a small section of their land, growing just enough corn and beans to survive and leaving the rest fallow. They look for other ways to earn cash, either hiring themselves out as labor for better-off farmers in the region or migrating to northern Mexico or the southern United States to pick fruit, several said.

"Things are going down the tubes faster and faster," said Peter Rosset, an American professor who runs a center for agricultural policy in Oaxaca. "You can't spend your whole life selling things for below the cost of production. That leads you to move to L.A."

Complicating matters has been the protracted conflict with the rebels, who, in January 1994, marched out of the Lacadona jungle and took over seven towns and dozens of large ranches, dividing the land among poor farmers who used to work on them for about 70 cents a day. A year later, the army drove the guerrillas, led by Subcommander Marcos, back into the mountains. Since then, an uneasy cease-fire has reigned while peace talks have dragged on without resolution.

The rebels have declared they will not cooperate with the government until it fulfills promises it made in a 1996 accord to allow Indians to govern themselves to a large extent in regions where they are the majority. In 2003, frustrated with the inaction of Congress, the Zapatistas pushed ahead on their own, setting up five governmental centers with clinics and schools to oversee dozens of what they call "autonomous municipalities."

The region, as a result, is a patchwork of rebel-run villages, military bases established by the Mexican government and villages where pro-government Indians are a majority. Army trucks with troops rumble up and down the roads. Rebel centers are closed to most outsiders and reporters.

Subcommander Marcos, meanwhile, seems more intent on pushing mainstream politicians to the left than on trying to consolidate rebel territory or improve the rebels' agricultural output.

In the last month, he has held a series of meetings with unionists, left-wing politicians and community groups, calling on them to carry out "a national leftist, anticapitalist program" with the goal of "a new constitution, which is another way of saying a new agreement for a new society."

The rebel leader has also attacked the most popular leftist candidate, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, suggesting that he and his party will sell out ordinary working people once in power.

Mr. Marcos's anticapitalist talk seems out of touch with the daily life of many Indians here.

A new constitution is the farthest thing from the mind of Pepe Luna López, for instance, who lives in San José del Carmen, a Zapatista autonomous community right next to the government-run village of Nuevo Morelia.

Mr. López, who is 35, has seven children ages 4 to 16. They all sleep in a leaky one-room shack with dirt floors and walls of slender poles. None of the children are in school; he refuses to send them to the government school a quarter-mile away and the Zapatista government has sent no teacher.

He farms only two acres of his five, and has no source of cash. His clothes are rags. He does not go to the health clinic down the road in Nuevo Morelia.

"We are resisting," he said. "We cannot accept anything from the government because they have not kept their word."

Another Zapatista farmer, Silvio López González, lives across the street from Nuevo Morelia's government school and health clinic. He, too, will not send his two children to either. But he acknowledges he is not much better off than he was before the 1994 uprising.

"We have 20 years in the struggle, and we are not even halfway there," he said.

For 30 years, Mr. Alvarez has lived in a small village called Tierra Blanca, once solidly in the rebel camp, above the main road about three miles away from the Zapatista center known as La Garrucha. He has 10 acres and a wood shack with a thatched roof. His eight children and his wife sleep on boards above the dirt floor.

Two years ago, however, the government took electricity to Tierra Blanca. And when it started offering scholarships for children in school, Mr. Alvarez gave up the rebel cause and accepted the cash - about $30 a month. His only other source of hard currency was a few coffee trees on his land, which he said brought in about $400 in a good year, $200 in a bad one.

He has also accepted the government's roofing and is building a new house next to the old one.

His eldest son, Rigoberto, completed the sixth grade, then migrated to Baja California to pick tomatoes for $800 a month. He turned 15 in May, far away from home.

Mr. Alvarez's eyes filled with tears when he explained that he could not afford to send Rigoberto to a secondary school; the nearest one then was two hours away. It is his second son, Alfonse, 12, who will go to the school in Patihuitz, a 45-minute walk away.

Education, he says, is the only way to break the chain that binds his children to his mountainous plot of earth.

"Otherwise we die, and the children stay here suffering," he said. "That's the end of it. There is no other step."

A Penguin in the Selva Lacandona

2005-08-02T20:35:00.000-07:00

Translated by irlandesa

A Penguin in the Selva Lacandona I/II

(The zapatista is just a little house, perhaps the smallest, on a street called "Mexico," in a barrio called "Latin America," in a city called the "World.")

You're not going to believe me, but there's a penguin in the Ezeta Headquarters. You'll say "Hey, Sup, what's up? You already blew the fuses with the Red Alert," but it's true. In fact, while I'm writing this to you, he (the penguin) is right here next to me, eating the same hard, stale bread (it has so much mold that it's just one degree away from being penicillin), which, along with coffee, were my rations for today. Yes, a penguin. But I'll tell you more about this later, because first we must talk a bit about the Sixth Declaration.

We have carefully read some of your doubts, criticism, advice and debates about what we posited in the Sixth. Not all of them, it's true, but you can chalk that up, not to laziness, but to the rain and mud that's lengthening the roads even more in the mountains of the Mexican Southeast. Although there are many points, I'm only going to refer to some of them in this text.

Some of the primary points of criticism refer to the so-called new intercontinental, to the national Mexican nature of the Sixth, and, along with this, to the proposal (it's still just that, a proposal) of joining the indigenous struggle with that of other social sectors, notably with workers in the countryside and the city. Others refer to the definition of the anti-capitalist left and to the Sixth's dealing with "old issues" or using "worn out" concepts. A few others warn of dangers: the displacement of the indigenous issue by others and, consequently, the Indian peoples being excluded as the subjects of transformation. The vanguardism and centralism that could arise in the politics of alliances with organizations of the left. The replacement of social leadership by political leadership. That the right would use zapatismo in order to strike a blow at López Obrador, in other words, at the political center (I know that those observations speak of AMLO's being on the left, but he says he's in the center, so here we're going to take what he says, not what they say about him). The majority of these observations are well intended, and they seek to help, rightly warning of obstacles in the path, or rightly providing opinions as to how the movement which the Sixth is trying to arouse might grow.

Concerning cutting and pasting

I will leave aside those who are lamenting that the Red Alert didn't end with the renewal of offensive combat by the EZLN. We are sorry that we didn't fulfill your expectations of blood, death and destruction. No way, we're sorry. Perhaps another time...We will also leave aside the dishonest criticisms. Like those who edit the text of the Sixth Declaration so that it says what they want it to say. This is what Señor Victor M. Toledo did in his article "Overweening Zapatismo. Sustainability, indigenous resistances and neoliberalism," published in the Mexican newspaper La Jornada (July 18, 2005). I believe one can debate the aims and methods posited by the Sixth Declaration without needing to be dishonest. Because Señor Toledo, utilizing the "cut and paste" method, has edited the Sixth in order to note that it lacks...what he cut. Toledo said: "It is surprising that (the EZLN in the Sixth Declaration) decided to join forces with campesinos, workers, laborers, students, women, young people, homosexuals, lesbians, transsexuals, priests, nuns and social activists, and that it does not make one single reference to the thousands of indigenous communities devoted to the search for sustainability."

Well, the parts which Señor Toledo edited out of the Sixth stated the opposite. For example, in the part which recognizes the existence of resistances and alternatives to neoliberalism in Mexico, and in first place in the enumeration of them, it notes: "And so we learned that there are indigenous, whose lands are far away from here in Chiapas, and they are building their autonomy and defending their culture and caring for the land, the forests, the water." Perhaps Señor Toledo was expecting a detailed account of those indigenous struggles, but that is one thing, and it's another very different and dishonest thing to say that there was not one single reference. In the account made by Señor Toledo of the efforts of those with which the EZLN decided to join, he has cut out the first social group to which the Sixth refers, which says, verbatim: "And then, according to the agreement of the majority of those people to whom we are going to listen, we will make a struggle with everyone, with indigenous, workers, campesinos, etcetera." In addition, the first point of the Sixth precisely states: "1. We are going to continue to fight for the Indian peoples of Mexico, but now no longer just for them nor just with them, but for all the exploited and dispossessed of Mexico, with all of them and throughout the country." And, at the end of the Sixth, it says "We are inviting all indigenous, workers, campesinos...etcetera." In sum, I imagined there might be, among those irritated by our criticisms of López Obrador and the PRD, more serious, and honest, arguments for the debate. Perhaps they might be presented some day. We'll wait, that is our specialty.

Concerning we don't want you in this barrio

There are also those criticisms, although more hidden, that the Sixth Declaration makes reference to some international issues and the manner in which they are addressed. And so some people criticize the fact that we refer to the blockade which the US government maintains against the people of Cuba. "It's a very old issue," they say. How old? As old as the blockade? Or as old as the resistance of the Indian peoples of Mexico? What are the "modern" issues? Who can honestly look at the world and pass over - "because it's an old issue" - an attack against a people who are doing what all peoples should do, that is, deciding their direction, path and destiny as a nation ("defending national sovereignty" they say)? Who can ignore the decades of resistance of an entire people against US arrogance? Who, knowing that they can do something - even if it's but little - to recognize that effort, would not do so? Who can ignore that that people has to lift itself up each time after a natural catastrophe, not only without the aid and loans enjoyed by other countries, but also in the midst of a brutal and inhumane siege? Who can ignore the US base of Guantánamo on Cuban territory, the laboratory of torture which it has been turned into, the wound it represents in the sovereignty of a Nation and say: "Go on, that's an old issue."

In any event, does it not seem natural that, in a movement which is primarily indigenous like the zapatista, sympathy and admiration would be evoked by what the indigenous in Ecuador and Bolivia are doing? That they would feel solidarity with those who have no land and are struggling in Brazil. That they would identify with the "piqueteros" of Argentina, and they would salute the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo. That they would perceive similarities in experiences and organization with the Mapuche of Chile and with the indigenous of Colombia. That they would warn of the obvious in Venezuela, namely: that the US government is doing everything possible to violate the sovereignty of that country. That they would enthusiastically applaud the great mobilizations in Uruguay in opposition to the imposition of "macroeconomic stability."

The Sixth Declaration does not speak to the institutions of above, good or bad. The Sixth is looking below. And it is seeing a reality that is shared, at least since the conquests made by Spain and Portugal of the lands which now share the name of "Latin America." Perhaps this feeling of belonging to the "patria grande" which is Latin America is "old," and it is "modern" to turn one's gaze and aspirations to the "restless and brutal north." Perhaps, but if anything is "old" in this corner of Mexico, of America and of the World, it is the resistance of the Indian peoples.

Concerning we don't want you on this street

There are also (I shall note and summarize some of them) those criticisms for trying to "nationalize and even internationalize" our discourse and our struggle. The Sixth, they tell us, falls into that nonsense. Therefore recommending that the EZLN remain in Chiapas, that it strengthen the Good Government Juntas and that it confine itself to the waterproof compartment that is their lot. That once that project is consolidated, and once we have demonstrated that we can "put into practice an alternative modernity to that of neoliberalism in their own lands," then we can set forth on the national, international and intergalactic arenas. In the face of those arguments, we present our reality. We are not trying to compete with anyone to see who is more anti-neoliberal or who has made more advances in the resistance, but, with modesty, our level and contributions are in the Good Government Juntas. You can come, speak with the authorities or with the peoples, ignore the letters and communiqués where we have explained this process and investigate, first hand, what is happening here, the problems which are confronted, how they are resolved. I do not know before whom we have to demonstrate that all this is "putting into practice an alternative modernity to that of neoliberalism in their own lands," and who is going to characterize us con palomita o tache, and then, yes, allow us to come out and attempt to join our struggle with other sectors.

Besides, we had the premonition that those criticisms would be praise...if the Sixth had declared its unconditional support of the political center represented by López Obrador. And if we were to have said that "we are going to come out in order to join with those citizens' networks in support of AMLO," there would be enthusiasm, "yes," "of course you have to leave, you don't have to stay shut away, it's time for zapatismo to abandon its hideout and join its experiences with the masses devoted to the one-in-waiting." Hmm...López Obrador. He just presented his "Alternative National Project" to the citizens' networks. We are suspicious, and we don't see anything more than plastic cosmetics (and which change according to the audience) and a list of forgettable promises. Whatever, perhaps someone might tell AMLO that he can't promise "the fulfillment of the San Andrés Accords," because that means, among other things, reforming the Constitution, and, if my memory serves, that is the work of the Congress. In any event, the promise should be made by a political party, noting that its candidates will fulfill it if they are elected. The other way there would have to be a proposal that the federal executive would govern above the other branches or ignore them. Or a dictatorship. But it's not about that. Or is it?

In the politics of above, the programs seek, during election periods, to add as many people as they can. But by adding some, others are subtracted. Then they decide to add the most and subtract the least. AMLO has created, as a parallel structure to the PRD, the "citizens' networks," and his objective is to add those who aren't members of the PRD. AMLO has presented 6 persons for those citizens' networks who are going to coordinate, at a national level, all those non-PRD lopezobradoristas. Let's look at two of the "national coordinators."

Socorro Díaz Palacios, Under Secretary of Civil Protection in the Carlos Salinas de Gortari government. On January 3, 1994, while the federales were perpetrating the Ocosingo market massacre, he stated (I'm citing the Department of Government Press Bulletin): "The violent groups which are acting in the state of Chiapas display a mix of national as well as foreign interests and persons. They demonstrate affinities with other violent factions which are operating in Central American countries. Some indigenous have been recruited, pressured by the chiefs of these groups, and they are also undoubtedly being manipulated as regards their historic claims which should continue being dealt with." And further on: " The Mexican Army, for its part, will continue acting with great respect for the rights of individuals and of peoples while giving a clear and decisive response to the demand for order and security...blah, blah, blah." In the days that followed, the Air Force bombarded the indigenous communities south of San Cristóbal de Las Casas, and the federal army detained, tortured and assassinated 3 indigenous in the community of Morelia, at that time in the municipality of Altamirano, Chiapas, Mexico.

Ricardo Monreal Ávila - In January of 1998, just a few days after the Acteal massacre, the then PRI deputy and member of the Permanent Commission of the Congress of the Union "commented that the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) is a paramilitary group, the same as those who killed the 45 Tzotzil indigenous on December 22, 1997 in Chenalhó, Chiapas. 'Because everything that acts like an Army without being one and arms itself as civilians is paramilitary. They all must disarm, because they have all contributed to this unnecessary, unjust and stupid violence which has had all Mexicans in mourning,' he stated" ( "El Informador" of Guadalajara, Jalisco. 3/1/98). Days later, after moving to the PRD because the PRI didn't give him the candidacy for governor of Zacatecas, he was to state (I am citing the note by Ciro Pérez and Andrea Becerril in La Jornada, 1/7/98) that the Chenalhó episode (referring to the Acteal massacre) was indeed planned, "but not by the one stated by the white leader of the dark-skinned indigenous," he opined that the EZLN's position regarding the massacre had to do with "securing an preemptive justification for Marcos and for those interests he is protecting," and he finished by warning that the EZ serves foreign interests which seek "to obtain control of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec region, its resources and its strategic location, an objective which is suitably served by Marcos and the armies which are fighting for the indigenous flag." Hmm...it sounds like, like...yes, Point 28 of AMLO's program which reads, verbatim: "We will link the Pacific with the Atlantic, in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, through the construction of two commercial ports: one in Salina Cruz, Oaxaca, and the other in Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz, as well as container shipment railways and the widening of the existing highway."

López Obrador has defined himself with those individuals. He has added some, and, with them, he has subtracted, among others, the "neozapatistas."

But, on another hand, why is there nothing in that program about the political prisoners and disappeared in the dirty war of the 70s and 80s? Nor about the punishment of former officials who enriched themselves illicitly. Nor about serving justice in the cases of the massacres of Acteal, El Bosque, Aguas Blancas, El Charco. I am afraid that, as to justice, López Obrador is offering "wipe the slate clean and start anew," which, paradoxically, is not new. Before returning to the criticisms of the statements the Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona makes on Mexico, Latin America and the World, allow me to tell you something:

That we are going to come out

We are going to come out. We are going to come out, and they had better get used to the idea. We are going to come out, and I believe, there are only 4 ways of stopping us.

One is with a preventative attack, so fashionable in this neoliberal period. The predictable steps are: accusation of ties with drug trafficking or with organized crime in general; invocations of the rule of law and rubbish to that effect; an intense media campaign; a double attack (against the communities and against the General Command); damage control (that is, distributing money, concessions and privileges among the "spokespersons of public opinion"); the authorities call for calm; politicians state that the most important thing is that the election takes place in peace and with social tranquility; after a brief impasse, the candidates renew their campaigns.

Another is taking us prisoners the moment we come out, or during the course of the "other campaign." The steps? Clandestine meetings among the leaders of the PRI, PAN and PRD in order to make agreements (like in 2001, with the indigenous counter-reform); the Cocopa states that dialogue has broken off; the Congress votes to overturn the Law for Dialogue; the PGR activates the arrest warrants; an AFI commando unit, with help from the federal army, takes the zapatista delegates prisoner; simultaneously the federal army takes the rebel indigenous communities "in order to prevent disorder and maintain the peace and national stability;" damage control, etcetera.

Another is to kill us. Stages: a hired assassin is contracted; a provocation is mounted; the crime is committed; the authorities regret the incident and offer to investigate "to its fullest extent, regardless of outcome...." Another alternative: "a regrettable accident caused the death of the zapatista delegation which was on its way to blah, blah, blah." In both: damage control, etcetera.

Another is to disappear us. I am referring to a forced disappearance, as was applied to hundreds of political opponents in the PRI "stability" period. It could be like this: the zapatista delegates don't appear; the last time they were seen was blah, blah, blah; the authorities offer to investigate; the hypothesis is ventured of a problem of passion; the authorities state that they are investigating all leads, and they are not discarding the possibility that the zapatista delegation has taken advantage of their departure to flee, with a quantity of bitter pozol, to a fiscal paradise; INTERPOL is investigating in the Cayman Islands; damage control, etcetera.

These are the initial problems which the Sixth could run up against. We have been preparing for many years to confront those possibilities. That is why the Red Alert has not been lifted for the insurgent troops, just for the towns. And that is why one of the communiqués pointed out that the EZLN could lose, through jail, death or forced disappearance, part or all of their publicly known leadership and continue fighting.

(To be continued...)

From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast

Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos

Mexico, July of 2005.

Originally published in Spanish by the EZLN
************************************
Translated by irlandesa

A Penguin in the Selva Lacandona II/II

(The zapatista is just a little house, perhaps the smallest, on a street called "Mexico," in a barrio called "Latin America," in a city called the "World.")

I was speaking to you about the critiques of the points made by the Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona concerning Mexico, Latin America and the World. Well, in response, allow me some questions:

Concerning there's no place for you in this world

What happens, for example, when, more than a decade ago, a little girl (let's say between 4 and 6 years old), indigenous and Mexican, sees her father, her brothers, her uncles, her cousins or her neighbors, taking up arms, a ton of pozol and a number of tostadas and "going off to war?" What happens when some of them don't return?

What happens when that little girl grows up, and, instead of going for firewood, she goes to school, and she learns to read and write with the history of her people's struggle?

What happens when that girl reaches youth, after 12 years of seeing, hearing and speaking with Mexicans, Basques, North Americans, Italians, Spaniards, Catalans, French persons, Dutch, German, Swiss, British, Finnish, Danish, Swedish, Greek, Russian, Japanese, Australian, Filipino, Korean, Argentinean, Chilean, Canadian, Venezuelan, Colombian, Ecuadorian, Guatemalan, Puerto Rican, Dominican, Uruguayan, Brazilian, Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan, Honduran, Bolivian and etceteras, and learns of what their countries, their struggles, their worlds are like?

What happens when she sees those men and women sharing deprivations, work, anguish and joys with her community?

What happens with that girl-then-adolescent-then-young-woman after having seen and heard "the civil societies" for 12 years, bringing not only projects, but also histories and experiences from diverse parts of Mexico and the World? What happens when she sees and listens to the electrical workers, working with Italians and Mexicans in the installation of a turbine in order to provide a community with light? What happens when she meets with young university students at the height of the 1999-2000 strike? What happens when she discovers that there are not just men and women in the world, but that there are many paths and ways of attraction and love. What happens when she sees young students at the sit-in at Amador Hernández? What happens when she hears what campesinos from other parts of Mexico have said? What happens when they tell her of Acteal and the displaced in Los Altos of Chiapas? What happens when she learns of the accords and advances of the peoples and organizations of the National Indigenous Congress? What happens when she finds out that the political parties ignored the death of her people and decided to reject the San Andrés Accords? What happens when they recount to her that the PRD paramilitaries attacked a zapatista march - peaceful and for the purpose of carrying water to other indigenous - and left several compañeros with bullet wounds on just April 10? What happens when she sees federal soldiers passing by every day with their war tanks, their artillery vehicles, their rifles pointing at her house? What happens when someone tells her that in a place called Ciudad Juárez, young women like her are being kidnapped, raped and murdered, and the authorities are not seeing that justice is done?

What happens when she listens to her brothers and sisters, to her parents, to her relatives, talking about when they went to the March of the 1111 in 1997, to the Consulta of 5000 in 1999, when they talk about what they saw and heard, about the families who welcomed them, about what they are like as citizens, how they also are fighting, how they won't give up either.

What happens when she sees, for example, Eduardo Galeano, Pablo González Casanova, Adolfo Gilly, Alain Touraine, Neil Harvey, in mud up to their knees, meeting together in a hut in La Realidad, talking about neoliberalism. What happens when she listens to Daniel Viglietti singing "A desalambrar" in a community? What happens when she sees the play, "Zorro el zapato" which the French children from Tameratong presented on zapatista lands? What happens when she sees and hears José Saramago talking, talking to her? What happens when she hears Oscar Chávez singing in Tzotzil? What happens when she hears a Mapuche indigenous recounting her experience of struggle and resistance in a country called Chile? What happens she goes to a meeting where someone who says he is a "piquetero" recounts how they are organizing and resisting in a country called Argentina? What happens when she hears an indigenous from Colombia saying that, in the midst of guerillas, paramilitaries, soldiers and US military advisors, her compañeros are trying to build themselves as the indigenous they are? What happens when she hears the "citizen musicians" playing that very otherly music called "rock" in a camp for the displaced? What happens when she knows that an Italian football team called Internazionale de Milan are financially helping the wounded and displaced of Zinacantán? What happens when she sees a group of North American, German and British men and women arrive with electronic appliances, and she listens to them talking about what they are doing in their countries in order to do away with injustice, while teaching her to assemble and use those appliances, and later she's in front of the microphone saying: "You are listening to Radio Insurgente, the voice of those without voice, broadcasting from the mountains of the Mexican southeast, and we are going to begin with a nice cumbia called 'La Suegra', and we're advising the health workers that they should go to the Caracol to pick up the vaccine." What happens when she hears at the Good Government Junta that that Catalan came from very far away to personally deliver what a solidarity committee put together for aid for the resistance? What happens when she sees a North American coming and going with the coffee, honey and crafts (and the product of their sale), which are made in the zapatista cooperatives, when she sees that they haven't commanded any special attention despite the fact that they've been making them for years without anyone paying them any notice? What happens when she sees the Greeks bringing money for school materials and then working along with the zapatista indigenous in the construction? What happens when she sees a frentista arriving at the Caracol and delivering a bus full of medicines, medical equipment, hospital beds and even uniforms and shoes for the health workers, while other young people from the FZLN are dividing up in order to help in the community clinics? What happens when she sees the people from "A School for Chiapas" arriving, departing and leaving, in effect, a school, a school bus, pencils, notebooks, chalkboards? What happens when she sees Hindus, Koreans, Japanese, Australians, Slovenes and Iranians arriving at the language school in Oventik (which a "citizen" compañero has kept functioning under heroic circumstances)? What happens when she sees a person arriving in order to deliver a book to the Security Committee with translations of the EZLN communiqués in Arab or Japanese or Kurd and the royalties from their sales?

What happens when, for example, a girl grows up and reaches youth in the zapatista resistance over 12 years in the mountains of the Mexican Southeast?

I'm asking because, for example, there are two insurgentas doing sentry duty here for the Red Alert in the EZLN headquarters. They are, as the compas say, "one hundred percent indigenous and one hundred percent Mexican." One is 18 and the other 16. Or, in other words, in 1994, the one was 6 and the other was 4. There are dozens like them in our mountain positions, hundreds in the militias, thousands in organizational and community positions, tens of thousands in the zapatista communities. The immediate commander of the two doing sentry duty is an insurgent lieutenant, indigenous, 22 years old, in other words, 10 years old in 1994. The position is under the command of an insurgent captain, also indigenous, who, as it should be, likes literature very much and is 24 years old, that is, 12 at the beginning of the uprising. And there are men and women all over these lands who passed from childhood to youth to maturity in the zapatista resistance.

Then I ask: What am I saying to you? That the world is wide and far away? That only what happens to us is important? That what happens in other parts of Mexico, of Latin America and of the world doesn't interest us, that we shouldn't involve ourselves in the national or international, and that we should shut ourselves away (and deceive ourselves), thinking that we can achieve, by ourselves, what our relatives died for? That we shouldn't pay any attention to all the signs which are telling us that the only way we can survive is by doing what we are going to do? That we should refuse the listening and words of those who have never denied us either one? That we should respect and help those same politicians who denied us a dignified resolution of the war? That, before coming out, we have to pass a test in order to see whether what we have constructed here over the last 12 years of war is of sufficient merit?

We told you in the Sixth Declaration that new generations have entered into the struggle. And they are not only new, they also have other experiences, other histories. We did not tell you in the Sixth, but I'm telling you now: they are better than us, the ones who started the EZLN and began the uprising. They see further, their step is more firm, they are more open, they are better prepared, they are more intelligent, more determined, more aware.

What the Sixth presents is not an "imported" product, written by a group of wise men in a sterile laboratory and then introduced into a social group. The Sixth comes out of what we are now and of where we are. That is why those first parts appeared, because what we are proposing cannot be understood without understanding what our experience and organization was before, that is, our history. And when I say "our history" I am not speaking just of the EZLN, I am also including all those men and women of Mexico, of Latin America and of the World who have been with us...even if we have not seen them and they are in their worlds, their struggles, their experiences, their histories.

The zapatista struggle is a little hut, one more little house, perhaps the most humble and simplest among those which are being raised, with identical or greater hardships and efforts, in this street which is called "Mexico." We who reside in this little house identify with the band which peoples the entire barrio of below which is called "Latin America," and we hope to contribute something to making the great City which is called the "World" habitable. If this is bad, attribute it to all those men and women who, struggling in their houses, barrios, cities - in their worlds - took a place among us. Not above, not below, but with us.

A Penguin in the Selva Lacandona

Alright, a promise is a promise. At the beginning of this document I told you I was going to tell you about the penguin that's here, in the mountains of the Mexican Southeast, so here goes.

It took place in one of the insurgent barracks, a little more than a month ago, just before the Red Alert. I was on my way, heading towards the position that was to be the headquarters of the Comandancia General of the EZLN. I had to pick the insurgentes and insurgentas up there, the ones who were going to make up my unit during the Red Alert. The commander of the barracks, a Lieutenant Colonel Insurgente, was finishing up the dismantling of the camp and was making arrangements for moving the impedimenta. In order to lighten the burden of the support bases who were providing supplies for the insurgent troops, the soldiers in this unit had developed a few subsistence measures of their own: a vegetable garden and a farm. They decided they would take as many of the vegetables as they could, and the rest would be left to the hand of god. As for the chickens, hens and roosters, the alternative was to eat them or leave them. "Better we eat them than the federales," the men and women (most of them young people under the age of 20) who were maintaining that position decided, not without reason. One by one, the animals ended up in the pot and, from there to the soldiers' soup dishes. There weren't very many animals either, so in a few days the poultry population had been reduced to two or three specimens.

When only one remained, on the precise day of departure, what happened happened...

The last chicken began walking upright, perhaps trying to be mistaken for one of us and to pass unnoticed with that posture. I don't know much about zoology, but it does not appear that the anatomical makeup of chickens is made for walking upright, so, with the swaying produced by the effort of keeping itself upright, the chicken was teetering back and forth, without being able to come up with a precise course. It was then that someone said "it looks like a penguin." The incident provoked laughter which resulted in sympathy. The chicken did, it's true, look like a penguin, it was only missing the white bib. The fact is that the jokes ended up preventing the "penguin" from meeting the same fate as its compañeros from the farm.

The hour of departure arrived, and, while checking to be sure nothing was left, they realized that the "penguin" was still there, swaying from one side to another, but not returning to its natural position. "Let's take it," I said, and everyone looked at me to see if I were joking or serious. It was the insurgenta Toñita who offered to take it. It began raining, and she put it in her lap, under the heavy plastic cape which Toñita wore to protect her weapon and her rucksack from the water. We began the march in the rain.

The penguin arrived at the EZLN Headquarters and quickly adapted to the routines of the insurgent Red Alert. It often joined (never losing the posture of a penguin) the insurgents and insurgentas at cell time, the hour of political study. The theme during those days was the 13 zapatista demands, and the compañeros summed it up under the title "Why We Are Struggling." Well, you're not going to believe me, but when I went to the cell meeting, under the pretext of looking for hot coffee, I saw that it was the penguin who was paying the most attention. And, also, from time to time, it would peck at someone who was sleeping in the middle of the political talk, as if chiding him to pay attention.

There are no other animals in the barracks...I mean except for the snakes, the "chibo" tarantulas, two field rats, the crickets, ants, an indeterminate (but very large) number of mosquitoes and a cojolito who came to sing, probably because it felt called by the music - cumbias, rancheras, corridos, songs of love, of spite - which emanated from the small radio which is used to hear the morning news by Pascal Beltrán on Antena Radio and then "Plaza Pública" by Miguel Ángel Granados Chapa on Radio UNAM.

Well, I told you there weren't any other animals, so it would seem normal that "penguin" would think that we were its kind and tend to behave as if it were one more of us. We hadn't realized how far it had gone until one afternoon when it refused to eat in the corner it had been assigned, and it went over to the wooden table. Penguin made a racket, more chicken-like than penguin-like, until we understood that it wanted to eat with us. You should understand that Penguin's new identity prevented the former chicken from flying the minimum necessary for getting up on the bench, and so it was insurgenta Erika who lifted it up and let it eat from her plate.

The insurgent captain in charge had told me that the chicken, I mean penguin, did not like to be alone at night, perhaps because it feared that the possums might confuse it with a chicken, and it protested until someone took it to their tarp. It wasn't very long before Erika and Toñita made it a white bib out of fabric (they wanted to paint it [Penguin] with lime or house paint, but I managed to dissuade them...I think), so that there would be no doubt that it was a penguin, and no one would confuse it with a chicken.

You may be thinking that I am, or we are, delirious, but what I'm telling you is true. Meanwhile, Penguin has become part of the Comandancia General of the Ezeta, and perhaps those of you who come to the preparatory meetings for the "Other Campaign" might see it with your own eyes. It could also be expected that Penguin might be the mascot for the EZLN football team when it faces, soon, the Milan Internazionale. Someone might then perhaps take a picture for a souvenir. Perhaps, after a while and looking at the image, a girl or a boy might ask: "Mama, and who are those next to the Penguin?" (sigh)

Do you know what? It occurs to me now that we are like Penguin, trying very hard to be erect and to make ourselves a place in Mexico, in Latin America, in the World. Just as the trip we are about to take is not in our anatomy, we shall certainly go about swaying, unsteady and stupidly, provoking laughter and jokes. Although perhaps, also like Penguin, we might provoke some sympathy, and someone might, generously, protect us and help us, walking with us, to do what every man, woman or penguin should do, that is, to always try to be better in the only way possible, by struggling.

Vale. Salud and an embrace from Penguin (?)

From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast

Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos

Mexico, July of 2005

A Penguin in the Selva Lacandona

2005-08-02T20:34:00.000-07:00

Originally published in Spanish by the EZLN

Originally published in Spanish by the EZLN
*************************************
Translated by irlandesa

A Penguin in the Selva Lacandona I/II

(The zapatista is just a little house, perhaps the smallest, on a street called "Mexico," in a barrio called "Latin America," in a city called the "World.")

You're not going to believe me, but there's a penguin in the Ezeta Headquarters. You'll say "Hey, Sup, what's up? You already blew the fuses with the Red Alert," but it's true. In fact, while I'm writing this to you, he (the penguin) is right here next to me, eating the same hard, stale bread (it has so much mold that it's just one degree away from being penicillin), which, along with coffee, were my rations for today. Yes, a penguin. But I'll tell you more about this later, because first we must talk a bit about the Sixth Declaration.

We have carefully read some of your doubts, criticism, advice and debates about what we posited in the Sixth. Not all of them, it's true, but you can chalk that up, not to laziness, but to the rain and mud that's lengthening the roads even more in the mountains of the Mexican Southeast. Although there are many points, I'm only going to refer to some of them in this text.

Some of the primary points of criticism refer to the so-called new intercontinental, to the national Mexican nature of the Sixth, and, along with this, to the proposal (it's still just that, a proposal) of joining the indigenous struggle with that of other social sectors, notably with workers in the countryside and the city. Others refer to the definition of the anti-capitalist left and to the Sixth's dealing with "old issues" or using "worn out" concepts. A few others warn of dangers: the displacement of the indigenous issue by others and, consequently, the Indian peoples being excluded as the subjects of transformation. The vanguardism and centralism that could arise in the politics of alliances with organizations of the left. The replacement of social leadership by political leadership. That the right would use zapatismo in order to strike a blow at López Obrador, in other words, at the political center (I know that those observations speak of AMLO's being on the left, but he says he's in the center, so here we're going to take what he says, not what they say about him). The majority of these observations are well intended, and they seek to help, rightly warning of obstacles in the path, or rightly providing opinions as to how the movement which the Sixth is trying to arouse might grow.

Concerning cutting and pasting

I will leave aside those who are lamenting that the Red Alert didn't end with the renewal of offensive combat by the EZLN. We are sorry that we didn't fulfill your expectations of blood, death and destruction. No way, we're sorry. Perhaps another time...We will also leave aside the dishonest criticisms. Like those who edit the text of the Sixth Declaration so that it says what they want it to say. This is what Señor Victor M. Toledo did in his article "Overweening Zapatismo. Sustainability, indigenous resistances and neoliberalism," published in the Mexican newspaper La Jornada (July 18, 2005). I believe one can debate the aims and methods posited by the Sixth Declaration without needing to be dishonest. Because Señor Toledo, utilizing the "cut and paste" method, has edited the Sixth in order to note that it lacks...what he cut. Toledo said: "It is surprising that (the EZLN in the Sixth Declaration) decided to join forces with campesinos, workers, laborers, students, women, young people, homosexuals, lesbians, transsexuals, priests, nuns and social activists, and that it does not make one single reference to the thousands of indigenous communities devoted to the search for sustainability."

Well, the parts which Señor Toledo edited out of the Sixth stated the opposite. For example, in the part which recognizes the existence of resistances and alternatives to neoliberalism in Mexico, and in first place in the enumeration of them, it notes: "And so we learned that there are indigenous, whose lands are far away from here in Chiapas, and they are building their autonomy and defending their culture and caring for the land, the forests, the water." Perhaps Señor Toledo was expecting a detailed account of those indigenous struggles, but that is one thing, and it's another very different and dishonest thing to say that there was not one single reference. In the account made by Señor Toledo of the efforts of those with which the EZLN decided to join, he has cut out the first social group to which the Sixth refers, which says, verbatim: "And then, according to the agreement of the majority of those people to whom we are going to listen, we will make a struggle with everyone, with indigenous, workers, campesinos, etcetera." In addition, the first point of the Sixth precisely states: "1. We are going to continue to fight for the Indian peoples of Mexico, but now no longer just for them nor just with them, but for all the exploited and dispossessed of Mexico, with all of them and throughout the country." And, at the end of the Sixth, it says "We are inviting all indigenous, workers, campesinos...etcetera." In sum, I imagined there might be, among those irritated by our criticisms of López Obrador and the PRD, more serious, and honest, arguments for the debate. Perhaps they might be presented some day. We'll wait, that is our specialty.

Concerning we don't want you in this barrio

There are also those criticisms, although more hidden, that the Sixth Declaration makes reference to some international issues and the manner in which they are addressed. And so some people criticize the fact that we refer to the blockade which the US government maintains against the people of Cuba. "It's a very old issue," they say. How old? As old as the blockade? Or as old as the resistance of the Indian peoples of Mexico? What are the "modern" issues? Who can honestly look at the world and pass over - "because it's an old issue" - an attack against a people who are doing what all peoples should do, that is, deciding their direction, path and destiny as a nation ("defending national sovereignty" they say)? Who can ignore the decades of resistance of an entire people against US arrogance? Who, knowing that they can do something - even if it's but little - to recognize that effort, would not do so? Who can ignore that that people has to lift itself up each time after a natural catastrophe, not only without the aid and loans enjoyed by other countries, but also in the midst of a brutal and inhumane siege? Who can ignore the US base of Guantánamo on Cuban territory, the laboratory of torture which it has been turned into, the wound it represents in the sovereignty of a Nation and say: "Go on, that's an old issue."

In any event, does it not seem natural that, in a movement which is primarily indigenous like the zapatista, sympathy and admiration would be evoked by what the indigenous in Ecuador and Bolivia are doing? That they would feel solidarity with those who have no land and are struggling in Brazil. That they would identify with the "piqueteros" of Argentina, and they would salute the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo. That they would perceive similarities in experiences and organization with the Mapuche of Chile and with the indigenous of Colombia. That they would warn of the obvious in Venezuela, namely: that the US government is doing everything possible to violate the sovereignty of that country. That they would enthusiastically applaud the great mobilizations in Uruguay in opposition to the imposition of "macroeconomic stability."

The Sixth Declaration does not speak to the institutions of above, good or bad. The Sixth is looking below. And it is seeing a reality that is shared, at least since the conquests made by Spain and Portugal of the lands which now share the name of "Latin America." Perhaps this feeling of belonging to the "patria grande" which is Latin America is "old," and it is "modern" to turn one's gaze and aspirations to the "restless and brutal north." Perhaps, but if anything is "old" in this corner of Mexico, of America and of the World, it is the resistance of the Indian peoples.

Concerning we don't want you on this street

There are also (I shall note and summarize some of them) those criticisms for trying to "nationalize and even internationalize" our discourse and our struggle. The Sixth, they tell us, falls into that nonsense. Therefore recommending that the EZLN remain in Chiapas, that it strengthen the Good Government Juntas and that it confine itself to the waterproof compartment that is their lot. That once that project is consolidated, and once we have demonstrated that we can "put into practice an alternative modernity to that of neoliberalism in their own lands," then we can set forth on the national, international and intergalactic arenas. In the face of those arguments, we present our reality. We are not trying to compete with anyone to see who is more anti-neoliberal or who has made more advances in the resistance, but, with modesty, our level and contributions are in the Good Government Juntas. You can come, speak with the authorities or with the peoples, ignore the letters and communiqués where we have explained this process and investigate, first hand, what is happening here, the problems which are confronted, how they are resolved. I do not know before whom we have to demonstrate that all this is "putting into practice an alternative modernity to that of neoliberalism in their own lands," and who is going to characterize us con palomita o tache, and then, yes, allow us to come out and attempt to join our struggle with other sectors.

Besides, we had the premonition that those criticisms would be praise...if the Sixth had declared its unconditional support of the political center represented by López Obrador. And if we were to have said that "we are going to come out in order to join with those citizens' networks in support of AMLO," there would be enthusiasm, "yes," "of course you have to leave, you don't have to stay shut away, it's time for zapatismo to abandon its hideout and join its experiences with the masses devoted to the one-in-waiting." Hmm...López Obrador. He just presented his "Alternative National Project" to the citizens' networks. We are suspicious, and we don't see anything more than plastic cosmetics (and which change according to the audience) and a list of forgettable promises. Whatever, perhaps someone might tell AMLO that he can't promise "the fulfillment of the San Andrés Accords," because that means, among other things, reforming the Constitution, and, if my memory serves, that is the work of the Congress. In any event, the promise should be made by a political party, noting that its candidates will fulfill it if they are elected. The other way there would have to be a proposal that the federal executive would govern above the other branches or ignore them. Or a dictatorship. But it's not about that. Or is it?

In the politics of above, the programs seek, during election periods, to add as many people as they can. But by adding some, others are subtracted. Then they decide to add the most and subtract the least. AMLO has created, as a parallel structure to the PRD, the "citizens' networks," and his objective is to add those who aren't members of the PRD. AMLO has presented 6 persons for those citizens' networks who are going to coordinate, at a national level, all those non-PRD lopezobradoristas. Let's look at two of the "national coordinators."

Socorro Díaz Palacios, Under Secretary of Civil Protection in the Carlos Salinas de Gortari government. On January 3, 1994, while the federales were perpetrating the Ocosingo market massacre, he stated (I'm citing the Department of Government Press Bulletin): "The violent groups which are acting in the state of Chiapas display a mix of national as well as foreign interests and persons. They demonstrate affinities with other violent factions which are operating in Central American countries. Some indigenous have been recruited, pressured by the chiefs of these groups, and they are also undoubtedly being manipulated as regards their historic claims which should continue being dealt with." And further on: " The Mexican Army, for its part, will continue acting with great respect for the rights of individuals and of peoples while giving a clear and decisive response to the demand for order and security...blah, blah, blah." In the days that followed, the Air Force bombarded the indigenous communities south of San Cristóbal de Las Casas, and the federal army detained, tortured and assassinated 3 indigenous in the community of Morelia, at that time in the municipality of Altamirano, Chiapas, Mexico.

Ricardo Monreal Ávila - In January of 1998, just a few days after the Acteal massacre, the then PRI deputy and member of the Permanent Commission of the Congress of the Union "commented that the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) is a paramilitary group, the same as those who killed the 45 Tzotzil indigenous on December 22, 1997 in Chenalhó, Chiapas. 'Because everything that acts like an Army without being one and arms itself as civilians is paramilitary. They all must disarm, because they have all contributed to this unnecessary, unjust and stupid violence which has had all Mexicans in mourning,' he stated" ( "El Informador" of Guadalajara, Jalisco. 3/1/98). Days later, after moving to the PRD because the PRI didn't give him the candidacy for governor of Zacatecas, he was to state (I am citing the note by Ciro Pérez and Andrea Becerril in La Jornada, 1/7/98) that the Chenalhó episode (referring to the Acteal massacre) was indeed planned, "but not by the one stated by the white leader of the dark-skinned indigenous," he opined that the EZLN's position regarding the massacre had to do with "securing an preemptive justification for Marcos and for those interests he is protecting," and he finished by warning that the EZ serves foreign interests which seek "to obtain control of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec region, its resources and its strategic location, an objective which is suitably served by Marcos and the armies which are fighting for the indigenous flag." Hmm...it sounds like, like...yes, Point 28 of AMLO's program which reads, verbatim: "We will link the Pacific with the Atlantic, in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, through the construction of two commercial ports: one in Salina Cruz, Oaxaca, and the other in Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz, as well as container shipment railways and the widening of the existing highway."

López Obrador has defined himself with those individuals. He has added some, and, with them, he has subtracted, among others, the "neozapatistas."

But, on another hand, why is there nothing in that program about the political prisoners and disappeared in the dirty war of the 70s and 80s? Nor about the punishment of former officials who enriched themselves illicitly. Nor about serving justice in the cases of the massacres of Acteal, El Bosque, Aguas Blancas, El Charco. I am afraid that, as to justice, López Obrador is offering "wipe the slate clean and start anew," which, paradoxically, is not new. Before returning to the criticisms of the statements the Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona makes on Mexico, Latin America and the World, allow me to tell you something:

That we are going to come out

We are going to come out. We are going to come out, and they had better get used to the idea. We are going to come out, and I believe, there are only 4 ways of stopping us.

One is with a preventative attack, so fashionable in this neoliberal period. The predictable steps are: accusation of ties with drug trafficking or with organized crime in general; invocations of the rule of law and rubbish to that effect; an intense media campaign; a double attack (against the communities and against the General Command); damage control (that is, distributing money, concessions and privileges among the "spokespersons of public opinion"); the authorities call for calm; politicians state that the most important thing is that the election takes place in peace and with social tranquility; after a brief impasse, the candidates renew their campaigns.

Another is taking us prisoners the moment we come out, or during the course of the "other campaign." The steps? Clandestine meetings among the leaders of the PRI, PAN and PRD in order to make agreements (like in 2001, with the indigenous counter-reform); the Cocopa states that dialogue has broken off; the Congress votes to overturn the Law for Dialogue; the PGR activates the arrest warrants; an AFI commando unit, with help from the federal army, takes the zapatista delegates prisoner; simultaneously the federal army takes the rebel indigenous communities "in order to prevent disorder and maintain the peace and national stability;" damage control, etcetera.

Another is to kill us. Stages: a hired assassin is contracted; a provocation is mounted; the crime is committed; the authorities regret the incident and offer to investigate "to its fullest extent, regardless of outcome...." Another alternative: "a regrettable accident caused the death of the zapatista delegation which was on its way to blah, blah, blah." In both: damage control, etcetera.

Another is to disappear us. I am referring to a forced disappearance, as was applied to hundreds of political opponents in the PRI "stability" period. It could be like this: the zapatista delegates don't appear; the last time they were seen was blah, blah, blah; the authorities offer to investigate; the hypothesis is ventured of a problem of passion; the authorities state that they are investigating all leads, and they are not discarding the possibility that the zapatista delegation has taken advantage of their departure to flee, with a quantity of bitter pozol, to a fiscal paradise; INTERPOL is investigating in the Cayman Islands; damage control, etcetera.

These are the initial problems which the Sixth could run up against. We have been preparing for many years to confront those possibilities. That is why the Red Alert has not been lifted for the insurgent troops, just for the towns. And that is why one of the communiqués pointed out that the EZLN could lose, through jail, death or forced disappearance, part or all of their publicly known leadership and continue fighting.

(To be continued...)

From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast

Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos

Mexico, July of 2005.

Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona

2005-07-07T18:15:00.000-07:00

Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona

by Subcomandante Marcos

July 02, 2005

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=59&ItemID=8218

Originally published in Spanish by the Zapatista Army of National Liberation

Translated by irlandesa

Zapatista Army of National Liberation.

Mexico.

Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona

This is our simple word which seeks to touch the hearts of humble and simple people like ourselves, but people who are also, like ourselves, dignified and rebel. This is our simple word for recounting what our path has been and where we are now, in order to explain how we see the world and our country, in order to say what we are thinking of doing and how we are thinking of doing it, and in order to invite other persons to walk with us in something very great which is called Mexico and something greater which is called the world. This is our simple word in order to inform all honest and noble hearts what it is we want in Mexico and the world. This is our simple word, because it is our idea to call on those who are like us and to join together with them, everywhere they are living and struggling.

I - What We Are

We are the zapatistas of the EZLN, although we are also called "neo-zapatistas." Now, we, the zapatistas of the EZLN, rose up in arms in January of 1994 because we saw how widespread had become the evil wrought by the powerful who only humiliated us, stole from us, imprisoned us and killed us, and no one was saying anything or doing anything. That is why we said "Ya Basta!," that no longer were we going to allow them to make us inferior or to treat us worse than animals. And then we also said we wanted democracy, liberty and justice for all Mexicans although we were concentrated on the Indian peoples. Because it so happened that we, the EZLN, were almost all only indigenous from here in Chiapas, but we did not want to struggle just for own good, or just for the good of the indigenous of Chiapas, or just for the good of the Indian peoples of Mexico. We wanted to fight along with everyone who was humble and simple like ourselves and who was in great need and who suffered from exploitation and thievery by the rich and their bad governments here, in our Mexico, and in other countries in the world.

And then our small history was that we grew tired of exploitation by the powerful, and then we organized in order to defend ourselves and to fight for justice. In the beginning there were not many of us, just a few, going this way and that, talking with and listening to other people like us. We did that for many years, and we did it in secret, without making a stir. In other words, we joined forces in silence. We remained like that for about 10 years, and then we had grown, and then we were many thousands. We trained ourselves quite well in politics and weapons, and, suddenly, when the rich were throwing their New Year's Eve parties, we fell upon their cities and just took them over. And we left a message to everyone that here we are, that they have to take notice of us. And then the rich took off and sent their great armies to do away with us, just like they always do when the exploited rebel - they order them all to be done away with. But we were not done away with at all, because we had prepared ourselves quite well prior to the war, and we made ourselves strong in our mountains. And there were the armies, looking for us and throwing their bombs and bullets at us, and then they were making plans to kill off all the indigenous at one time, because they did not know who was a zapatista and who was not. And we were running and fighting, fighting and running, just like our ancestors had done. Without giving up, without surrendering, without being defeated.

And then the people from the cities went out into the streets and began s houting for an end to the war. And then we stopped our war, and we listened to those brothers and sisters from the city who were telling us to try to reach an arrangement or an accord with the bad governments, so that the problem could be resolved without a massacre. And so we paid attention to them, because they were what we call "the people," or the Mexican people. And so we set aside the fire and took up the word.

And it so happened that the governments said they would indeed be well-behaved, and they would engage in dialogue, and they would make accords, and they would fulfill them. And we said that was good, but we also thought it was good that we knew those people who went out into the streets in order to stop the war. Then, while we were engaging in dialogue with the bad governments, we were also talking with those persons, and we saw that most of them were humble and simple people like us, and both, they and we, understood quite well why we were fighting. And we called those people "civil society" because most of them did not belong to political parties, rather they were common, everyday people, like us, simple and humble people.

But it so happened that the bad governments did not want a good agreement, rather it was just their underhanded way of saying they were going to talk and to reach accords, while they were preparing their attacks in order to eliminate us once and for all. And so then they attacked us several times, but they did not defeat us, because we resisted quite well, and many people throughout the world mobilized. And then the bad governments thought that the problem was that many people saw what was happening with the EZLN, and they started their plan of acting as if nothing were going on. Meanwhile they were quick to surround us, they laid siege to us in hopes that, since our mountains are indeed remote, the people would then forget, since zapatista lands were so far away. And every so often the bad governments tested us and tried to deceive us or to attack us, like in February of 1995 when they threw a huge number of armies at us, but they did not defeat us. Because, as they said then, we were not alone, and many people helped us, and we resisted well.

And then the bad governments had to make accords with the EZLN, and those accords were called the "San Andrés Accords" because the municipality where those accords were signed was called "San Andrés." And we were not all alone in those dialogues, speaking with people from the bad governments. We invited many people and organizations who were, or are, engaged in the struggle for the Indian peoples of Mexico, and everyone spoke their word, and everyone reached agreement as to how we were going to speak with the bad governments. And that is how that dialogue was, not just the zapatistas on one side and the governments on the other. Instead, the Indian peoples of Mexico, and those who supported them, were with the zapatistas. And then the bad governments said in those accords that they were indeed going to recognize the rights of the Indian peoples of Mexico, and they were going to respect their culture, and they were going to make everything law in the Constitution. But then, once they had signed, the bad governments acted as if they had forgotten about them, and many years passed, and the accords were not fulfilled at all. Quite the opposite, the government attacked the indigenous, in order to make them back out of the struggle, as they did on December 22, 1997, the date on which Zedillo ordered the killing of 45 men, women, old ones and children in the town in Chiapas called ACTEAL. This immense crime was not so easily forgotten, and it was a demonstration of how the bad governments color their hearts in order to attack and assassinate those who rebel against injustices. And, while all of that was going on, we zapatistas were putting our all into the fulfillment of the accords and resisting in the mountains of the Mexican southeast.

And then we began speaking with other Indian peoples of Mexico and their organizations, and we made an agreement with them that we were going to struggle together for the same thing, for the recognition of indigenous rights and culture. Now we were also being helped by many people from all over the world and by persons who were well respected and whose word was quite great because they were great intellectuals, artists and scientists from Mexico and from all over the world. And we also held international encuentros. In other words, we joined together to talk with persons from America and from Asia and from Europe and from Africa and from Oceania, and we learned of their struggles and their ways, and we said they were "intergalactic" encuentros, just to be silly and because we had also invited those from other planets, but it appeared as if they had not come, or perhaps they did come, but they did not make it clear.

But the bad governments did not keep their word anyway, and then we made a plan to talk with many Mexicans so they would help us. And then, first in 1997, we held a march to Mexico City which was called "of the 1,111" because a compañero or compañera was going to go from each zapatista town, but the bad government did not pay any attention. And then, in 1999, we held a consulta throughout the country, and there it was seen that the majority were indeed in agreement with the demands of the Indian peoples, but again the bad governments did not pay any attention. And then, lastly, in 2001, we held what was called the "march for indigenous dignity" which had much support from millions of Mexicans and people from other countries, and it went to where the deputies and senators were, the Congress of the Union, in order to demand the recognition of the Mexican indigenous.

But it happened that no, the politicians from the PRI, the PAN and the PRD reached an agreement among themselves, and they simply did not recognize indigenous rights and culture. That was in April of 2001, and the politicians demonstrated quite clearly there that they had no decency whatsoever, and they were swine who thought only about making their good money as the bad politicians they were. This must be remembered, because you will now be seeing that they are going to say they will indeed recognize indigenous rights, but it is a lie they are telling so we will vote for them. But they already had their chance, and they did not keep their word.

And then we saw quite clearly that there was no point to dialogue and negotiation with the bad governments of Mexico. That it was a waste of time for us to be talking with the politicians, because neither their hearts nor their words were honest. They were crooked, and they told lies that they would keep their word, but they did not. In other words, on that day, when the politicians from the PRI, PAN and PRD approved a law that was no good, they killed dialogue once and for all, and they clearly stated that it did not matter what they had agreed to and signed, because they did not keep their word. And then we did not make any contacts with the federal branches. Because we understood that dialogue and negotiation had failed as a result of those political parties. We saw that blood did not matter to them, nor did death, suffering, mobilizations, consultas, efforts, national and international statements, encuentros, accords, signatures, commitments. And so the political class not only closed, one more time, the door to the Indian peoples, they also delivered a mortal blow to the peaceful resolution - through dialogue and negotiation - of the war. It can also no longer be believed that the accords will be fulfilled by someone who comes along with something or other. They should see that there so that they can learn from experience what happened to us.

And then we saw all of that, and we wondered in our hearts what we were going to do.

And the first thing we saw was that our heart was not the same as before, when we began our struggle. It was larger, because now we had touched the hearts of many good people. And we also saw that our heart was more hurt, it was more wounded. And it was not wounded by the deceits of the bad governments, but because, when we touched the hearts of others, we also touched their sorrows. It was as if we were seeing ourselves in a mirror.

II. - Where We Are Now

Then, like the zapatistas we are, we thought that it was not enough to stop engaging in dialogue with the government, but it was necessary to continue on ahead in the struggle, in spite of those lazy parasites of politicians. The EZLN then decided to carry out, alone and on their side ("unilateral", in other words, because just one side), the San Andrés Accords regarding indigenous rights and culture. For 4 years, since the middle of 2001 until the middle of 2005, we have devoted ourselves to this and to other things which we are going to tell you about.

Fine, we then began encouraging the autonomous rebel zapatista municipalities - which is how the peoples are organized in order to govern and to govern themselves - in order to make themselves stronger. This method of autonomous government was not simply invented by the EZLN, but rather it comes from several centuries of indigenous resistance and from the zapatistas' own experience. It is the self-governance of the communities. In other words, no one from outside comes to govern, but the peoples themselves decide, among themselves, who governs and how, and, if they do not obey, they are removed. If the one who governs does not obey the people, they pursue them, they are removed from authority, and another comes in.

But then we saw that the Autonomous Municipalities were not level. There were some that were more advanced and which had more support from civil society, and others were more neglected. The organization was lacking to make them more on a par with each other. And we also saw that the EZLN, with its political-military component, was involving itself in decisions which belonged to the democratic authorities, "civilians" as they say. And here the problem is that the political-military component of the EZLN is not democratic, because it is an army. And we saw that the military being above, and the democratic below, was not good, because what is democratic should not be decided militarily, it should be the reverse: the democratic-political governing above, and the military obeying below. Or, perhaps, it would be better with nothing below, just completely level, without any military, and that is why the zapatistas are soldiers so that there will not be any soldiers. Fine, what we then did about this problem was to begin separating the political-military from the autonomous and democratic aspects of organization in the zapatista communities. And so, actions and decisions which had previously been made and taken by the EZLN were being passed, little by little, to the democratically elected authorities in the villages. It is easy to say, of course, but it was very difficult in practice, because many years have passed - first in the preparation for the war and then the war itself - and the political-military aspects have become customary. But, regardless, we did so because it is our way to do what we say, because, if not, why should we go around saying things if we do not then do them.

That was how the Good Government Juntas were born, in August of 2003, and, through them, self-learning and the exercise of "govern obeying" has continued.

>From that time and until the middle of 2005, the EZLN leadership has no longer involved itself in giving orders in civil matters, but it has accompanied and helped the authorities who are democratically elected by the peoples. It has also kept watch that the peoples and national and international civil society are kept well informed concerning the aid that is received and how it is used. And now we are passing the work of safeguarding good government to the zapatista support bases, with temporary positions which are rotated, so that everyone learns and carries out this work. Because we believe that a people which does not watch over its leaders is condemned to be enslaved, and we fought to be free, not to change masters every six years.

The EZLN, during these 4 years, also handed over to the Good Government Juntas and the Autonomous Municipalities the aid and contacts which they had attained throughout Mexico and the world during these years of war and resistance. The EZLN had also, during that time, been building economic and political support which allowed the zapatista communities to make progress with fewer difficulties in the building of their autonomy and in improving their living conditions. It is not much, but it is far better than what they had prior to the beginning of the uprising in January of 1994. If you look at one of those studies the governments make, you will see that the only indigenous communities which have improved their living conditions - whether in health, education, food or housing - were those which are in zapatista territory, which is what we call where our villages are. And all of that has been possible because of the progress made by the zapatista villages and because of the very large support which has been received from good and noble persons, whom we call "civil societies," and from their organizations throughout the world. As if all of these people have made "another world is possible" a reality, but through actions, not just words.

And the villages have made good progress. Now there are more compañeros and compañeras who are learning to govern. And - even though little by little - there are more women going into this work, but there is still a lack of respect for the compañeras, and they need to participate more in the work of the struggle. And, also through the Good Government Juntas, coordination has been improved between the Autonomous Municipalities and the resolution of problems with other organizations and with the official authorities. There has also been much improvement in the projects in the communities, and the distribution of projects and aid given by civil society from all over the world has become more level. Health and education have improved, although there is still a good deal lacking for it to be what it should be. The same is true for housing and food, and in some areas there has been much improvement with the problem of land, because the lands recovered from the finqueros are being distributed. But there are areas which continue to suffer from a lack of lands to cultivate. And there has been great improvement in the support from national and international civil society, because previously everyone went wherever they wanted, and now the Good Government Juntas are directing them to where the greatest need exists. And, similarly, everywhere there are more compañeros and compañeras who are learning to relate to persons from other parts of Mexico and of the world,. They are learning to respect and to demand respect. They are learning that there are many worlds, and that everyone has their place, their time and their way, and therefore there must be mutual respect between everyone.

We, the zapatistas of the EZLN, have devoted this time to our primary force, to the peoples who support us. And the situation has indeed improved some. No one can say that the zapatista organization and struggle has been without point, but rather, even if they were to do away with us completely, our struggle has indeed been of some use.

But it is not just the zapatista villages which have grown - the EZLN has also grown. Because what has happened during this time is that new generations have renewed our entire organization. They have added new strength. The comandantes and comandantas who were in their maturity at the beginning of the uprising in 1994 now have the wisdom they gained in the war and in the 12 years of dialogue with thousands of men and women from throughout the world. The members of the CCRI, the zapatista political-organizational leadership, is now counseling and directing the new ones who are entering our struggle, as well as those who are holding leadership positions. For some time now the "committees" (which is what we call them) have been preparing an entire new generation of comandantes and comandantas who, following a period of instruction and testing, are beginning to learn the work of organizational leadership and to discharge their duties. And it also so happens that our insurgents, insurgentas, militants, local and regional responsables, as well as support bases, who were youngsters at the beginning of the uprising, are now mature men and women, combat veterans and natural leaders in their units and communities. And those who were children in that January of '94 are now young people who have grown up in the resistance, and they have been trained in the rebel dignity lifted up by their elders throughout these 12 years of war. These young people have a political, technical and cultural training that we who began the zapatista movement did not have. This youth is now, more and more, sustaining our troops as well as leadership positions in the organization. And, indeed, all of us have seen the deceits by the Mexican political class and the destruction which their actions have caused in our patria. And we have seen the great injustices and massacres that neoliberal globalization causes throughout the world. But we will speak to you of that later.

And so the EZLN has resisted 12 years of war, of military, political, ideological and economic attacks, of siege, of harassment, of persecution, and they have not vanquished us. We have not sold out nor surrendered, and we have made progress. More compañeros from many places have entered into the struggle so that, instead of making us weaker after so many years, we have become stronger. Of course there are problems which can be resolved by more separation of the political-military from the civil-democratic. But there are things, the most important ones, such as our demands for which we struggle, which have not been fully achieved.

To our way of thinking, and what we see in our heart, we have reached a point where we cannot go any further, and, in addition, it is possible that we could lose everything we have if we remain as we are and do nothing more in order to move forward. The hour has come to take a risk once again and to take a step which is dangerous but which is worthwhile. Because, perhaps united with other social sectors who suffer from the same wants as we do, it will be possible to achieve what we need and what we deserve. A new step forward in the indigenous struggle is only possible if the indigenous join together with workers, campesinos, students, teachers, employees...the workers of the city and the countryside.

III - How We See the World

Now we are going to explain to you how we, the zapatistas, see what is going on in the world. We see that capitalism is the strongest right now. Capitalism is a social system, a way in which a society goes about organizing things and people, and who has and who has not, and who gives orders and who obeys. In capitalism, there are some people who have money, or capital, and factories and stores and fields and many things, and there are others who have nothing but their strength and knowledge in order to work. In capitalism, those who have money and things give the orders, and those who only have their ability to work obey.

Then capitalism means that there a few who have great wealth, but they did not win a prize, or find a treasure, or inherited from a parent. They obtained that wealth, rather, by exploiting the work of the many. So capitalism is based on the exploitation of the workers, which means they exploit the workers and take out all the profits they can. This is done unjustly, because they do not pay the worker what his work is worth. Instead they give him a salary that barely allows him to eat a little and to rest for a bit, and the next day he goes back to work in exploitation, whether in the countryside or in the city.

And capitalism also makes its wealth from plunder, or theft, because they take what they want from others, land, for example, and natural resources. So capitalism is a system where the robbers are free and they are admired and used as examples.

And, in addition to exploiting and plundering, capitalism represses because it imprisons and kills those who rebel against injustice.

Capitalism is most interested in merchandise, because when it is bought or sold, profits are made. And then capitalism turns everything into merchandise, it makes merchandise of people, of nature, of culture, of history, of conscience. According to capitalism, everything must be able to be bought and sold. And it hides everything behind the merchandise, so we don't see the exploitation that exists. And then the merchandise is bought and sold in a market. And the market, in addition to being used for buying and selling, is also used to hide the exploitation of the workers. In the market, for example, we see coffee in its little package or its pretty little jar, but we do not see the campesino who suffered in order to harvest the coffee, and we do not see the coyote who paid him so cheaply for his work, and we do not see the workers in the large company working their hearts out to package the coffee. Or we see an appliance for listening to music like cumbias, rancheras or corridos, or whatever, and we see that it is very good because it has a good sound, but we do not see the worker in the maquiladora who struggled for many hours, putting the cables and the parts of the appliance together, and they barely paid her a pittance of money, and she lives far away from work and spends a lot on the trip, and, in addition, she runs the risk of being kidnapped, raped and killed as happens in Ciudad Juárez in Mexico.

So we see merchandise in the market, but we do not see the exploitation with which it was made. And then capitalism needs many markets...or a very large market, a world market.

And so the capitalism of today is not the same as before, when the rich were content with exploiting the workers in their own countries, but now they are on a path which is called Neoliberal Globalization. This globalization means that they no longer control the workers in one or several countries, but the capitalists are trying to dominate everything all over the world. And the world, or Planet Earth, is also called the "globe", and that is why they say "globalization," or the entire world.

And neoliberalism is the idea that capitalism is free to dominate the entire world, and so tough, you have to resign yourself and conform and not make a fuss, in other words, not rebel. So neoliberalism is like the theory, the plan, of capitalist globalization. And neoliberalism has its economic, political, military and cultural plans. All of those plans have to do with dominating everyone, and they repress or separate anyone who doesn't obey so that his rebellious ideas aren't passed on to others.

Then, in neoliberal globalization, the great capitalists who live in the countries which are powerful, like the United States, want the entire world to be made into a big business where merchandise is produced like a great market. A world market for buying and selling the entire world and for hiding all the exploitation from the world. Then the global capitalists insert themselves everywhere, in all the countries, in order to do their big business, their great exploitation. Then they respect nothing, and they meddle wherever they wish. As if they were conquering other countries. That is why we zapatistas say that neoliberal globalization is a war of conquest of the entire world, a world war, a war being waged by capitalism for global domination. Sometimes that conquest is by armies who invade a country and conquer it by force. But sometimes it is with the economy, in other words, the big capitalists put their money into another country or they lend it money, but on the condition that they obey what they tell them to do. And they also insert their ideas, with the capitalist culture which is the culture of merchandise, of profits, of the market.

Then the one which wages the conquest, capitalism, does as it wants, it destroys and changes what it does not like and eliminates what gets in its way. For example, those who do not produce nor buy nor sell modern merchandise get in their way, or those who rebel against that order. And they despise those who are of no use to them. That is why the indigenous get in the way of neoliberal capitalism, and that is why they despise them and want to eliminate them. And neoliberal capitalism also gets rid of the laws which do not allow them to exploit and to have a lot of profit. They demand that everything can be bought and sold, and, since capitalism has all the money, it buys everything. Capitalism destroys the countries it conquers with neoliberal globalization, but it also wants to adapt everything, to make it over again, but in its own way, a way which benefits capitalism and which doesn't allow anything to get in its way. Then neoliberal globalization, capitalism, destroys what exists in these countries, it destroys their culture, their language, their economic system, their political system, and it also destroys the ways in which those who live in that country relate to each other. So everything that makes a country a country is left destroyed.

Then neoliberal globalization wants to destroy the nations of the world so that only one Nation or country remains, the country of money, of capital. And capitalism wants everything to be as it wants, in its own way, and it doesn't like what is different, and it persecutes it and attacks it, or puts it off in a corner and acts as if it doesn't exist.

Then, in short, the capitalism of global neoliberalism is based on exploitation, plunder, contempt and repression of those who refuse. The same as before, but now globalized, worldwide.

But it is not so easy for neoliberal globalization, because the exploited of each country become discontented, and they will not say well, too bad, instead they rebel. And those who remain and who are in the way resist, and they don't allow themselves to be eliminated. And that is why we see, all over the world, those who are being screwed over making resistances, not putting up with it, in other words, they rebel, and not just in one country but wherever they abound. And so, as there is a neoliberal globalization, there is a globalization of rebellion.

And it is not just the workers of the countryside and of the city who appear in this globalization of rebellion, but others also appear who are much persecuted and despised for the same reason, for not letting themselves be dominated, like women, young people, the indigenous, homosexuals, lesbians, transsexual persons, migrants and many other groups who exist all over the world but who we do not see until they shout ya basta of being despised, and they raise up, and then we see them, we hear them, and we learn from them.

And then we see that all those groups of people are fighting against neoliberalism, against the capitalist globalization plan, and they are struggling for humanity.

And we are astonished when we see the stupidity of the neoliberals who want to destroy all humanity with their wars and exploitations, but it also makes us quite happy to see resistances and rebellions appearing everywhere, such as ours, which is a bit small, but here we are. And we see this all over the world, and now our heart learns that we are not alone.

1V - How We See Our Country Which is Mexico

Now we will talk to you about how we see what is going on in our Mexico. What we see is our country being governed by neoliberals. So, as we already explained, our leaders are destroying our nation, our Mexican Patria. And the work of these bad leaders is not to look after the well-being of the people, instead they are only concerned with the well-being of the capitalists. For example, they make laws like the Free Trade Agreement, which end up leaving many Mexicans destitute, like campesinos and small producers, because they are "gobbled up" by the big agro-industrial companies. As well as workers and small businesspeople, because they cannot compete with the large transnationals who come in without anybody saying anything to them and even thanking them, and they set their low salaries and their high prices. So some of the economic foundations of our Mexico, which were the countryside and industry and national commerce, are being quite destroyed, and just a bit of rubble - which they are certainly going to sell off - remains.

And these are great disgraces for our Patria. Because food is no longer being produced in our countryside, just what the big capitalists sell, and the good lands are being stolen through trickery and with the help of the politicians. What is happening in the countryside is the same as Porfirismo, but, instead of hacendados, now there are a few foreign businesses which have well and truly screwed the campesino. And, where before there were credits and price protections, now there is just charity...and sometimes not even that.

As for the worker in the city, the factories close, and they are left without work, or they open what are called maquiladoras, which are foreign and which pay a pittance for many hours of work. And then the price of the goods the people need doesn't matter, whether they are expensive or cheap, since there is no money. And if someone was working in a small or midsize business, now they are not, because it was closed, and it was bought by a big transnational. And if someone had a small business, it disappeared as well, or they went to work clandestinely for big businesses which exploit them terribly, and which even put boys and girls to work. And if the worker belonged to his union in order to demand his legal rights, then no, now the same union tells him he will have to put up with his salary being lowered or his hours or his benefits being taken away, because, if not, the business will close and move to another country. And then there is the "microchangarro," which is the government's economic program for putting all the city's workers on street corners selling gum or telephone cards. In other words, absolute economic destruction in the cities as well.

And then what happens is that, with the people's economy being totally screwed in the countryside as well as in the city, then many Mexican men and women have to leave their Patria, Mexican lands, and go to seek work in another country, the United States. And they do not treat them well there, instead they exploit them, persecute them and treat them with contempt and even kill them. Under neoliberalism which is being imposed by the bad governments, the economy has not improved. Quite the opposite, the countryside is in great need, and there is no work in the cities. What is happening is that Mexico is being turned into a place where people are working for the wealth of foreigners, mostly rich gringos, a place you are just born into for a little while, and in another little while you die. That is why we say that Mexico is dominated by the United States.

Now, it is not just that. Neoliberalism has also changed the Mexican political class, the politicians, because they made them into something like employees in a store, who have to do everything possible to sell everything and to sell it very cheap. You have already seen that they changed the laws in order to remove Article 27 from the Constitution so that ejidal and communal lands could be sold. That was Salinas de Gortari, and he and his gangs said that it was for the good of the countryside and the campesino, and that was how they would prosper and live better. Has it been like that? The Mexican countryside is worse than ever and the campesinos more screwed than under Porfirio Diaz. And they also say they are going to privatize - sell to foreigners - the companies held by the State to help the well-being of the people. Because the companies don't work well and they need to be modernized, and it would be better to sell them. But, instead of improving, the social rights which were won in the revolution of 1910 now make one sad...and courageous. And they also said that the borders must be opened so all the foreign capital can enter, that way all the Mexican businesses will be fixed, and things will be made better. But now we see that there are not any national businesses, the foreigners gobbled them all up, and the things that are sold are worse than the those that were made in Mexico.

And now the Mexican politicians also want to sell PEMEX, the oil which belongs to all Mexicans, and the only difference is that some say everything should be sold and others that only a part of it should be sold. And they also want to privatize social security, and electricity and water and the forests and everything, until nothing of Mexico is left, and our country will be a wasteland or a place of entertainment for rich people from all over the world, and we Mexican men and women will be their servants, dependent on what they offer, bad housing, without roots, without culture, without even a Patria.

So the neoliberals want to kill Mexico, our Mexican Patria. And the political parties not only do not defend it, they are the first to put themselves at the service of foreigners, especially those from the United States, and they are the ones who are in charge of deceiving us, making us look the other way while everything is sold, and they are left with the money. All the political parties that exist right now, not just some of them. Think about whether anything has been done well, and you will see that no, nothing but theft and scams. And look how all the politicians always have their nice houses and their nice cars and luxuries. And they still want us to thank them and to vote for them again. And it is obvious, as they say, that they are without shame. And they are without it because they do not, in fact, have a Patria, they only have bank accounts.

And we also see that drug trafficking and crime has been increasing a lot. And sometimes we think that criminals are like they show them in the songs or movies, and maybe some are like that, but not the real chiefs. The real chiefs go around very well dressed, they study outside the country, they are elegant, they do not go around in hiding, they eat in good restaurants and they appear in the papers, very pretty and well dressed at their parties. They are, as they say, "good people", and some are even officials, deputies, senators, secretaries of state, prosperous businessmen, police chiefs, generals.

Are we saying that politics serves no purpose? No, what we mean is that THAT politics serves no purpose. And it is useless because it does not take the people into account. It does not listen to them, it does not pay any attention to them, it just approaches them when there are elections. And they do not even want votes anymore, the polls are enough to say who wins. And then just promises about what this one is going to do and what the other one is going to do, then it's bye, I'll see you, but you don't see them again, except when they appear in the news when they've just stolen a lot of money and nothing is going to be done to them because the law - which those same politicians made - protects them.

Because that's another problem, the Constitution is all warped and changed now. It's no longer the one that had the rights and liberties of working people. Now there are the rights and liberties of the neoliberals so they can have their huge profits. And the judges exist to serve those neoliberals, because they always rule in favor of them, and those who are not rich get injustice, jails and cemeteries.

Well, even with all this mess the neoliberals are making, there are Mexican men and women who are organizing and making a resistance struggle.

And so we found out that there are indigenous, that their lands are far away from us here in Chiapas, and they are making their autonomy and defending their culture and caring for their land, forests and water.

And there are workers in the countryside, campesinos, who are organizing and holding their marches and mobilizations in order to demand credits and aid for the countryside.

And there are workers in the city who do not let their rights be taken away or their jobs privatized. They protest and demonstrate so the little they have isn't taken away from them and so they don't take away from the country what is, in fact, its own, like electricity, oil, social security, education.

And there are students who don't let education be privatized and who are fighting for it to be free and popular and scientific, so they don't charge, so everyone can learn, and so they don't teach stupid things in schools.

And there are women who do not let themselves be treated as an ornament or be humiliated and despised just for being women, but who are organizing and fighting for the respect they deserve as the women they are.

And there are young people who don't accept their stultifying them with drugs or persecuting them for their way of being, but who make themselves aware with their music and their culture, their rebellion.

And there are homosexuals, lesbians, transsexuals and many ways who do not put up with being ridiculed, despised, mistreated and even killed for having another way which is different, with being treated like they are abnormal or criminals, but who make their own organizations in order to defend their right to be different.

And there are priests and nuns and those they call laypeople who are not with the rich and who are not resigned, but who are organizing to accompany the struggles of the people.

And there are those who are called social activists, who are men and women who have been fighting all their lives for exploited people, and they are the same ones who participated in the great strikes and workers' actions, in the great citizens' mobilizations, in the great campesino movements, and who suffer great repression, and who, even though some are old now, continue on without surrendering, and they go everywhere, looking for the struggle, seeking justice, and making leftist organizations, non-governmental organizations, human rights organizations, organizations in defense of political prisoners and for the disappeared, leftist publications, organizations of teachers or students, social struggle, and even political-military organizations, and they are just not quiet and they know a lot because they have seen a lot and lived and struggled.

And so we see in general that in our country, which is called Mexico, there are many people who do not put up with things, who do not surrender, who do not sell out. Who are dignified. And that makes us very pleased and happy, because with all those people it's not going to be so easy for the neoliberals to win, and perhaps it will be possible to save our Patria from the great thefts and destruction they are doing. And we think that perhaps our "we" will include all those rebellions...

V - What We Want To Do

We are now going to tell you what we want to do in the world and in Mexico, because we cannot watch everything that is happening on our planet and just remain quiet, as if it were only we were where we are.

What we want in the world is to tell all of those who are resisting and fighting in their own ways and in their own countries, that you are not alone, that we, the zapatistas, even though we are very small, are supporting you, and we are going to look at how to help you in your struggles and to speak to you in order to learn, because what we have, in fact, learned is to learn.

And we want to tell the Latin American peoples that we are proud to be a part of you, even if it is a small part. We remember quite well how the continent was also illuminated some years ago, and a light was called Che Guevara, as it had previously been called Bolivar, because sometimes the people take up a name in order to say they are taking up a flag.

And we want to tell the people of Cuba, who have now been on their path of resistance for many years, that you are not alone, and we do not agree with the blockade they are imposing, and we are going to see how to send you something, even if it is maize, for your resistance. And we want to tell the North American people that we know that the bad governments which you have and which spread harm throughout the world is one thing - and those North Americans who struggle in their country, and who are in solidarity with the struggles of other countries, are a very different thing. And we want to tell the Mapuche brothers and sisters in Chile that we are watching and learning from your struggles. And to the Venezuelans, we see how well you are defending your sovereignty, your nation's right to decide where it is going. And to the indigenous brothers and sisters of Ecuador and Bolivia, we say you are giving a good lesson in history to all of Latin America, because now you are indeed putting a halt to neoliberal globalization. And to the piqueteros and to the young people of Argentina, we want to tell you that, that we love you. And to those in Uruguay who want a better country, we admire you. And to those who are sin tierra in Brazil, that we respect you. And to all the young people of Latin America, that what you are doing is good, and you give us great hope.

And we want to tell the brothers and sisters of Social Europe, that which is dignified and rebel, that you are not alone. That your great movements against the neoliberal wars bring us joy. That we are attentively watching your forms of organization and your methods of struggle so that we can perhaps learn something. That we are considering how we can help you in your struggles, and we are not going to send euro because then they will be devalued because of the European Union mess. But perhaps we will send you crafts and coffee so you can market them and help you some in the tasks of your struggle. And perhaps we might also send you some pozol, which gives much strength in the resistance, but who knows if we will send it to you, because pozol is more our way, and what if it were to hurt your bellies and weaken your struggles and the neoliberals defeat you.

And we want to tell the brothers and sisters of Africa, Asia and Oceania that we know that you are fighting also, and we want to learn more of your ideas and practices.

And we want to tell the world that we want to make you large, so large that all those worlds will fit, those worlds which are resisting because they want to destroy the neoliberals and because they simply cannot stop fighting for humanity.

Now then, what we want to do in Mexico is to make an agreement with persons and organizations just of the left, because we believe that it is in the political left where the idea of resisting neoliberal globalization is, and of making a country where there will be justice, democracy and liberty for everyone. Not as it is right now, where there is justice only for the rich, there is liberty only for their big businesses, and there is democracy only for painting walls with election propaganda. And because we believe that it is only from the left that a plan of struggle can emerge, so that our Patria, which is Mexico, does not die.

And, then, what we think is that, with these persons and organizations of the left, we will make a plan for going to all those parts of Mexico where there are humble and simple people like ourselves.

And we are not going to tell them what they should do or give them orders.

Nor are we going to ask them to vote for a candidate, since we already know that the ones who exist are neoliberals.

Nor are we going to tell them to be like us, nor to rise up in arms.

What we are going to do is to ask them what their lives are like, their struggle, their thoughts about our country and what we should do so they do not defeat us.

What we are going to do is to take heed of the thoughts of the simple and humble people, and perhaps we will find there the same love which we feel for our Patria.

And perhaps we will find agreement between those of us who are simple and humble and, together, we will organize all over the country and reach agreement in our struggles, which are alone right now, separated from each other, and we will find something like a program that has what we all want, and a plan for how we are going to achieve the realization of that program, which is called the "national program of struggle."

And, with the agreement of the majority of those people whom we are going to listen to, we will then engage in a struggle with everyone, with indigenous, workers, campesinos, students, teachers, employees, women, children, old ones, men, and with all of those of good heart and who want to struggle so that our Patria called Mexico does not end up being destroyed and sold, and which still exists between the Rio Grande and the Rio Suchiate and which has the Pacific Ocean on one side and the Atlantic on the other.

VI - How We Are Going To Do It

And so this is our simple word that goes out to the humble and simple people of Mexico and of the world, and we are calling our word of today:

Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona

And we are here to say, with our simple word, that...

The EZLN maintains its commitment to an offensive ceasefire, and it will not make any attack against government forces or any offensive military movements.

The EZLN still maintains its commitment to insisting on the path of political struggle through this peaceful initiative which we are now undertaking. The EZLN continues, therefore, in its resolve to not establish any kind of secret relations with either national political-military organizations or those from other countries.

The EZLN reaffirms its commitment to defend, support and obey the zapatista indigenous communities of which it is composed, and which are its supreme command, and - without interfering in their internal democratic processes - will, to the best of its abilities, contribute to the strengthening of their autonomy, good government and improvement in their living conditions. In other words, what we are going to do in Mexico and in the world, we are going to do without arms, with a civil and peaceful movement, and without neglecting nor ceasing to support our communities.

Therefore...

In the World...

1 - We will forge new relationships of mutual respect and support with persons and organizations who are resisting and struggling against neoliberalism and for humanity.

2 - As far as we are able, we will send material aid such as food and handicrafts for those brothers and sisters who are struggling all over the world.

In order to begin, we are going to ask the Good Government Junta of La Realidad to loan their truck, which is called "Chompiras," and which appears to hold 8 tons, and we are going to fill it with maize and perhaps two 200 liter cans with oil or petrol, as they prefer, and we are going to deliver it to the Cuban Embassy in Mexico for them to send to the Cuban people as aid from the zapatistas for their resistance against the North American blockade. Or perhaps there might be a place closer to here where it could be delivered, because it's always such a long distance to Mexico City, and what if "Chompiras" were to break down and we'd end up in bad shape. And that will happen when the harvest comes in, which is turning green right now in the fields, and if they don't attack us, because if we were to send it during these next few months, it would be nothing but corncobs, and they don't turn out well even in tamales, better in November or December, it depends.

And we are also going to make an agreement with the women's crafts cooperatives in order to send a good number of bordados, embroidered pieces, to the Europes which are perhaps not yet Union, and perhaps we'll also send some organic coffee from the zapatista cooperatives, so that they can sell it and get a little money for their struggle. And, if it isn't sold, then they can always have a little cup of coffee and talk about the anti-neoliberal struggle, and if it's a bit cold then they can cover themselves up with the zapatista bordados, which do indeed resist quite well being laundered by hand and by rocks, and, besides, they don't run in the wash.

And we are also going to send the indigenous brothers and sisters of Bolivia and Ecuador some non-transgenic maize, and we just don't know where to send them so they arrive complete, but we are indeed willing to give this little bit of aid.

3 - And to all of those who are resisting throughout the world, we say there must be other intercontinental encuentros held, even if just one other. Perhaps December of this year or next January, we'll have to think about it. We don't want to say just when, because this is about our agreeing equally on everything, on where, on when, on how, on who. But not with a stage where just a few speak and all the rest listen, but without a stage, just level and everyone speaking, but orderly, otherwise it will just be a hubbub and the words won't be understood, and with good organization everyone will hear and jot down in their notebooks the words of resistance from others, so then everyone can go and talk with their compañeros and compañeras in their worlds. And we think it might be in a place that has a very large jail, because what if they were to repress us and incarcerate us, and so that way we wouldn't be all piled up, prisoners, yes, but well organized, and there in the jail we could continue the intercontinental encuentros for humanity and against neoliberalism. Later on we'll tell you what we shall do in order to reach agreement as to how we're going to come to agreement. Now that is how we're thinking of doing what we want to do in the world. Now follows...

In Mexico...

1 - We are going to continue fighting for the Indian peoples of Mexico, but now not just for them and not with only them, but for all the exploited and dispossessed of Mexico, with all of them and all over the country. And when we say all the exploited of Mexico, we are also talking about the brothers and sisters who have had to go to the United States in search of work in order to survive.

2 - We are going to go to listen to, and talk directly with, without intermediaries or mediation, the simple and humble of the Mexican people, and, according to what we hear and learn, we are going to go about building, along with those people who, like us, are humble and simple, a national program of struggle, but a program which will be clearly of the left, or anti-capitalist, or anti-neoliberal, or for justice, democracy and liberty for the Mexican people.

3 - We are going to try to build, or rebuild, another way of doing politics, one which once again has the spirit of serving others, without material interests, with sacrifice, with dedication, with honesty, which keeps its word, whose only payment is the satisfaction of duty performed, or like the militants of the left did before, when they were not stopped by blows, jail or death, let alone by dollar bills.

4 - We are also going to go about raising a struggle in order to demand that we make a new Constitution, new laws which take into account the demands of the Mexican people, which are: housing, land, work, food, health, education, information, culture, independence, democracy, justice, liberty and peace. A new Constitution which recognizes the rights and liberties of the people, and which defends the weak in the face of the powerful.

TO THESE ENDS...

The EZLN will send a delegation of its leadership in order to do this work throughout the national territory and for an indefinite period of time. This zapatista delegation, along with those organizations and persons of the left who join in this Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona, will go to those places where they are expressly invited.

We are also letting you know that the EZLN will establish a policy of alliances with non-electoral organizations and movements which define themselves, in theory and practice, as being of the left, in accordance with the following conditions:

Not to make agreements from above to be imposed below, but to make accords to go together to listen and to organize outrage. Not to raise movements which are later negotiated behind the backs of those who made them, but to always take into account the opinions of those participating. Not to seek gifts, positions, advantages, public positions, from the Power or those who aspire to it, but to go beyond the election calendar. Not to try to resolve from above the problems of our Nation, but to build FROM BELOW AND FOR BELOW an alternative to neoliberal destruction, an alternative of the left for Mexico.

Yes to reciprocal respect for the autonomy and independence of organizations, for their methods of struggle, for their ways of organizing, for their internal decision making processes, for their legitimate representations. And yes to a clear commitment for joint and coordinated defense of national sovereignty, with intransigent opposition to privatization attempts of electricity, oil, water and natural resources.

In other words, we are inviting the unregistered political and social organizations of the left, and those persons who lay claim to the left and who do not belong to registered political parties, to meet with us, at the time, place and manner in which we shall propose at the proper time, to organize a national campaign, visiting all possible corners of our Patria, in order to listen to and organize the word of our people. It is like a campaign, then, but very otherly, because it is not electoral.

Brothers and sisters:

This is our word which we declare:

In the world, we are going to join together more with the resistance struggles against neoliberalism and for humanity.

And we are going to support, even if it's but little, those struggles.

And we are going to exchange, with mutual respect, experiences, histories, ideas, dreams.

In Mexico, we are going to travel all over the country, through the ruins left by the neoliberal wars and through those resistances which, entrenched, are flourishing in those ruins.

We are going to seek, and to find, those who love these lands and these skies even as much as we do.

We are going to seek, from La Realidad to Tijuana, those who want to organize, struggle and build what may perhaps be the last hope this Nation - which has been going on at least since the time when an eagle alighted on a nopal in order to devour a snake - has of not dying.

We are going for democracy, liberty and justice for those of us who have been denied it.

We are going with another politics, for a program of the left and for a new Constitution.

We are inviting all indigenous, workers, campesinos, teachers, students, housewives, neighbors, small businesspersons, small shop owners, micro-businesspersons, pensioners, handicapped persons, religious men and women, scientists, artists, intellectuals, young persons, women, old persons, homosexuals and lesbians, boys and girls - to participate, whether individually or collectively, directly with the zapatistas in this NATIONAL CAMPAIGN for building another way of doing politics, for a program of national struggle of the left, and for a new Constitution.

And so this is our word as to what we are going to do and how we are going to do it. You will see whether you want to join.

And we are telling those men and women who are of good heart and intent, who are in agreement with this word we are bringing out, and who are not afraid, or who are afraid but who control it, to then state publicly whether they are in agreement with this idea we are presenting, and in that way we will see once and for all who and how and where and when this new step in the struggle is to be made.

While you are thinking about it, we say to you that today, in the sixth month of the year 2005, the men, women, children and old ones of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation have now decided, and we have now subscribed to, this Sixth Declaration of the Selva Lacandona, and those who know how to sign, signed, and those who did not left their mark, but there are fewer now who do not know how, because education has advanced here in this territory in rebellion for humanity and against neoliberalism, that is in zapatista skies and land.

And this was our simple word sent out to the noble hearts of those simple and humble people who resist and rebel against injustices all over the world.

Democracy! Liberty! Justice!

>From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast.

Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee - General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.

Mexico, in the sixth month, or June, of the year 2005.

False Narco-Smear Against the Zapatistas: Al Giordano

2005-06-22T17:10:00.000-07:00

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/6/22/124158/124
Mexico: The False Narco-Smear Against the Zapatistas

By Al Giordano, Posted on Wed Jun 22nd, 2005 at 12:41:58 PM EST
The rapid-fire sequence of communiqués in recent days "from somewhere in the mountains of the Mexican southeast" by Subcomandante Marcos in the name of the Zapatista Army for National Liberation (EZLN, in its Spanish initials), especially the Monday communiqué that announced that the indigenous rebels of Chiapas had called a "Red Alert," has placed various actors on all sides on tenterhooks.

My emailbox runneth over with pleas for "more information" or to explain "what is really happening" and I realize how cynical news consumers have become. Society is not used to newsmakers who do what they say, and that, alone, makes the Zapatistas difficult for many to understand. My response is: Read the communiques! They're self-explanatory. I'll place links to English translations of the recent Zapatista comms below the jump.

On the other hand, governments, unlike the Zapatistas, never do what they say and rarely say what they do. The Zapatista "Red Alert" comes on the heels of a massive redeployment of Mexican military troops surrounding the 38 Autonomous Municipalities and 1,111 or so villages that openly declare themselves to be in rebellion and self-government with the Zapatistas.
The troop movements in Chiapas, in fact, are related to President Vicente Fox's new "Mexico Seguro" ("Safe Mexico") simulation of an anti-drug campaign...

Perhaps government military commanders in Chiapas, fearing redeployment to someplace truly dangerous for them like Nuevo Laredo (where a military convoy was ambushed and shot at by local police earlier this month) are just trying to "look busy" to justify their continued vacation way down south in scenic Chiapas. And that's why the Army made a (demonstrably false) claim that it found some marijuana plants last week in Zapatista territory. In any case, whatever the motives, the behavior of the Armed Forces in Chiapas in recent days has backfired and led to a crisis, now, in Mexico's southernmost border state, too.

The Zapatista Communiqués Speak for Themselves

Here are links to the Zapatista communiqués of the past week, in more or less chronological order:

"The Impossible Geometry of Power in Mexico"
...this is so far available only in Spanish. Dated "in the sixth month of 2005," it is a scathing (and poetic) indictment, by name, of each of Mexico's three major political parties (PRI, PAN, and PRD) and every one of their national leaders, from Vicente Fox to Roberto Madrazo to Andrés Manuel López Obrador and Cuahtémoc Cárdenas. The communiqué openly calls on Civil Society to pay less attention to the simulated democracy of "power from above" as embodied in the upcoming 2006 presidential campaign, and more to the legitimate grievances of the movements from below...

Then, dated June 19, came the communiqué that placed everyone at the edges of their seats. This one, translated by Irlandesa, is available in English..

"General Red Alert"
...in which the Zapatistas announce the immediate closure of the Good Government Councils and other self-governing entities in the Autonomous Municipalities:
That the councils and other officials will now work in a "clandestine and nomadic manner;"
That the local health clinics (set up by the Zapatistas without government money) have been distanced "from any of our future actions, and we are demanding that they be treated as civilians and with respect for their life, liberty and goods by government forces;"
That all Zapatista forces (civilian and insurgent) are being "called up" (the communiqué didn't specify what they are being called up to);

That Radio Insurgente and the Zapatista Information Center in San Cristóbal de Las Casas (the rebels' main communications routes to the rest of the country and world) are being closed for now;

"That, simultaneous with the publication of this communiqué, national and international civil societies who are working in peace camps and in community projects are being urged to leave rebel territory. Or, if they decide freely of their own volition, they remain on their own and at their own risk, gathered in the caracoles. In the case of minors, their departure is obligatory;"

"That the EZLN releases from responsibility for any of our future actions all persons and civil, political, cultural, citizens and non-governmental organizations, solidarity committees and support groups who have been close to us since 1994. We thank all of those who have, sincerely and honestly, throughout these almost 12 years, supported the civil and peaceful struggle of the zapatista indigenous for the constitutional recognition of indigenous rights and culture." And it ends with the traditional signature:

Democracy!Liberty!Justice!

From the Mountains of the Mexican Southeast.By the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee – General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.
Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos

The following day, dated June 20, came a new communiqué, also available in English:

"The Reasons for the Red Alert"

...it briefly explains that the centers of Good Government throughout Chiapas are closed because all Zapatistas have been called to a consultation about the next steps to take.
And simultaneously, the EZLN released another brief communiqué announcing The Restructured Politico-Military Organization of the EZLN

Yes, there are gaps in the details provided. Combined with the removal of Radio Insurgente and the Zapatista Information Center, it seems pretty clear that those gaps are intentional: It's classic Marcos, "presence through absence." The communiqués hint at a possible bold new action to come (if, as Marcos says, the grassroots bases of the organization endorse it). But a reader can be certain that everything they say they are doing, they are doing. Commentators like to label the Zapatistas with words like "enigmatic" or "mysterious" but they're really quite straightforward. They tell us what they want to tell us, and they wait until later to fill in the blanks. It's part of what is now a 12-year educational process. And if there is anything I have learned by walking close to this movement for most of those years, it's that it is futile to speculate too much about what comes next. When they're ready, they'll tell the world.

However, the actions of the non-enigmatic institutional forces, the ones that never say what they will do nor do what they will say, do beg analysis. I'm speaking, of course, of the Mexican government, its sponsors in Washington and on Wall Street, and the Armed Forces with 70,000 troops in Chiapas. (Think about it: there was a huge hullabaloo when Fox sent 1,500 troops to Nuevo Laredo and the populous northern border this month: but he keeps a force 45 times larger than that surrounding the most impoverished peasant farmers in the country, in Chiapas, who don't count with a fraction of the armaments that the Tex-Mex narcos have up north.)

According to Hermann Bellinghausen, probably the most astute reporter on all things Zapatista, in today's La Jornada, the context of the Zapatista "Red Alert" is provided by recent and heavy military troop movements all around them, and demonstrably untrue claims by the Secretary of Defense that marijuana fields were supposedly found in Zapatista territory.
As Bellinghausen reveals, the Defense Secretary is very confused when it comes to the geography of Chiapas:

The recent Zapatista announcements were made in the context of out-of-the-ordinary movements, unexplained to the public, by the Federal Army, such as the repositioning of troops in Chenalhó and last weekend's military entrance from the Rancho Nuevo base into the Lacandon jungle with "special" convoys (a word that was affixed in front and back of the trucks on those convoys) bringing arms and hundreds of soldiers in large trucks and all-terrain vehicles...

In its recent press statements about anti-drug operations, the National Secretary of Defense (SEDENA, in its Spanish initials) listed the names of three official municipalities as being inside rebel indigenous territory but that, according to the Army's own data, are not part of the "conflict zone" or under "zapatista influence."

In fact, the towns of Tapilula, Pueblo Nuevo Solistahuacán and Rayón (the three places where marijuana plants were found) are outside of the the wide fence tended by the Federal Army around the indigenous region of Chiapas since 1995. There aren't even military bases there, just Judicial and local police encampments and bases.

Additionally, these municipalities aren't even in the highlands region (Los Altos) as the SEDENA press releace claimed yesterday afternoon, hours after the EZLN declared itself in Red Alert. The press release was the first reaction by the Armed Forces to the rebel announcement, although the military movements were carried out, according to the official version, on June 15 and 16...

The geographic inexactitude was so evident that the state government of Chiapas had to, yesterday, correct the military error. No, it said, these places are not located in Los Altos.
What is worrisome is that there is little chance that the Secretary of Defense made an honest mistake. Those towns are so far outside of the major Zapatista zones of influence that there is no wiggle room for error. The marijuana plantations were found, rather, near the border of the state of Tabasco, at the base of the femous El Chichonal volcano that erupted in the early 1980s covering much of the region with green dust (and, as hemp farmers know, volcanic dust makes for fertile soil for their particular favorite crop.)

Bellinghausen also recounted various other times during the 12 year history of the Zapatistas that previous adminstrations were caught red-handed planting drugs near Zapatista communities, or using video special effects to place the burning of some drug crops in locations closer to Zapatista towns. (In Narco News' ten part series on the Drug War in Chiapas, there are multiple other examples of this kind of narco-simulation as well.)

The Cocopa National Peace Commision (a governmental board set up to mediate 1996 peace talks) doesn't buy the narco-smear either, according to today's La Jornada:
Senators and Congressmen agreed that it was urgent to officially clarify the supposed seizure of marijuana in the conflict zone, since the details offered by the Defense Secretary are very unclear.

"For the COCOPA, it is definitely impossible that there is any connection between the EZLN and
narco-trafficking. We also know that the marijuana seizure that SEDENA alluded to was not strictly inside the area of influence of the Zapatistas."

The Fox government seems to be speaking with forked tongue on the matter, with different
high officials contradicting each other, according to today's El Financiero:

Presidential press secretary Ruben Aguilar said that there is no proof of any connection between the EZLN and narco-trafficking. But Secretary of State Luis Ernesto Derbez called on Subcomandante Marcos to "explain his relationship" with drug trafficking.

The daily El Universal quotes Derbez - the recently disgraced and defeated candidate for the chairmanship of the Organization of American States - as saying:
"I think it is important that this man gives us an explanation for why there is drug cultivation in the territories that he has taken over.

Derbez is one of the high Mexican officials most controlled by Washington. Indeed, that's why the Organization of American States rejected him (see "Democracy Triple Play: Mexico to Ecuador to the OAS," Narco News, May 1, 2005, for more details).

The long confluence between repression of the indigenous in Chiapas and a false "war on drugs" is one of those pesky matters that few players want to talk about openly.

But oh how the mighty have fallen if we trace Vicente Fox's March 2001 declaration in favor of the legalization of drugs (precisely at the moment when the Zapatisas were pulling up stakes from Mexico City and turning their backs on the Fox government for its broken promises... and now, this week, the Zapatistas have turned around and faced toward his government for the first time since that moment four years ago...) to this month's remanifestation of Fox as boneheaded gringo-style drug warrior from Texas to Tapachula, it's clear that the US-imposed drug war has something to do - we don't yet know to what extent - with the "Red Alert" in Chiapas.

Be on guard, kind readers: The drug war pretext is the flavor of the month in the halls of Mexican power. The Fox administration, entering its final year, unable to solve any of the problems he said he would resolve "in fifteen minutes," is increasingly pulling out the narco-brush to distract from all other grievances of a public that has had enough.

And what does a failed government do when the illusion of control is crumbling all around it? In the 21st century, it plays the narco card.
Just yesterday, for example, Fox's press secretary Ruben Aguilar made a bizarre and unnecessary smear upon members of Civil Society in the northern border city of Nuevo Laredo, who have protested against the militarization of their city through the "Mexico Seguro" operation. Aguilar claimed:

"There are indications that some citizens who have demonstrated against the operation, particularly in Tamaulipas, in Nuevo Laredo, have been backed, including paid and financed, by organized criminal gangs."

It's a potentially dangerous time when officials are so desperate to silence speech that they paint it as criminal. That's why Mexico's secretaries of Defense and State are running around like clowns trying to narcotize the Zapatistas, who, as we've reported here many times, are one of the only political forces in Mexico who, it can be definitively confirmed, are not mixed up with the narco. The Zapatistas strictly prohibit all use, cultivation or trafficking of all drugs, including alcohol, in their communities.

The drug-free Zapatistas, though, stand at stark contrast with the government, which, now finds itself in another blossoming narco-scandal along the Caribbean coast, where Mexican narco-traffickers worked hand in hand with the Fox and Bush administrations this spring to give international terrorist Luis Posada Carriles safe passage up to Gringolandia.

Pot, Kettle, Narco. The accusers are the narcos here. And their "Mexico Seguro" simulation has now backfired on both borders, North and South, of the United States of Mexico

Reuters on the Red Alert

2005-06-22T17:08:00.000-07:00

http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/mexico/3137.html
ReutersJune 21, 2005 Additional reporting by Lorraine Orlandi

SAN CRISTOBAL DE LAS CASAS, Mexico, June 20 (Reuters) - Mexico's Zapatista rebel group, which emerged in 1994 to fight for Indian rights but has been quiet in recent years, put its forces on alert but it was unclear what prompted the action.

The Zapatistas, known by the Spanish-language acronym EZLN, said in a statement on Monday they were grouping their fighters, closing down their radio station and pulling out of villages they control.

They did not give a reason for the moves in the southern state of Chiapas but the Defense Ministry said in a statement it had sent troops into rebel-held territory last week and destroyed 44 marijuana plantations there.

The last time the group declared a similar "red alert" was in 1997 after paramilitary forces killed 45 people in the village of Acteal.

"All elements of the EZLN that were carrying out social work in Zapatista communities have been called into the ranks and our regular troops have been brought into barracks," the Zapatistas said in a statement.

Human rights activists in Chiapas said the alert appeared to be in response to a move by the Mexican army. "Something like this could only be caused by an important military mobilization. I think it has to do with the army," said rights worker Ernesto Ledesma of the CAPISE Indian rights center.

But Mexico's government denied any such turmoil through its peace commissioner for Chiapas, Luis H. Alvarez.

"From the information gathered by Commissioner Luis H. Alvarez in person during recent weeks, and validated by state and federal officials, it can be affirmed categorically that the border zone of Los Altos and the Chiapas jungle are in a state of full normalcy," his office said in a short statement.

Alvarez has sought to bring the Zapatista leadership to the negotiating table, but peace talks have remained in limbo since 1996. Los Altos was the site of the army's drug raid.
The Chiapas state government said federal troops had recently pulled out of the area. "Some military bases have been withdrawn. Only two days ago one pulled out so we don't know what is happening," said Nolberto Chame, spokesman for the Chiapas state government. "

The Defense Ministry in Mexico City said in a statement that almost 200 troops from infantry and armored units joined federal police in destroying marijuana plantations in three rebel-held zones.

The Zapatistas' statement, signed by rebel leader Subcomandante Marcos, said political officers who worked in Zapatista-run local administrations, known as "good-government councils," were going into hiding.

"Members of various good-government councils and autonomous authorities are being evacuated to protect them," the statement said. "From now on, and for an undefined period of time, they will carry out their work clandestinely."

The pipe-smoking Marcos, who became an anti-globalization icon hidden behind a ski mask, issued a weekend statement attacking the left-wing front-runner for presidential elections next year, Mexico City Mayor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who he accused of betraying left-wing principles.

In Monday's statement, Marcos advised rights and aid workers in Chiapas, many of them foreign, to leave Zapatista-held territory "or if they stay of their own free will it is at their own risk."

The Zapatistas began a rebellion against the government on New Year's Day 1994 to demand Indian rights but there has been little violence in recent years. They are believed to have several thousand people under arms.

The Zapatistas took towns in Chiapas like San Cristobal de las Casas at the start of the uprising, in which more than 100 people were killed before a cease-fire 10 days later.
The rebels suffered a serious setback in 2001 when Congress watered down an Indian-rights law they had fought for.

Marcos last year launched a career as a crime writer. A book he co-wrote, "Uncomfortable Deaths" was published in a leftist newspaper.

Zapatistas Declare Red Alert

2005-06-22T17:04:00.000-07:00

Originally published in Spanish by the CCRI-CG the EZLN Communiqué from the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee –

General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.

Mexico. June 19, 2005

To the People of Mexico: To the Peoples of the World: Brothers and Sisters:

As of today, the Zapatista Army of National Liberation has declared, throughout all rebel territory, a GENERAL RED ALERT Based on this, we are informing you: First - That at this time the closure is being carried out of the Caracoles and the Good Government Offices which are located in the zapatista communities of Oventik, La Realidad, Morelia and Roberto Barrios, as well as all the headquarters of the authorities of the different Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities.

Second - That also being carried out is the evacuation of the members of the different Good Government Juntas and the autonomous authorities, in order to place them in shelter. Now, and for an indefinite time period, they will be carrying out their work in a clandestine and nomadic manner. Both the projects as well as the autonomous government will continue functioning, although under different circumstances than they have been up until now.

Third - That basic community health services will continue functioning in the different Caracoles. Civilians will be in charge of these services, and the CCRI-CG of the EZLN is distancing them from any of our future actions, and we are demanding that they be treated as civilians and with respect for their life, liberty and goods by government forces.

Fourth - That there has been a call-up of all members of our EZLN who have been engaged in social work in the zapatista communities and those of our regular troops who have been in their barracks. In a similar fashion, all broadcasts by Radio Insurgente, "The Voice of Those Without Voice", in FM and in short wave, have been suspended for an indefinite period of time.

Fifth - That, simultaneous with the publication of this communiqué, national and international civil societies who are working in peace camps and in community projects are being urged to leave rebel territory. Or, if they decide freely of their own volition, they remain on their own and at their own risk, gathered in the caracoles. In the case of minors, their departure is obligatory.

Sixth - That the EZLN announces the closing of the Zapatista Information Centre (CIZ), not without first thanking the civil societies who have participated in it, from the time of its creation until today. The CCRI-CG of the EZLN formally releases these persons from any responsibility for the future actions of the EZLN. Seventh - That the EZLN releases from responsibility for any of our future actions all persons and civil, political, cultural, citizens and non-governmental organizations, solidarity committees and support groups who have been close to us since 1994.

We thank all of those who have, sincerely and honestly, throughout these almost 12 years, supported the civil and peaceful struggle of the zapatista indigenous for the constitutional recognition of indigenous rights and culture.

Democracy! Liberty! Justice! From the Mountains of the Mexican Southeast. By the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee – General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.

Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos Mexico, in the sixth month of the year 2005.

Massive Protest Forces end to Prosecution of Mexico City's Mayor

2005-05-25T23:51:00.000-07:00

Massive Protest Forces end to Prosecution of Mexico City's Mayor
Rafael AzulWSWSMay 3, 2005

Mexico's President Vicente Fox announced last Thursday that the "storm clouds" had cleared in the political crisis that has gripped the country since the government stripped Mexico City's Mayor Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador of his immunity from prosecution. The government has backed away from the political maneuver, which had seemed almost certain to preclude Lopez Obrador's candidacy in the 2006 presidential election."The path is now clear," Fox told a group of business executives. "We have gotten rid of the storm clouds, we have gotten rid of uncertainty, and we are ensuring that the electoral process of 2006 will be one in complete accordance with the law."

The night before, the country's attorney general in charge of Lopez Obrador's prosecution had resigned, and Fox had called for a negotiated agreement that would allow the Mexico City mayor to run for president in July of next year.

The "uncertainty" that Fox referred to was both the threat of political upheavals in Mexico itself and the growing nervousness on the international markets that the confrontation would generate a protracted period of economic and social instability. Fox told the assembled businessmen that he had decided to lift the threat against Lopez Obrador in large part to restore investor confidence.

Yet there is no doubt that the underlying concern was that popular anger over the government's actions would prove uncontrollable. On Sunday April 24, 1.2 million Mexican citizens had mobilized in a massive "March of Silence" to repudiate the government's attempt to prosecute the Mexico City mayor. The demonstrators walked the 6 kilometers (3.5 miles) between the Archeological Museum and the historic Zocalo Square, the city's political center.

Workers, peasants, students and middle class people from as far away as Oaxaca in southern Mexico participated in what was the largest political protest ever in Mexico City. The turnout exceeded by far the predictions of up to 300,000 made by its organizers in Lopez Obrador's Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD). In attendance were former supporters of President Vicente Fox and of his National Action Party (PAN) and of the Revolutionary Institutionalist Party (PRI) as well as trade union contingents, such as nuclear power workers, petroleum workers, electricians, and government employees.

The PRI, created in the period following the Mexican Revolution (1910-1917), ruled Mexico continuously for 70 years. It was defeated in the 2000 elections by Fox and the PAN.
The march was meant to be silent; organizers distributed 200,000 face masks, symbolic of the protest. This did not prevent people from chanting in support of Lopez Obrador and against President Fox. Among the slogans inscribed on banners were: "They did it in Ecuador, why not in Mexico," a reference to the popular demonstrations that forced the removal of Ecuadorian President Lucio Gutierrez last month; "Defend the right of suffrage;" and "Defend Democracy." Other signs called for a massive vote against the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and the PAN in next year's elections.

The decision by the Mexican House of Deputies to strip Lopez Obrador of his immunity from criminal prosecution was widely seen as a cynical ploy to prevent the Mexico City mayor-who places first in the presidential polls-from running for president. The alleged offense involved a petty dispute over land that the city government had expropriated in order to build a public road.

While Lopez Obrador's political opponents claimed he had abused his authority and defied a court order in taking the land, for Mexicans who have seen immense corruption by other politicians go unpunished, the case was clearly a pretext.The action sparked protests across the country, with demonstrators dogging President Fox wherever he went, including Guadalajara, Mexico's third largest city, generally considered a PAN stronghold. Polls indicate that 65 percent of the public disapproved of Fox's handling of the matter.

The Fox administration vacillated in the days following the March of Silence, but finally caved in. On Monday, April 25, Fox's press secretary Ruben Aguilar denounced Lopez for disregarding the House of Deputies' decision and going back to work as Mexico City mayor. "I will simply say that we consider this a provocation and a violation of the law," declared Aguilar. Aguilar downplayed the March of Silence and insisted that it would not affect Lopez Obrador's indictment. Yet he indicated thatthe government was open to a compromise solution, based on negotiations between government authorities and the mayor.In answer to a reporter's question, Aguilar categorically denied that the government was pressing for the resignation of the nation's Attorney General, Rafael Macedo, for supposed procedural errors in preparing an indictment against Lopez Obrador.

Toward the end of the week, Emilio Chuayfett, of the PRI, who led the impeachment effort in the House of Deputies, advised legislators that the vote by the lower house did not include removing Lopez from office. This interpretation was in marked contrast to what was actually said during the debate on April 7, when PRI members insisted that Lopez had been removed from office. While defending the vote as "impeccable," Chuayfett called for reversing that decision.

On the day before the march, former PRI President Humberto Roque warned of divisions within the military on the Lopez Obrador crisis. In an interview with the Mexican daily La Jornada, he denounced attempts by Fox to use the army to interfere with the protests, comparing it to what President Diaz Ordaz had done in 1968, when soldiers were called out to massacre students in Tlatelolco Square.

The Secretary of National Defense Gerardo Vega vehemently denied Roque's charge the following day. According to Vega, Fox ordered the military to stay out of the streets. Less than one year ago, on June 2004, retired officers within the School of Cadets let it be known that they were ready to intervene on Fox's behalf, and called for a him to apply a heavy hand, if necessary.

Clearly the depth of popular support for Lopez and revulsion over the political maneuvers to deprive Mexican voters of the right to vote for the PRD candidate forced Fox, the PAN and the PRI to back down. Their fear that the crisis could yield a social explosion is based not merely on the latest political events, but on the profound changes within Mexican society over two decades.

Since the 1980s, there has been a huge social polarization between Mexico's capitalist class and the workers. Mexico boasts some of the richest men in Latin America, billionaires who acquired enormous wealth thanks to their political connections and links to foreign capital. While a handful of Mexican billionaires make the Fortune 500 list each year, some 30 million Mexicans have virtually nothing, earning less than the US $135 a month necessary to buy the Basic Indispensable Breadbasket (CBI,) a minimal level of consumption by Mexican standards. In 1980, the CBI was the equivalent of a minimum wage. In today's prices, a minimum wage only buys 28 percent of a CBI. Over 30 percent of Mexico's workers earn less than two minimum wages. Many are forced to work two, sometimes three, jobs.

The buying power of industrial wages is now 70 percent of what it was in 1976.The situation is far worse outside of the main industrial centers. Out of the impoverished southern states of Michoacan, Guerrero, Oaxaca, a steady stream of migrants inundates Mexico City; many others cross the border into the United States. The mobility of capital in the global economy makes it possible for the wealthy to protect their assets simply by transferring them to another country. No such easy options are available to workers and peasants, many of whom fall pray to smugglers and get sick or die trying to cross the US-Mexico border.

The flight of peasants into the large cities, the growth of maquiladora-export oriented sweatshops-and the integration of industry into the global economy have transformed the Mexican working class. A section of workers, still somewhat protected by corporatist arrangements between the PRI-controlled union bureaucracy and the government (such as oil workers, public employees, sugar workers, and utility workers), has managed to cling to a modicum of job security, pensions and stable wages set by union contracts.

The rest of the working class, directly tied to the global market, faces conditions of virtually no job security, of variable wages and working conditions based on the profit needs of corporations, with minimal benefits, and little chance of a decent retirement. In many cases wage increases have been replaced with productivity bonuses. While factories such as the Ford Motors assembly plant in Hermosillo, Mexico rank among the most productive in the world, wages average less than three dollars an hour. French economist Alain Lipietz reports that, instead of higher wages, high-performance workers at the plant are typically rewarded with trinkets such as tape recorders and radios.

At the rally that capped the March of Silence, Lopez Obrador declared that his Alternate Program for the Nation puts poor people first and called for a commitment by all social classes to return to a welfare state, organized by the federal Government in the context of the global economy. Obrador's populist program is based on the illusion that somehow a return to the conditions that existed prior to 1982 and the onset of the Mexican debt crisis is possible.

Behind the empty promises of a revival of economic nationalism, Lopez Obrador and the PRD are themselves quite conscious that the country is turning into a social powder keg. The "silent" character of the march is indicative of the cautiousness with which they attempted to mobilize support, while discouraging the voicing of demands that they have no intention of meeting.

STAC National Meeting & Decolonlization Conference

2005-05-09T20:40:00.000-07:00

STAC National Meeting

What: Meeting of autonomous STAC Chapters and interested individuals to make some broader plans for the organization

Who: Members of: STAC Guelph, STAC Halifax and STAC Montreal When: Friday May 13th Decolonization conference in Montreal (starts after the opening panel, exact location TBA, please e-mail educationcoordinator@stacmexico.com or call 902-454-2095 for more info. Information about the conference is below.

First started in Halifax, 1999 there are now STAC Chapters in several different Canadian cities. These autonomous groups work on a variety of issues related to the Zapatista struggle in Chiapas, Mexico. Since each Chapter has developed organically, we sometimes have trouble coordinating efforts and supporting each other. We are calling this meeting to open better communication channels, discuss the summer caravan and talk about the organization’s long term efforts.

STAC is non-hierarchical organization made up of autonomous chapters who make choices within the consensus based model of decision making which allows each participant an equal say in the process. STAC does all of its own fundraising and does not accept corporate donations.

If chapters and individuals could get some of the ground work laid before we commence, in terms of proposals and report backs, that would make things run a lot smoother, as I am sure we’ll be tired and wanting to enjoy Montreal.

So far, as a tentative agenda, we have

> - Updates from of activities from different chapters>
- discussion on how we can better support each other with>

Current projects.>
- Caravan discussion>
- logistics for this year and long term planning>

- Basis of unity

> - Long term national goals (if we want them at all)?

> - review of current projects>

> - Website (s)

STAC is non-hierarchical and makes it’s choices within the consensus based model of decision making which allows each participant an equal say in the process. STAC does all of its own fundraising and does not accept corporate donations.
In Struggle,

Chris, STAC Halifax

-=-=-=-=-LAND, DECOLONIZATION AND SELF-DETERMINATION

A conference to confront Canadian colonialism and strengthen movements forself-determination May 13-15, 2005Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM)Pavillon Hubert-Aquin, Room A-M050400 Ste-Catherine East(Metro Berri-UQAM) Montreal, OCCUPIED KANIEN'KEHA:KA TERRITORY=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= *

Films, workshops & presentations;* Strategy and organizing sessions;* Land, Decolonization and Self-Determination March Land, Decolonization and Self-Determination aims to demystify the process of decolonization in the 'Canadian' state. The conference will bring together those at the forefront of self-determination struggles, and organizers and activists participating in solidarity work across Turtle Island (ie. Occupied North America).

This conference will strategize ways to dismantle the colonial 'Canadian' state, break down the walls of Fortress North America, and forge links of resistance. Let us share information, advance dialogue and fight together. Organized by the Indigenous Peoples Solidarity Movement (IPSM) and No One IsIllegal-Montreal (NOII) Childcare on-site. Translation available. Metro tickets available. FREE. INFO:Phone: 514-398-7432E-Mail : decolonization@riseup.netWebsites: www.decolonization.cahttp://ipsm.nativeweb.org =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Preliminary Conference Schedule:(For more specific details and updates, please visit www.decolonization.ca)

*Friday, May 13:11AM-6PM: Film screenings6:30PM-9:30PM: Evening panel and discussion (Pavillon Hubert-Aquin A-M050)Canadian Colonialism, Anti-Colonial Struggles & ResistanceSpeakers: Joane Bourget, Harsha Walia, Arnie Jack

*Saturday, May 14:8:30 AM - 9:30 AM – light breakfast & registration 9:30 - 11:30 - WORKSHOPS (3)-Decolonizing IdentityNatalie Lloyd, Dolores Chew, Joane Bourget-National Liberation, Nationalism & DecolonizationAshanti Alston, Harsha Walia-Justice, Security & Self-DeterminationRoderick Carreon, Kukdookaa Terri Brown, Paul Delaronde Tekarontake

11:30 - 12pm - Break 12 - 2PM - WORKSHOPS (4)-Prisons & DecolonizationSky Bellefleur, Jonathan Wilson, Antonia Baker-Migration, Displacement & [De]colonizationTess Agustin, Smail Behlouili, Harsha Walia, Clifton Arihwakehte-Solidarity and Self-Determination Sarita Ahooja, Ashanti Alston, Sue Collis-Canadian Colonialism at Home & AbroadMagalie X, MacDonald Stainsby, Alcan’t in India, Andrea Schmidt

2 - 3 pm - Lunch Break 3 -

4:30 PM - Reportbacks from Workshops 4:30 - 4:45 PM - Break 4:45 - 7pm – Closing PanelDecolonization in Practice (Pavillon Hubert-Aquin A-M050)Shawn Brant, Paul Delaronde Tekarontake, Kukdookaa Terri Brown, Arnie Jack *Sunday, May 15:Atwater Square (corner Atwater and Ste-Catherine, Metro Atwater)-> 11am: Brunch and Speakers-> 12pm: Land, Decolonization and Self-Determination March =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- T

The 'Canadian' government, in its propaganda and legislation, has perpetuatedthe idea that decolonization means taking Indigenous Peoples out from under theyolk of the Indian Act by making them Canadians and allowing delegatedgovernance. This conference will expose the 'Canadian' government's current legislativedrive as nothing more than an attempt to complete the colonial project, andacquire legal access to remaining Indigenous lands and resources in order tosuccessfully compete in the global economy. Participants will learn whatdecolonization means from the perspective of Indigenous and otherself-determining communities. We will learn of the many strategies employedpast and present - legal, political, social and cultural - by Indigenous andother oppressed peoples in their fight against 'Canadian' colonialism.

Our vision of decolonization at this conference includes deepening our analysisof the various ways in which colonization manifests itself. We encourage theparticipation of people active in diverse social justice movements so that wecan collectively strategize; we include movements that address occupations inIraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Haiti andelsewhere; the attacks on the rights of immigrants and refugees; the PrisonIndustrial Complex; the 'war on drugs,' the 'war on terrorism,' reparationscampaigns; anti-racist, anti-patriarchy and queer liberation movements;capitalist globalization, police harassment and brutality, attacks on the poor;and more.

HOW YOU CAN HELP AND GET INVOLVED? -> ENDORSE: We are actively seeking individuals and groups to endorse thisconference. If you or your group supports the conference basis of unity (seewebsite) please let us know by e-mail or phone. -> DONATE: We are in big need of funding to meet the various costs associatedwith this conference, including transportation for out-of-town guests, andmaking sure the conference is free for participants. Please contact your groupsfor potential donations and/or help with fund-raising. If you can donate, pleaseget in touch. Cheques should be made out to 'QPIRG-McGill' with 'IPSM' in thememo line. Cheques can be mailed to:QPIRG-McGill, 3647 University Street, 3rd Floor, Montreal, Quebec H3A 2B3 -> PARTICIPATE: Land, Decolonization and Self-Determination is both a publiceducation and organizing conference. We are encouraging the participation oforganizers and activists who are interested in building a 'Canadian'decolonization movement. If you would like to get involved, please get intouch. Also, if you live in the Montreal-area and would like to volunteerduring the conference, get in touch too! We need help with childcare, foodpreparation, note taking, postering, and more… See the volunteer callout formore details and contact persons. -> BILLETING: We are expecting many people to be coming in from out of town, andwould like to be able to help them find accommodations. If you have space andwould be willing to welcome people into your home, please send a message todecolonization at riseup.net with ‘Billeting’ in the subject line. Pleaseinclude your name, contact info, number of people you can accommodate, and onwhich dates; also what kind of accommodations (bed, couch, floor, etc.),location, accessibility (pet free, wheelchair,child friendly, etc…), and any other necessary information. -> TABLE: If you would like to set up a table on Saturday, please contact ussoon, as a limited number of spaces are available. INFO: conference website: www.decolonization.cadecolonization@riseup.net or 514-398-7432http://ipsm.nativeweb.org-----Land, Decolonization & Self-Determination conference basis of unity(Please contact us at decolonization [at] riseup [dot] net if you endorse theBasis of Unity) -We reject the mutually reinforcing structures of capitalism, imperialism,colonialism, patriarchy and racism, and the institutions in which they areembodied. We are organising this conference with the understanding thatcapitalist globalisation is nothing new- it is simply a new name for thecolonialism and culture of genocide which Indigenous peoples have beenresisting for centuries. We challenge anti-war and social justice activists andorganisations to recognize that there can be no justice on stolen land. -We assert that decolonization 'at home' is an integral part of the struggle forglobal justice and self-determination - in concretely targeting the roots ofinjustice inside Fortress North America, we oppose injustice everywhere. -We advocate the use of a broad range of tactics and creative initiatives inbuilding a decolonization movement and affirm the importance of buildingrelationships of mutual aid and solidarity, within and across our movements,ranging from anti-poverty and prison abolition to queer and trans liberation,from immigrant and refugee struggles to environmental justice. -We see decolonization as being only possible through active and collaborativeefforts. This necessarily requires a parallel process of mutualself-determination and active solidarity between Indigenous and non-Indigenouscommunities, founded on a respect for the autonomy of all peoples, groups andindividuals.

Mexico's Would-Be mandela, Stares into the Darkness

2005-04-19T20:50:00.000-07:00

http://www.counterpunch.org/ross04182005.html
April 18, 2005

El Desafuero
Lopez Obrador, Mexico's Would-Be Mandela, Stares into the Darkness

By JOHN ROSS

Mexico City, Mexico

Andes Manuel Lopez Obrador looked out upon the sea of brown faces flooding the great Zocalo plaza at the heart of this ancient Aztec city and pleaded for peace. Within hours, Mexico's political bosses would strip him of his immunity from prosecution ("el desafuero"), displace him as the extraordinarily popular mayor of the hemisphere's most teeming megalopolis, and bar him from the 2006 presidential ballot and his supporters were not at all happy about it. "No estas solo! No estas solo!" 300,000 throats roared over and over again,"You are not alone!"

The official police count for the April 7th Zocalo rally was 330,000, perhaps the biggest outpouring of support for a politician here since Lopez Obrador's predecessor as the leader of Mexico's electoral Left, Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, was swindled out of the presidency 17 years ago.
To consolidate the parallels between then and now, AMLO as he is universally acronymed, would utilize the moment to announce his candidacy for the presidency of this long-suffering republic in next year's elections no matter what his legal entanglements might be by then. The disclosure was anything but a surprise AMLO has been leading his closest rivals in President Vicente Fox's National Action PAN Party and the long-ruling (71 years) PRI since 2003 mid-terms by margins of 10 to 20 points in the most respected polls.

Mexico's civil society has often responded en masse in the face of myriad injustices perpetrated by the nation's political class but the size of the turnout in defense of "El Peje" (for "Pejelagarto", a gar-like fish native to his home state of Tabasco) was remarkable because it came early in the official mourning for Pope John Paul II in a country that insists it is 93% Catholic (Lopez Obrador is himself a member of an Evangelical church.) Despite papal media saturation, the dead pontiff played second fiddle to El Peje in Mexico April 7th.

Although the New York Times likened the huge crowd to recent democracy demonstrations in the Ukraine, the million plus who gathered in Caracas following the April 2002 White House-orchestrated coup to welcome Hugo Chavez back to the Miraflores Palace is a more pertinent comparison. Foes and friends both have often made Andes Manuel out to be a kind of Mexican Chavez, an attribute he aggressively rejects

Now the hushed throng clung to each of AMLO's words. He was being framed by the PRI and the PAN the "PRIAN" for the heinous crime of trying to build an access road to a hospital (the road was never even built.) Imagine! In a land where the massacre of hundreds of striking students at Tlatelolco in 1968, the dirty war of the '70s, the stealing of the 1988 election, assassination, political thuggery, and spectacular thievery remains unpunished, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador would now be convicted by his political enemies on trumped-up charges of trying to build a road to a hospital!

El Peje would confront his accusers eyeball to eyeball in the congress of the country. He was determined to face them alone and he pleaded with his followers not to accompany him. "A politician can risk his own life but not the lives of those who support him." "No estas solo!" AMLO's people continued to chant.

Driving his battered Tsuro to the legislative palace a few blocks east of City Hall and puffing away on the inevitable Raleigh (he must have furnished several homes with the coupons by now), AMLO could not have avoided contemplating the dismal fortunes of Left candidates in this distant neighbor nation.

Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, once his mentor but now estranged, had stood in that same Zocalo in July 1988 after the theft of the election by Carlos Salinas and the PRI, and pleaded for peace before hundreds of thousands of enraged citizens, some of whom were firebombing the great portals of the National Palace Cardenas later would insist that he turned back the assault on the seat of power to avoid a bloodbath by the military. Nonetheless, in the years that followed over 500 members and supporters of the Party of the Democratic Revolution were murdered in political vendettas by the PRI under the regimes of Carlos Salinas and Ernesto Zedillo. Luis Donaldo Colosio, Salinas's handpicked successor, was himself cut down in a Tijuana slum in 1994 by an assassin who allegedly sought retribution for the theft of the 1988 election.

Indeed, in just three days Mexico would mark the 86th anniversary of the persecution and execution of that incorruptible revolutionary martyr Emiliano Zapata by his own government April 10th 1919, the last gasp of the Mexican revolution.

And before Zapata, there was Francisco Madero who in 1910 challenged dictator Porfirio Diaz for the presidency and was promptly clapped into prison from where he declared the Mexican revolution. When finally he came to the presidency in 1911, Madero like AMLO was chased from office by Diaz's cronies at the behest of the U.S. ambassador. Hours later, he and his vice-president were gunned down right here on the very streets through which Lopez Obrador was driving.

El Peje's speech to congress that day was a moment of unparalled drama in a drab and venial political landscape. In the grand style of Fidel Castro's "History will absolve me" defense to the military court in Santiago, and Zapatista spokesperson Subcomandante Marcos's "what gives you the right to pardon us?", AMLO stared down his accusers and spat "you will judge me today but never forget that all of us will be judged by history."

Lopez Obrador spoke with the winds of history blowing at his back. "The people do not suffer from amnesia" he warned the legislators it is, indeed, the neo-liberals who declare it is the end of history. Now AMLO retold the story of the desafuero and death of Madero and leveled a finger at Mexico's interior secretary Santiago Creel, Fox's anointed successor, whose grandfather Luis formed part of the plot that displaced the president and financed the bloody Huerta as the nation's new boss of all bosses. Creel's great grandfather had been both Porfirio Diaz's foreign minister and his envoy to Washington. Creel family holdings in the state of Chihuahua were larger than Belgium.

Then Lopez Obrador turned his attentions to Creel's accomplices in the Institutional Revolutionary Party and told of how another congress dominated by that party just as this one was, had sought to throw out Carlos Madrazo, a fellow Tabasqueno and reformer who tried and failed to democratize the PRI. Madrazo, who died in a mysterious plane crash in 1969, is, ironically, the father of Roberto Madrazo, current president of the PRI and almost certainly the party's candidate for the presidency in 2006, and AMLO's blood rival during ten years of political warfare in the swamps of Tabasco. Along with Fox and Creel, Madrazo had configured the desafuero of El Peje.

He had committed no crime but Lopez Obrador made it abundantly clear to his accusers that he would go to jail with his dignity in tact (the contempt of court charge that evolved from the hospital road construction carries a sentence of one to eight years) and would accept no lawyers or bail or appeals. Like Madero. he would campaign for the presidency from his prison cell. Madero won, he is fond of reminding his tormentors.

The Fox government prosecutor, Carlos Javier Vega Memije, who gained notoriety for his persecution of the ecological farmers' movement when he was attorney general of Guerrero back in the '90s, adamantly rejects AMLO's plans, maintaining that he will lose all political rights the moment he is indicted automatically disqualifying his candidacy. According to Memije, unlike the martyred Madero, Lopez Obrador would be barred from even issuing political pronouncements from prison. AMLO's legal team speculates that Fox will seek to imprison the (ex) mayor either in the Matamoros super-maxi on the U.S. border, or at La Palma in Mexico state where the nation's leading narco-lords are housed.

What happens next in this highly charged political soap opera is uncertain not since Madero was removed from high office and taken out and shot with the connivance of Creel's forbearers has so important a personage suffered a desafuero and the rules are ill-defined. It is even uncertain whether or not AMLO has actually been removed from office the Mexico City legislative assembly, dominated by the PRD, says Lopez Obrador is still the mayor as do many jurists nominally affiliated with the PRI, and has gone to the supreme court to make its case. Memije, on the other hand, citing an armload of constitutional clauses, vehemently disagrees and ultimately the high court will have to untangle the affair, a decision that is not expected for months. Meanwhile, El Peje, threatened with charges of usurpation of power if he remains in his City Hall offices and the nullification of any legislation he might sign, has taken a leave of absence, turning over the keys to his vice-mayor Alejandro Encinas, a roly-poly ex-communist who most probably will run the capital for the next 18 months. Although AMLO can be reinstated as mayor if exonerated by the court, a distinct possibility think most constitutionalists, he would have to resign public office six months prior to the July 2006 election date.

2005-03-03T18:07:00.000-08:00

http://www.counterpunch.org/ross03032005.html
March 3, 2005
CIA Warns of the "Ingovernability" of Mexico
Fox Schemes to Jail Front-Running Leftist

By JOHN ROSS

Mexico City.

The table is being laid here for a political battle of biblical proportions as the Mexican Congress, under the hammer of the rightist National Action or PAN (the party of President Vicente Fox) and the once-upon-a-time long-ruling (71 years) Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), prepare to strip left-wing Mexico City Mayor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) of both his office and the immunity from prosecution ("el fuero") it affords him, for the heinous crime of seeking to build an access road to a hospital despite a court order barring him from expropriating a private right-of-way.

If convicted of contempt of court charges in this momentously forgettable imbroglio, Lopez Obrador could be sentenced to prison for up to eight years and would be automatically stripped of his political rights and excluded from next year's presidential election--AMLO has been a ten-point front-runner in the race for the job ever since 2003 mid-term elections.

Long-time political observers here, not just this grizzled veteran of 20 years of partisan felonies, see this PRI-PAN ploy to get rid of Lopez Obrador as one of the dirtiest tricks ever perpetrated in the deviant annals of recent Mexican electoral history, one that indeed spells the end of the line for Mexico's glacial "transition to democracy."

Even the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, in a recent evaluation of security risks in the hemisphere, warns that such a provocative turn of events could so polarize Mexico in anticipation of the 2006 presidential elections as to make this distant neighbor nation "ungovernable."

Out at the scene of the crime that could unchain a volcano of public protest if the PAN-PRI scheme prospers, the shaggy winter grass wags tranquilly in the breeze - but just over the bucolic hillside one can detect the grinding of gears as heavy machinery digs at the earth, preparing the foundations of transnational corporate headquarters that have made the Santa Fe district of extreme western Mexico City a high rent landscape.

Depending upon whose calculations one buys; "El Encino" ("The Oak") is a 100,000 or 83,000 square meter swatch of much-coveted terrain. Once national land deeded to rancher cronies by dictator Porfirio Diaz (1876-1910), El Encino eventually fell into the hands of real estate speculators operating under the shady corporate handle "Promotora Internacionales Santa Fe" ("International Promoter of Santa Fe.")

Back in 2001, when Mayor Lopez Obrador seeking to accommodate the new site of the upscale British-run ABC hospital broke ground on an access road that skirted the Encino property, Promotora Internacionales obtained a court injunction barring construction until the land ownership issues were unraveled. The speculators also alleged that the city was blocking access to the property--a pair of two-foot wide footpaths - by parking its heavy machinery there, and demanded that the Mayor and/or his representatives be held in contempt of court for doing so.

One day in early February 2005, members of the congressional commission assembling the evidence and preparing the charges against AMLO took a field trip out to El Encino to examine the property for itself and the embattled mayor tagged along to kibitz. While commissioners accompanied by federal judicial agents, surveyed the property lines, Lopez Obrador joked with reporters that the proof of his innocence was staring them right in the face--there was, in fact, no access road to the hospital nor had there ever been one. He had discontinued construction upon learning of the court order. Whether or not compliance was immediate has been difficult to determine--aerial photographs are nebulous and there are no witnesses other than the grass to inculpate the mayor.

Upon such legaloid hair-splitting, the fate of the Aztec nation may rest.

Despite their day in the country, the majority of the congressional commissioners--two PANistas, two PRIistas and a token member of Lopez Obrador's left-center Party of the Democratic Revolution did not seem to much care about the details of the matter--one PAN deputy snoozed in his car during the outing.

On February 23rd, having shut down the investigation into the land ownership issue, the PAN-PRI- dominated commission gathered up its findings, all of which seemed to support criminal charges formally filed against AMLO by the nation's attorney general Rafael Macedo de la Concha, and put the full chamber on notice that it would soon send the legislature their recommendations to strip Lopez Obrador of his "fuero."

The PRI-PAN majority in congress is expected to approve the request for "desafuero" (the taking away of the "fuero") and bind Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador over for criminal prosecution.

Although the PRD, which controls the Mexico City legislative assembly would continue to govern Mexico City as it has since 1997 (PRD militants are sworn to take the doors of City Hall to prevent the opposition from laying claim to the building), the mayor will be forced to step down to face the music for the sin of trying to build a road to a hospital.

Stripping AMLO of his immunity from prosecution will require half of the 500 seat lower house plus one. With 150 PANistas unanimously prepared to oust Lopez Obrador, only 91 members of the PRI's 240 strong congressional delegation need to join their right-wing rivals to send Lopez Obrador to trial.

PRI president Roberto Madrazo, an AMLO enemy since the two slugged it out year after year in the swamps of their home state Tabasco in the late 1980S and early '90s, has told his majority bloc in congress they are free to vote their conscience on the desafuero - but it is a well-known fact that PRIistas have no conscience and inevitably, reflexively, vote the Party line.
Despite the high-minded claim that he would rather beat AMLO in the polling place than through legalistic flimflam, Roberto Madrazo is not about to pass up this golden opportunity to deconstruct his blood rival's political ambitions.

And besides, Roberto Madrazo has made it abundantly clear in recent weeks that, if he has anything to say about it, he will be the PRI's presidential nominee in 2006 and getting the front-runner out of the way early will be a big boost in his campaign to retake Los Pinos, the Mexican White House, from the PAN.

Interior Secretary Santiago Creel too, Fox's hand-picked successor, has good reason to want Lopez Obrador out of the way in 2006. Back in 2000, Creel lost the Mexico City mayor's race to AMLO by just three points. Although Creel overspent campaign limits by a half million dollars and accepted large campaign donations from dubious sources, Fox's attorney general was never prosecuted.

In what must be a high water mark for political hypocrisy, Santiago Creel now insists that bringing charges against "El Pejelagarto" (a gar-like Tabasco swamp fish and AMLO's totem animal) is not politically motivated and that the dispute over El Encino is really just between "particulars." El Peje's plight is lamentable but "no politician is above the law", as Creel and Fox never seem to tire of braying.

At the end of February, La Jornada revealed that both President Fox and his attorney general Macedo de la Concha have similarly disobeyed court injunctions and, like Creel, were never brought to justice.

PAN dissidents who suffered decades of PRI political chicanery shake their heads in disbelief to see National Action use the same kind of dirty tricks against Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and the PRD. "The PANista are like the Jews--first the Nazis committed genocide against the Jews and now the Jews do it to the Palestinians" mused Don Juanito Suarez, a tailor and one-time PAN partisan who sympathizes with El Peje, while taking his evening tea at the popular downtown Café La Blanca here.

The congressional vote on the desafuero is anticipated by the ides of March but is subject to legislative manipulation and the PAN-PRI alliance may hold the measure off the floor until Holy Week (March 20th-27th) when the capitol empties out and Mexico goes to the beach. Although scheduling the crucifixion of AMLO at the same time as that of Jesus Christ puts a biblical cast on Lopez Obrador's martyrdom, bringing the vote to a head during the high holy days would theoretically diminish the mobs of Peje supporters determined to lay siege to the congress and prevent a vote from being taken. In the past, campesinos have ridden horses into the chambers and protestors tossed heavy coinage from the balconies to prevent unpopular votes by the congress.

As the nation counts down to Desafuero Day, the capitol is on tense stand-by. Lopez Obrador has called for massive civil disobedience on the day the decision comes down--the law stipulates that all parties be notified 72 hours before the vote is taken, giving the PRD and its allies ample time to organize the turn-out.

For weeks, AMLO's supporters have been working door to door, organizing neighborhood resistance to the desafuero, handing out little Mexican flag lapel buttons, and hanging house signs that read "Todos Somos El Peje" ("We Are All El Peje") from every pedestrian overpass in town. Encampments of protestors have begun to sprout up in public parks and plazas, always a sign that activists are digging in. Brigades of young people invade football matches and parade through subway cars passing out literature and calling for popular support for El Peje. "Maybe we need to pile up sticks and stones in our homes" one passenger laughed in earshot of La Jornada collaborator Jaime Aviles, an outspoken AMLO booster, Aviles also reports that the Mayor's older supporters --he has a huge constituency of senior citizens for whom he now provides a $60 USD monthly stipend in lieu of any federal help for pensionless retirees whatsoever--are pooling resources to pay for anti-desafuero Masses to be celebrated in many federal district churches. Last week saw the first pilgrimage to the shrine of the Virgin of Guadalupe to ask the Brown Madonna's intervention to halt the desafuero.

Signs of impending unrest abound. PRI and PAN national headquarters here are reportedly contracting private security forces in the event of unruly mob attacks, not trusting to the Mexico City police to get the job done, and the French news agency Agence France-Presse just handed out gas masks to all its reporters for the turbulent days to come. Writing in La Jornada, Aviles suggests that long dormant guerrilla groups in the capital's outlying suburbs could be stirred to act as the result of the desafuero.

In a March 1st communique from the mountains of Chiapas, the Zapatista Army of National Liberation's quixotic spokesperson Subcomandante Marcos made it clear that while the Mayan rebels do not support Lopez Obrador or the party he represents, the Zapatistas view his possible desafuero as a serious injustice and call upon all their members to join in demonstrations around the country to oppose it.President Fox is empowered by the constitution to impose martial law on the capitol should the protests turn too hectic and even declare a state of exception.

In recent weeks, the embattled mayor has received support from unexpected corners including the National Human Rights Commission, the rector of the National University (UNAM), and the Cardinal of Mexico City, Norberto Rivera, the nation's most powerful Churchman whose cathedral sits just across the Zocalo plaza from City Hall.

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's powers of convocation are formidable--he has repeatedly filled the Zocalo, the great central plaza spreading beneath his City Hall offices, to the brim with his supporters when his authority has been challenged in the past. Giving the rising tide of fury in the city at the PAN-PRI frame-up, political calculators figure AMLO could put a half million marchers in the streets of Mexico City on the day of reckoning, a number that would rival what his one-time mentor Cuauhtemoc Cardenas was able to turn out after the PRFI stole the 1988 presidential election from him in a veritable Tsunami of fraud.

Indeed, the desafuero of Lopez Obrador bears a marked resemblance to that disgraceful episode in recent Mexican electoral history. In both instances, a left-wing candidate who seemed destined to win the Mexican presidency was eliminated from contention, Cardenas by the wholesale burning of ballots and vote count "alchemy" that turned his victory to defeat overnight. Now with AMLO about to be scratched from the ballot, the PAN and the PRI will save the electorate the trouble of going to the polls at all.

As in 1988, the "coraje" (both courage and anger) of the protestors is bound to escape PRD control during prolonged confrontations, considers left political columnist Luis Hernandez Navarro. With civil society in the driver's seat, occupying public buildings and tying up Mexico City traffic day after day, Navarro contemplates the crystallization of "a movement of historic proportions" that will far outstrip the reinstatement of AMLO's candidacy. "Fox and the right do not yet understand what the desafuero has unleashed."
(To be continued)

John Ross has just been awarded the 2005 Upton Sinclair Award (an "Uppie") by the San Pedro California chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union for his latest cult classic "Murdered By Capitalism--A Memoir of 150 Years of Life & Death on the U.S. Left".

Transgressing to Teach: Education & Insurgencey

2005-02-27T21:38:00.000-08:00

http://members.aol.com/jophe51/boyd01.htm

TRANSGRESSING TO TEACH:
EDUCATION AND INSURGENCY IN CHIAPAS

Tammy Boyd and Tom Owens
University of Oklahoma

We have nothing to lose, absolutely nothing, no decent roof over our heads, no land, no work, poor health, no food, no education, no right to freely and democratically choose our leaders, no independence from foreign interests, and no justice for ourselves or our children. But we say enough is enough! We are the descendants of those who truly built this nation, we are the millions of dispossessed, and we call upon all of our brethren to join our crusade, the only option to avoid dying of starvation!

Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle, 1993
Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN)
Introduction

The takeover of the town of San Cristobal on New Year's Day 1994 stunned Mexico and the
world; equally stunning was the declaration of war (Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle) posted all over the town. While the conflict is primarily over political and agrarian issues, there is a significant educational component contained within the demands for indigenous recognition and autonomy that has come to be a defining feature of the Zapatista war. One very useful way to view this educational component is through the lens of emancipatory/liberatory educational theory.

There are several ideas that come from bell hooks' writing - and the writing of other emancipatory educators like Paulo Freire - that focus this lens for viewing the various educational demands of the Ejercito Zapatista de Liberacion Nacional/EZLN (Zapatista National Liberation Army), or Zapatistas. First, education should encourage students to think about the political effects of education and not simply be the ingestion of information; it should liberate students and allow them to participate more fully in democratic society. Second, education should reintegrate people into history and reintegrate the person rather than perpetuate the mind/body dualism that makes this historical disengagement possible. Third, everyone's presence is recognized and valued. Fourth, students become the constructors of their own knowledge and communities. Finally, learning is cooperative, not competitive. "Engaged is a great way to talk about liberatory classroom practice. It invites us always to be in the present, to remember that the classroom is never the same" (hooks, 1994, p.158).

This paper will briefly trace the history of Emiliano Zapata and the "original" Zapatistas, then the modern-day Zapatistas. It will then highlight some of the more (in)famous Zapatista educational demands and conclude with how the Zapatistas, in fighting for the right to educate themselves, are in fact educating all of us.

History of the Zapatistas

Because they have been dominated and marginalized by colonizers and mestizos or ladinos (people of mixed Spanish and Indian descent) for 500 years, the indigenous peoples of Mexico - and in this case the Mayans in particular - have been perceived and construed as a people without history. In many cases it was this alleged lack of a historical consciousness that justified the treatment of indigenous peoples in Mexico. "Not only did the original inhabitants of the region lose their lands, but they have also been subject to centuries of fierce racism and discrimination on the part of the dominant Ladino society, which continues virtually unabated to this day" (Rosset and Cunningham, available on-line).

The end of colonialism and the introduction of statehood did not alleviate the situation. The continuance of haciendas (large landed estates) perpetuated the poverty and marginalization of companeros (farmer, villager). The children of this era, including Emiliano Zapata who was born in 1879 in Morelos in southern Mexico, learned early that they were surrounded by inequality and justice, centered on who controlled the land.

Although Zapata was a ranchero (small landholder), he was sympathetic to the plight of the companeros and frequently clashed with the existing oligarchy; he was elected president of the village defense committee in 1909. He was also greatly influenced by Francisco Madero's "Plan of San Luis," written in 1910; it called for "effective suffrage and no re-election" as well as the return of illegally taken lands to small proprietors. Zapata built on this political document, extending it to agrarian and social reform, and produced the Plan of Ayala in 1911. The gist of the document was that usurped lands would be returned to the rightful owners, one-third of the haciendas would be nationalized and anyone opposing the plan would have all of their property nationalized. Furthermore, democratic processes for state and national government would be put in place.

1911 was also the beginning of armed resistance by the Liberation Army of the South, commonly referred to as Zapatistas. In the political flux at the national level that ensued, with presidents coming and going by fair means or foul, Mexico came to be divided between Zapata in the south and Venustiano Carranza and Pancho Villa in the north. The three factions sent delegates to Aguascalientes in 1914 to try to come to terms, but the dialogue ended in deadlock (Carranza was in power with the Constitutionalist government at the time). Carranza eventually removed Villa from the north and in 1919 had a colonel assassinate Zapata; following his death, many Zapatistas surrended or retired, although a small group continued until 1920 when Obregon overthrew Carranza. Although some measure of Zapata's agrarian reforms were incorporated in the Constitution of 1917 - mainly Article 27 which stated that ejidos (small communal landholdings) would be recognized - the reforms never progressed as quickly as the Zapatistas wanted and they were never completed; the country quickly reverted back to its hacienda ways.

For all his focus on agrarian reform, Zapata was remarkably interested in education. He encouraged villages to build schools for its children (some established night schools for adults) and sought an educational system that would meet the needs of rural Mexico. Elementary schools would emphasize physical, manual and practical training; every state would have a normal school; the National University would be emancipated; and higher education would preference manual arts and industrial science. (Millon, 1969; Brunk, 1995). Zapata is credited with saying, "[education] is an initiative that past governments never wanted to make because it was convenient for them that the people remained eternally ignorant, so they could always be exploited" (Brunk, 1995, p.197).

As I stated earlier, the country quickly reverted to hacienda oligarchies, with little relief for poor villagers except the odd ejido. In the 1960's many villagers - mostly displaced indigenous farmers - were encouraged to migrate to the Lacandon in Chiapas, to establish ejidos there and grow corn and coffee. This effectively removed the poorest of the poor from the center of power. Unfortunately, the companeros were quickly followed into the regions by cattle barons, who quickly took the best tracts of land and displaced everyone else into the jungle. Clashes between the ejidos and ranchers and government began in the mid-1970's. Many leftist groups and missionaries flocked to the area in the 1980's, among them a Maoist-oriented student group which came to teach villagers and to train soldiers. Subcommandate Marcos, who is believed to be Rafael Sebastian Guillen, was one of those students.

This critical mass of ejidos and supporters in the Lacandon Jungle gave rise to the Zapatista community in the 1980's. The decision, in 1990, by the International Coffee Organization, to let coffee prices float, followed quickly by a ban on timber cutting, the revision (repeal) of Article 27 of the Constitution and Mexico's participation in the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, precipitated the Zapatista action. "In late 1992, the Zapatista community assemblies gave the General Command a year in which to prepare the war" (Bardacke et. al., 1995, p.12).

On January 1, 1994 the Zapatista Army entered San Cristobal just after midnight and pronounced the Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle from the government palace balcony. After fighting their way back to the jungle, the Zapatistas remained silent, except for their communiques. After bombing the jungle proved fruitless, the government asked to negotiate with the Zapatistas in San Cristobal. The dialogue resulted in state promises to meet the Zapatistas' demands (Serrill, 1994; Cockburn and Murray, 1994), but Salinas would not ratify the agreement and the Zapatistas rejected the government's "peace proposal." The following year the Zapatistas and the government met in San Andres and signed a series of agreements. To date, the government has not upheld its end of the bargain (Bardacke et. al., 1995; Holloway and Palaez (eds.), 1998).

The Zapatistas are interested in dialoguing with civil society, not taking over the government. They want the state to take responsibility for its actions, to be held accountable; they do not want power (Bardacke et. al., 1995). "The Zapatista movement supports autonomy within, not against, Mexican society - a point dramatically symbolized by the flying of the Mexican flag at virtually all Zapatista gatherings" (Cleaver, 1998, p.623). One of the things they want the government to be held accountable for is education.

(English Translations of) Zapatista Educational Concerns and Demands

Chiapas: the Southeast in two winds, a storm and a prophecy

Education? The worst in the country. Seventy-two out of every one-hundred children do not finish the first grade. Half of the schools go no higher than the third grade, and half of them have only one teacher to teach all the courses. The true drop-out figures are even higher, as the children of the indigenous people are forced to enter the system of exploitation in order to help their families survive. In every indigenous community it is common to see children carrying corn or wood, cooking or washing clothes, during school hours. Of the 16,058 schoolrooms in Chiapas in 1989, only 96 were in indigenous areas.
Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle

We now ask for your committed participation and support for this plan of the people of Mexico who struggle for work, land, housing, food, health, education, independence, freedom,
democracy, justice, and peace. We declare that we will not stop fighting until we win these basic demands of our people, forming a free and democratic government.

EZLN demands during the initial dialogue with the Mexican government

Twelfth. We want the illiteracy of the indigenous peoples to come to an end. For this to happen we need better elementary and secondary schools in our communities, including free teaching materials, and teachers with university education who are at the service of the people and not just in defense of the interests of the rich. In the municipal seats there must be free elementary, junior high, and high schools; the government must give the students uniforms, shoes, food, and all study materials free of charge. The larger, central communities that are very far from the municipal seats must provide boarding schools at the secondary level. Education must be totally free, from preschool to university, and must be granted to all Mexicans regardless of race, creed, age, sex, or political affiliation.
Twenty-ninth. Indigenous women's petition:

(10) Schools must be built where women can receive technical training.

(11) There must be preschools and day-care centers in the rural communities where the children can have fun and grow up strong, morally and physically.
Response to the government's peace proposal
Ninth. Among the national indigenous demands of the EZLN are the following:

(2) A full course of free public education for all indigenous communities.

(3) That the languages of all indigenous communities be given official status, and that instruction in them be obligatory at all levels of education.
...the Zapatista Army of National Liberation says NO to the request that we sign the government's peace proposal. The dialogue of San Cristobal is at an end....

San Andres Agreements -

Document 1: Joint declaration that the federal government and the EZLN shall submit to national debating and decision-making bodies.

COMMITMENTS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES.

Third. The responsibilities that the federal government takes on as commitments that the Mexican state should fulfill with indigenous peoples in their new relationship are:

(4) Promoting the cultural manifestations of indigenous peoples. The state should promote national and local cultural policies of recognition and broadening of the spaces of indigenous peoples for the production, recreation and dissemination of their cultures; of promotion and coordination of the activities of institutions dedicated to the development of indigenous cultures, with the active participation of indigenous peoples; and of incorporation of the knowledge of different cultural practices into the study plans and programs of public and private educational institutions. Knowledge of indigenous cultures is national enrichment and a necessary step in eliminating misunderstandings and discrimination towards indigenous peoples.

(5) Ensuring education and training. The state should ensure for indigenous peoples an education that respects and takes advantage of their knowledge, traditions and forms of organization; with processes of comprehensive education in the communities that broaden their access to culture, science and technology; professional education to improve their development prospects; training and technical assistance that improves the production processes and quality of their goods; and training for organization that raises communities' management capacities. The State should respect the educational activities of indigenous peoples within their own cultural space. The education provided by the State should be intercultural. Impetus shall be given to the integration of regional educational networks that offer the communities the possibility of access to the different levels of education.1

As you can see, despite being an agrarian-based political movement, there is a significant educational component to the Zapatista demands. The primary issue for the Zapatistas is the wholly inadequate educational infrastructure in the Chiapas currently; even for children who want and are able to attend school, many have no opportunity to study beyond the third grade, especially if they are indigenous. Such a low level of education is not enough, by most international standards, to provide basic literacy and numeracy; you need at least four years of education, and most multinational aid organizations prefer six (see Inter-American Development Bank, International Monetary Fund and World Bank). Indeed, many of the calls for improving the educational system in Chiapas are motivated by concerns about illiteracy, especially among the indigenous populations. That brings us to our second - but by no means secondary - issue, the provision of specific educational opportunities for indigenous peoples.

These concerns center on multi-lingual and multicultural education; indigenous peoples want their children to learn their language and culture. Moreover, they want their history taught and they have worked hard to reclaim and record it (Benjamin, 2000). Additionally, many indigenous students are effectively barred from participating in education because they are non-Spanish speakers. A third issue for the Zapatistas is training and qualifications for adults. Central to this is increased access to science and technology in order to be competitive in agriculture; this has become critical for indigenous populations' survival with the removal of subsidies for coffee prices (they have been allowed to float freely) and the influx of cheap American corn with the inception of NAFTA. Also, they have had no real opportunity to participate in the recent oil boom (van der Haar, 1995; Bardacke, et. al., 1995). Despite their commitment to reforming civil society, dialogue with the government has proven fruitless so the Zapatistas and their international supporters have embarked on several educational initiatives of their own.

Educational Initiatives by (and for) the Zapatistas

The Zapatistas were always an organization dedicated to educating the displaced villagers - indigenous or otherwise - in Chiapas. Even before the invasion of San Cristobal, the area of the Lacandon Jungle occupied by the EZLN was a place where people with no schooling could go to learn (Bardacke, et. al., 1995). In an interview with Geneve Maxwell Gil, Comandante Ana
Maria talked about learning from the Zapatistas.

I joined when I was ... fourteen years old. Some companeros, who had more experience, taught us the alphabet. They taught us to read and write, and after that they taught us to fight. Later on, they also told us something about politics, how to communicate with the people and to tell them the reasons for our struggle (Gil, 1999, p.26).

The Zapatistas have also been active in the building and staffing of libraries and schools, not to mention women's centers and clinics, in the absence of state and federal assistance in Chiapas.
Following the declaration of war, one of the first things the Zapatistas did was to boycott the government, and this included boycotting state schools and schoolteachers; education in Chiapas had always been substandard or nonexistent. In response, they established their own schools and asked villagers to elect their own schoolteachers (Blackwell, 1995). These teachers were frequently chosen for their Spanish language ability - not their teaching skills - but the villagers' desire to learn and communicate could not be denied. In response, the government established the Indigenous Community Instructor Project to provide emergency and continuing education and training for the newly elected teachers in Chiapas. They eventually organized into the Union of Teachers for New Education (UNEM) and articulated a twofold objective: "... the preservation of indigenous cultures and the acquisition of skills that would be relevant to the everyday life of indigenous communities" (Vargas-Cetina, 1998, p.150). The UNEM has a large number of partners, particularly non governmental organizations (NGOs), and works globally to develop locally (in keeping with the Zapatistas' efforts to reform, rather than remove, state and national government).

The Zapatistas and the indigenous peoples of the Chiapas also enjoy private aid. The organization "Schools for Chiapas" states its mission is "cooperating with the Maya peoples' efforts to build dignified schools while promoting social justice" (Schools for Chiapas, 2000). In one of their recent newsletters they noted that the Primero de Enero (First of January) Zapatista Autonomous Rebellious Secondary School (ESRAZ) had opened with 140 students; the school was built, and the local teachers trained, by "Education Caravan for Peace" volunteers as well as local residents. The group is currently building its second junior high school and offers individuals unable to come to Chiapas, but who want to help nonetheless, the opportunity to buy Zapatista bonds ($5.00 each), contribute money ($44.00/month) or provide school supplies to the Individual Indigenous Scholarship Program (Schools for Chiapas, 2000). Finally, "this summer people from around the world [were] invited (for the first time) to participate in formal language classes inside of Zapatista territory in Chiapas, Mexico" (Schools for Chiapas, 2000). Native speakers taught language classes in Spanish or Tzotzil during five-day intensive sessions; the classes were held in Oventic, Aguascalientes II and all profits were used to support schools.

Last, but not least, we cannot forget the "Zapatista effect" stemming from their on-line efforts. The communiques from the EZLN not only go to local, national and international news publications, they are also posted to the Internet within a few hours of their publication; they are usually translated into English and other languages by the next day. "The direct communiques were - and still are - a hedge against increased government repression" (Halleck, 1994, p.32). It should be noted, however, that the EZLN plays no real direct role in this Internet proliferation; even if they had the technology, the lack of energy and communications infrastructures in Chiapas makes posting such a large volume of work on the Internet difficult, if not impossible. Many of the most informative sites - particularly the "lanic gopher" at the University of Texas, Austin which provides a chronological history of Zapatista communiques - are actually maintained in the United States. The presence of the Zapatistas in cyberspace is worrisome for many, particularly at the nation-state level, because the emancipatory potential of the Internet (and independent sources of information) is upsetting the traditional balance of power. The most dramatic development has been the increase in organizational capacity for the Zapatistas and the links to other social movements also on the Internet (Cleaver, 1998). Not only have the Zapatistas learned of the student strike at the National Autonomous University of Mexico and publicly stated their support of the students - in several communiques (Lindsay, 1999) - but there are also Internet groups such as the Irish Mexico Group. Predictably, the Mexican government (and others) are scrambling to put counter-insurgency efforts on-line, as well as trying to establish policy to regulate Internet traffic, but at this point they are still playing catch-up. Nor is the government the only entity opposed to the Zapatistas. Many villages are split between pro-Zapatista and progovernment factions, and thousands have left Chiapas out of fear of the Zapatistas (Blackwell, 1995; van der Haar, 1995; Holloway and Pelaez (eds.), 1998).

Conclusion

In dialoguing with the government about issues of concern for themselves, the Zapatistas have not only educated the villagers of Chiapas, they have educated the nation and the world. They have, in good faith, tried to work with the government to improve the living standards (and educational opportunities) of the poor in Chiapas; furthermore they are adamant about such reforms extending to the whole of Mexico. Finally, not only have they not once sought political power for themselves, they have demonstrated their commitment to historical reintegration and valuing everyone's presence, whether indigenous or not. They have worked hard to build their local communities and (re)construct their own history and knowledge. They seek, not to overthrow global capitalism and modern nation-states, but rather to view them in a new way and with an emphasis on the local community (Vargas-Cetina, 1998). In their drive to be participatory, to work and learn cooperatively, they are not only educating and liberating themselves, they are educating and liberating all of us.ENDNOTES

1. From Shadows of Tender Fury, Monthly Review Press and "United States Institute of Peace Library" found at http://www.usip.org/library/pa/index/pa_chiapas.html. A complete (as best as I can tell) list of EZLN communiques (many of which also address education but which are too numerous to include here) can be found at http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezlnco.html.
REFERENCES
Bardacke, Frank; Lopez, Leslie and the Watson, California Human Rights Committee. (1995). Shadows of tender fury: the letters and communiques of Subcommandate Marcos and the Zapatista Army of National Liberation. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Benjamin, Thomas. (April 2000). "A time of reconquest: history, the Maya revival, and the Zapatista rebellion in Chiapas." American Historical Review, 105(2), 417-450.
Blackwell, Ben. (27 October, 1995). "Divided by war, united by lessons." Times Educational Supplement, 14.
Brunk, Samuel. (1995). Emiliano Zapata: revolution and betrayal in Mexico. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.
Cleaver, Jr., Harry. (Spring 1998). "The Zapatista effect: the Internet and the rise of an alternative political fabric." Journal of International Affairs, 51(2), 621-641.
Cockburn, Alexander and Murray, Kieran. (18 March, 1994). "A fistful of promises." New Statesman and Society, 7(294), 20-22.
Gil, Geneve Maxwell. (1999). A Freirian revolution on-line and in the jungle: Zapatistas in the public sphere. Master's Thesis. Austin, TX: University of Texas.
Halleck, Deedee. (September-October 1994). "Zapatistas on-line." NACLA Report on the Americas, 28(2), 30-32.
Holloway, John and Pelaez, Eloina. (1998). Zapatista! Reinventing revolution in Mexico. Sterling, VA: Pluto Press.
hooks, bell. (1994). Teaching to transgress: education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.
Lindsay, Bruce. (October 1999). "Students strike in Mexico." Arena Magazine, 23.
Millon, Robert. (1969). Zapata: the ideology of a peasant revolutionary. New York: International Publishers.
Rosset, Peter with Cunningham, Shea. (n.d.). "Understanding Chiapas." Food First Action Alert. Available on-line at http://www.ezln.org/understanding-chiapas.html.
San Andres Agreements. (1996). "Document 1: Joint declaration that the federal government and the EZLN shall submit to national debating and decision-making bodies." Available on-line at http://www.usip.org/library/pa/index/pa_chiapas.html.
Schools for Chiapas. (May 2000). "Schools for Chiapas Update." Available on-line at http://www.ezln.org/alerts/schoolsforchiapas0005.htm and http://www.mexicopeace.org/.
Serrill, Michael. (14 March, 1994). "Score one for the Indians." Time, 143(11), 44.
van der Harr, Gemma. (June 1995). "A background to the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas." European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 58, 118-121.
Vargas-Cetina, Gabriela. (1998). "Uniting in difference: the movement for a new indigenous education in the state of Chiapas, Mexico." Urban Anthropology, 27(2), 135-164.

Photo Essay: http://dominionpaper.ca/features/2005/01/18/photo_essa.html

2005-01-20T09:16:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone,

Well the tour is over and we're back to the daily grind of writing grant proposals and doing e-public education.

We just put out a photo-essay on the really cool grassroots newspaper The Dominion.

Check it out
http://dominionpaper.ca/features/2005/01/18/photo_essa.html

There has been a bit of a storm going on within STAC for the past couple days. Reforma newspaper, mexico's foremost business daily, did a story on the boot project. It actually turned out to be a better article than most of what's in the english language press.

The other day, the story appeared on the Mexican Government's website as 'good news'. I have never heard of a government who considers forigeners funding armed rebels on their territory 'good news'- but I suppose this is what the counter-insurgencey has become, a battle for legitimacy.

The spanish version of the article is available at
http://2004.presidencia.gob.mx/buenasnoticias/index.php?contenido=16263&pagina=3

We are in the midst of getting this translated, and an english version will be posted as soon as we have it.

Take care
In struggle
chris

New Year's Wish from West Papua

2005-01-04T13:00:00.000-08:00

This article is not about the Zapatista struggle, but is posted in solidarity with the indigenous of Papua.

New Year's Wish from West Papua
Posted on Tue, 12/28/2004 - 17:13.
WestPAN Exclusives

As most of the Western world prepares to celebrate, an anxious appeal for peace
was issued [on December 22] by eight church-based organizations in the oft-forgotten
land of West Papua. The churches, along with 27 traditional tribal councils,
human-rights institutions and other organizations, are making a Christmas and New Year's plea for
international attention and support. Without this, they predict an imminent repeat
of East Timor-style massacres in West Papua, masterminded by the same individual.

In May 2004, Franciscans International urged the UN to put pressure on Indonesia to
disband terrorist-run, government-supported paramilitary groups, stating, "The
presence in Papua of Eurico Guterres, one of the architects involved in organizing
terror wrought by militias in East Timor in 1999, is a cause for grave concern." Mr
Guterres, indicted by an Indonesian court for crimes against humanity, has remained
free while he appeals his jail sentence. Recent reports from coastal towns in West
Papua indicate that shipments of guns are arriving and being distributed to local
militia recruited and organized by Mr Guterres. His organizing activities in West
Papua have been well known for more than a year.

[The December 22] appeal also stated that an additional 25,000 Indonesian troops
have arrived in West Papua since 2000. Also, more than a million Indonesian migrants
have been relocated there, and will soon outnumber the 1.5 million native Papuans.
It is a recipe for disaster for Papuans, who are a loosely organized set of highly
diverse tribal cultures. (West Papua contains 15% of the world's known languages.)
An escalating military operation in the highlands has displaced more than 6,000
indigenous Papuans over the past few months. These people are prevented from
returning to their sources of food and medicine, and humanitarian organizations are
not allowed access to the area. It is a slow but steady genocide.

The region has virtually been under siege for 40 years, but governments of developed
nations have just recently started to acknowledge this. Although smaller nations and
members of parliaments worldwide have denounced Indonesia's forced integration of
its easternmost "province", on December 20 the British House of Lords was the first
to openly admit that Papuans were forced into Indonesia against their will. Earlier
this month, the US government extended their human rights-based decision to withhold
military assistance.

Efforts over the past few years to establish a "zone of peace" have failed and the
Christmas appeal calls the situation a "time bomb waiting to go off". Protests have
become larger, more frequent, and more violent as Papuans are pushed to the brink.
Sadly, the church groups and their allies are sounding the trumpet in a world
deafened by explosions in the Middle East. They have tried to warn us before, yet
the situation has only deteriorated as a result of global neglect.

It often takes an extreme situation for the Church to speak out, let alone band
together with other denominations. This is a desperate appeal from desperate people.
They cling to the hope that international pressure will result in a reversal of
direction imposed by Indonesia's new president, [Susilo Bambang] Yudhoyono, who
plans to visit December 26. The man who sang John Lennon's "Imagine" after winning
the election three months ago has expressed his intent to rein in the military.
Papuans are hoping he will take this opportunity to demonstrate a true commitment.
As unlikely as many believe that may be, it is their only hope to see Yuletide
peace, and ultimately to avert a grand-scale disaster.

Tom Benedetti
WestPAN (West Papua Action Network)
Canada (Dec 24, '04)

Sollution to a Stalled Revolution: Write a Mystery Novel

2005-01-03T08:27:00.000-08:00

Solution to a Stalled Revolution: Write a Mystery Novel
New York Times

What should a rebel leader with a little extra time on his hands do to get attention? Subcommander Marcos, the elusive and charismatic leader of the Zapatista movement in southern Mexico, has apparently decided the answer is to write a crime novel.

Two weeks ago, Pablo Ignacio Taibo II, a successful writer of detective stories set in Mexico City, received a clandestine letter from the guerrilla leader. In it, Subcommander Marcos, the rebel leader who made wearing a black ski mask sexy, proposed that they team up to write a detective story, alternating chapters.

"I thought about it for 10 seconds and said 'No, not right now. I'm very happy with my Pancho Villa book, which I'm writing, and this new project will drive me crazy," Mr. Taibo recalled. "Then rapidly, 10 seconds later, I said yes. It had the enormous attraction of insanity. For a writer like me who is always bordering on insanity, it was part of my, shall we say, greatest obsessions to do something like that."

So Mr. Taibo, a liberal who sympathizes with the Zapatista movement's campaign for greater rights for indigenous people in the southern region of Chiapas, worked out the rules for writing the book in a flurry of letters with the rebel leader.

The first six chapters of the book, titled "Awkward Deaths," are to be a sort of Ping-Pong game, Mr. Taibo said. Marcos is to write chapters one, three and five, introducing his detective, Elías Contreras. Mr. Taibo would write chapters two, four and six, using the protagonists in his previous books, Detective Héctor Belascoarán Shayne. In the seventh chapter, the two detectives must meet at the Revolution Monument in Mexico City, where Pancho Villa and Lázaro Cárdenas are buried.

Neither collaborator knows how the book will end, or how long it will be, Mr. Taibo said. Marcos has chosen to tell the story from a future perspective, with his investigator looking back at events. Mr. Taibo's narrative will stick to the present.

La Jornada, a left-wing newspaper, has agreed to publish the chapters serially. The first effort by the masked-guerrilla-turned-novelist appeared on Dec. 5. The second chapter was published Sunday.

Marcos's reasons for writing the book, like so much about him, remain about as clear as the mists shrouding Chiapas's jungles. Judging from the first chapter, he wants to use fiction not just to raise money for charity, as the two authors have agreed to do, but also to make political points.

In the first chapter, the intrepid Elías Contreras (which Marcos says is not the character's real name) tracks down a missing woman at the request of a Zapatista commander called, yes, dear reader, Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos. It turns out the woman had run away from an abusive husband. When the commander hears this, he expresses shock that a Zapatista rebel would beat his wife.

"Maybe you know someone who forgets to be a Zapatista once in a while," the investigator says.

"How long does it take to become a Zapatista then?" the commander asks.

"Sometimes it takes more than 500 years," says the detective, before riding off on his mule.

The passage appears to be thinly veiled propaganda, condemning domestic violence but also urging faithful Zapatistas not to give up the faith. It also reflects an underlying problem for the rebels - the slow pace of change in Chiapas and the flagging attention of Mexico City and the world.

Subcommander Marcos, a former philosophy professor whose real name officials say is Rafael Sebastián Guillén Vicente, led a January 1994 uprising in the name of Indian rights. Though not an Indian himself, he captured the imagination and sympathy of many intellectuals and middle-class liberals.

Many urban Mexicans were moved by the plight of the illiterate, malnourished Indians whom Marcos championed. But the rebellion also tapped into anxiety about what free trade might do to the country. Overnight the rebel leader became an international cult hero.

Yet the Zapatistas never had much success on the battlefield, and agreements made in 1996 with President Ernesto Zedillo later unraveled. Then in March 2001, President Vicente Fox let them march to Mexico City, hold a giant rally and speak before Congress.

A month later, lawmakers passed a watered-down version of their demands, and the movement lost some steam. Since then, the guerrilla leader has retreated to his hide-out in the Chiapas jungles, advocating a quieter revolution in the handful of towns rebels still control.

Subcommander Marcos could not be immediately reached for comment about the book. Javier Elorriaga, a spokesman for the political arm of the Zapatista movement, did not respond to messages sent to him by e-mail and left via telephone at the group's headquarters in Mexico City.

Bernardino Ramos, a legislator who heads a commission set up to pacify Chiapas, said the book seemed to be a clever way to rekindle interest in the problems of indigenous people the Zapatistas champion.

For his part, Mr. Taibo refuses to speculate about the guerrilla leader's motives. He acknowledges that the novel, like most Latin American fiction, will explore social problems, what he calls "the demons that walk free in Mexico," the abuse of power and corruption.

Still, a detective novel is a detective novel, Mr. Taibo said. "It will be essentially a piece of fiction, but always in a novel like this one there will be a political reflection, without a doubt," Mr. Taibo said. "We have put it forward as a fiction novel. I don't know what else he wants to say. I know what I want to say. I want to say that Mexico City is also a jungle."

As published Mr. Taibo's first contribution to the book follows the conventions of detective fiction, yet it is also laced with references to Mexican politics, past and present, opening up a wide range of possible story lines for Marcos to develop.

Luis Hernández, the editorial page editor of La Jornada, said it should come as no surprise that the guerrilla leader was exploring a new literary genre to get his message out. Over the years, his missives to the newspapers have often been written in the form of poetry, stories and parables.

"I think here is an attempt to use a genre that he has not used before," Mr. Hernández said. "The police novel is the best genre for describing social injustice, the abuse of power, the inequality that exists in a society."

The Economist on PPP

2004-12-15T20:13:00.000-08:00

Title: Plan quÃ©?
Source: Economist; 4/10/2004, Vol. 371 Issue 8370, p29, 2p, 1 map
Document Type: Article
Subject Terms: COMMERCIAL policy

Developing southern Mexico

Plan quÃ©?

Mexico's flagship development project has stalled

Dateline: SAN CRISTÃ“BAL DE LAS CASAS, CHIAPAS

IT WAS a bold bid for regional leadership. Soon after he took office
four years ago, Vicente Fox, Mexico's president, outlined a development
plan for nine of his country's poor southern and south-eastern states,
and for its Central American neighbours. One of the objectives of the
Puebla-to-Panama Plan (PPP) was to narrow the gap between Mexico's south
and the richer north, which had opened under the North American
Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA) during the 1990s. Road-building (to promote
commerce), power and other infrastructure schemes were the main
elements, though social projects, environmental protection and improved
disaster-prevention were also mentioned. Yet, three years on, little
trace of the PPP can be seen in southern Mexico.

In a village near San CristÃ³bal de Las Casas in the state of Chiapas,
one of the areas supposed to benefit most, villagers look blank at the
mention of the plan--named after the Mexican state and Central American
country at the northern and southern ends of its scope (see map). They
have encountered other development schemes, though, and they show little
enthusiasm for them. Cayetano HernÃ¡ndez, for instance, says a new road
through his village was built without local consent, and took up a lot
of land formerly used to grow maize. Only those with cars benefit--a
group, says Mr HernÃ¡ndez, which includes his family "only in my dreams".
They probably will not even be able to afford much electricity.

These concerns help explain why the PPP has flopped in Mexico. Manuel
Parra, of the local University of the Southern Frontier, argues that, as
an "urban-industrial" project, the PPP was irrelevant to the poor, rural
south, and did not "work with the advantages and resources of the region
as they actually exist." And however noble its intentions, the
government has failed to explain it to the region. Apart from a basic
website, information about it is hard to come by. Neither of the two
main cities of Chiapas yet has a dedicated PPP office. The impression
has been given that this is a scheme imposed from Mexico City. Thus,
though launched by Mr Fox, the PPP seems to remind many people of the
previous, authoritarian regime of the Institutional Revolutionary Party.

Plan B

These mistakes have proved fatal in a region naturally suspicious of the
federal government. Decades of strife between the locals, especially the
indigenous population, culminated in the Zapatist uprising of 1994,
which was centred on San CristÃ³bal de Las Casas. Since then, the city
has become a mecca for the anti-globalisation, environmental and
anarchist movements. These fell on the feeble presentation of the PPP
with glee, portraying it as a damaging conspiracy. The result has been a
public-relations disaster for the government, and stagnation on the
ground for the PPP.

Can Mr Fox save his grand vision? He certainly hopes to, and the PPP
office in Mexico City is soon to relaunch the plan, apparently in a
fresh spirit of co-operation. Herbert Taylor, who took over as its boss
at the lowest ebb, now admits that his team have been "very bad
communicators" and made "bad, stupid errors". With a new air of
humility, he says the PPP will now be more a co-ordinator of ideas from
the states than a top-down planner. It will include some of the elements
that people in Chiapas have been asking for all along. Besides the
roads, which are still "indispensable", he points to new provisions in
the budget for health projects, such as campaigns to fight AIDS and the
newly arrived dengue fever. He has, he says, been trying to think like
"an average citizen: what would I want out of the project?"

Down in Central America, the plan has been more successful, partly
because other countries have been better at securing money for PPP
projects from the Inter-American Development Bank. The sort of attitude
Mr Taylor claims to have adopted would represent a remarkable turnaround
for Mexico's bureaucracy, and might revitalise the PPP in Mexico. But
the relaunch may have come too late, particularly for Mr Fox, who will
leave office in 2006 and still seeks his place in the history books.

Business Week on NAFTA and Mexico

2004-12-15T20:09:00.000-08:00

Title: MEXICO Was NAFTA Worth It?
Authors: Smith, Geri

Lindblad, Cristina
Source: Business Week; 12/22/2003 Issue 3863, p66, 7p, 5 graphs, 6c
Document Type: Article
Subject Terms: EDUCATION & state

FREE trade

Persistent link to this record:
http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,ui
d&db=f5h&an=11676474

Cut and Paste: href="http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,
url,uid&db=f5h&an=11676474">MEXICO Was NAFTA Worth It?

Database: MasterFILE Premier
Section: SPECIAL REPORT

MEXICO Was NAFTA Worth It?

A tale of what free trade can and cannot do

Piedad Urquiza probably doesn't know much about NAFTA, but she knows
what it's like to have a steady job. Urquiza works at a Delphi Corp.
auto-parts plant in Ciudad JuÃ¡rez, just across the border from El Paso.
The assembly line is a cross section of working-class Mexico, from
twentysomethings raised in this border boomtown to veteran hands harking
from the deep interior. In the years since NAFTA lowered trade and
investment barriers, Delphi has significantly expanded its presence in
the country. Today it employs 70,000 Mexicans, who every day receive up
to 70 million U.S.-made components to assemble into parts. The wages are
not princely by U.S. standards -- an assembly line worker with two
years' experience earns about $1.90 an hour. But that's triple Mexico's
minimum wage, and Delphi jobs are among the most coveted in JuÃ¡rez. ``I
like the environment, I like my colleagues,'' says Urquiza, a
56-year-old widow who assembles the switches that control turn signals.
The daughter of a poor rancher, she dropped out of school after the
seventh grade and has relied on her Delphi job to raise six children to
adulthood -- and, she hopes, to a better life.

Urquiza and millions of other Mexicans live out daily one of the most
radical free-trade experiments in history. The North American Free Trade
Agreement ranks on a par with Europe's creation of the euro and China's
casting off Marxism for capitalism. It encompasses 421 million people
and melds two first-world economies -- the U.S. and Canada -- with a
struggling third-world country, Mexico. The bloc was seen as a bold
attempt to demonstrate once and for all free trade's vast power to turn
a developing nation into a modern economy. If anything was a litmus test
for globalization, NAFTA was it.

PROMISES, PROMISES

On Jan. 1, NAFTA will celebrate its 10th anniversary. The assessment?
The grand experiment worked in spades on many levels. American
manufacturers, desperate for relief from Asian competition, flocked to
Mexico to take advantage of wages that were a 10th of those in the U.S.
Foreign investment flooded in, rising to an annual average of $12
billion a year over the past decade, three times what India takes in.
Exports grew threefold, from $52 billion to $161 billion today. Mexico's
per capita income rose 24%, to just over $4,000 -- which is roughly 10
times China's. ``NAFTA gave us a big push,'' Mexican President Vicente
Fox told BusinessWeek. Fox notes proudly that Mexico's $594 billion
economy is now the ninth-largest in the world, up from No. 15 a dozen
years ago. ``It gave us jobs. It gave us knowledge, experience,
technological transfer.''

Just as important, the pact spurred profound political change. Mexicans
who backed open markets also wanted an open political system. Would the
Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) have fallen from seven decades
in power in 2000 if Mexico hadn't signed a treaty requiring government
transparency, equal treatment for domestic and foreign investors, and
international mediation of labor, environmental, and other disputes?
It's hard to believe democracy would have come as quickly without NAFTA.

Impressive milestones -- and seemingly ample proof that free trade
delivers the goods. But rightly or wrongly, a large proportion of
Mexicans today believe the sacrifices exceeded the benefits. The Mexican
mood is infecting other Latin countries, which after 15 years of
gradually opening their own economies to trade and investment are
showing pronounced fatigue with the ``Washington consensus,'' the
free-market formula preached by the U.S. and the International Monetary
Fund. In an August poll of 17 Latin countries carried out by Chile-based
Latinobarometro, just 16% of respondents said they were satisfied with
the way market economics were working in their countries. Thus NAFTA's
perceived shortfalls are giving fresh ammunition to free trade's
opponents. ``Now you have a whole network of people organizing against
the Free Trade Area of the Americas and globalization because of what
has happened in Mexico under NAFTA,'' says Thea Lee, the AFL-CIO's chief
expert on international trade pacts. That's an ironic switch: It was
NAFTA, after all, that kicked the free-trade movement into high gear,
spurring forward the Uruguay round of global trade talks in the
mid-1990s and setting the stage for China's entry into the World Trade
Organization in 2001.

Why have so many Mexicans soured on NAFTA? One problem is that the deal
was oversold by its sponsors as a near-magic way to turn Mexico into the
next Korea or Taiwan. Ten years later, many think the pact has stopped
paying dividends -- and that Mexico has been unfairly neglected by a
Washington consumed by the war on terror. Speaking before an audience of
students on Nov. 11, Mexico's envoy to the U.N., Adolfo Aguilar Zinser,
characterized NAFTA as ``a weekend fling.'' The U.S., he said, ``isn't
interested in a relationship of equals with Mexico, but rather in a
relationship of convenience and subordination.'' While Zinser's remarks
cost him his job, his words struck a chord. In an October survey by a
leading pollster, only 45% of Mexicans said NAFTA had benefited their
economy. That's down from the 68% who in November, 1993, saw the pact as
a strong plus. With the U.S. in a slump for the past three years,
Mexicans are experiencing the downside of their close commercial ties
with the colossus. Mexico's economy will grow by 1.5% this year, a poor
showing for a developing country.

In a larger sense, Mexicans feel shortchanged by globalization. They
thought they would be America's biggest workshop. That honor now belongs
to China, which this year surpassed Mexico as the U.S.'s No. 2 supplier.
Mexican policymakers signed trade agreements with a total of 32
countries, and as a result consumers got cheaper and better goods. Yet
local manufacturers of everything from toys to shoes, as well as farmers
of rice and corn, struggle to survive the onslaught of cheap imports.
Mexicans hoped NAFTA would generate enough jobs to keep them at home.
Instead, the jobless flock in ever-greater numbers across the border.
Reforms that pressed on Mexico before NAFTA -- modernizing the
electricity sector, overhauling the tax code, shoring up the crumbling
schools -- are an even more difficult sell now that power is split among
several parties.

OPPORTUNITY KNOCKED

Do Mexico's woes disprove the value of free trade? Few would argue that
NAFTA was a waste. ``If we didn't have NAFTA, we'd be in far worse shape
than we are today,'' says AndrÃ©s Rozental, president of the Mexican
Council on Foreign Relations. If NAFTA has disappointed, it is in part
because the Mexican government has failed to capitalize on the
opportunities it offered. ``Trade doesn't educate people. It doesn't
provide immunizations or health care,'' says Carla A. Hills, the chief
U.S. negotiator in the NAFTA talks. ``What it does is generate wealth so
government can allocate the gains to things that are necessary.'' If a
government doesn't allocate new wealth correctly, the advantages of free
trade quickly erode. That is Mexico's plight. ``NAFTA wasn't an end unto
itself, but a means to something, and that something was precisely the
need to go further in reform,'' says former Mexican President Carlos
Salinas, one of NAFTA's principal architects. ``It's like Alice in
Wonderland -- you have to run faster and faster if you want to stay in
the same place. Globalization won't wait for you.''

The outcome of Mexico's struggle to regain momentum is of vital interest
not just to Latin America but also to the U.S. The Bush Administration
has made trade a key part of its hemispheric agenda. Besides, the U.S.
needs a stable, prosperous Mexico on its border to stem the flood of
illegal immigration and drugs. Mexico's ability to get to the next stage
will also show whether low-wage economies around the globe can hold
their own against China. ``Mexico cannot compete sewing brassieres and
tennis shoes,'' says Roger Noriega, U.S. Under Secretary of State for
the Wes-tern Hemisphere. ``They cannot compete with China -- who can?
Mexico has to modernize so it can move forward.''

NAFTA has already proven a powerful impetus to reform. Mexico did not
hike its import tariffs when the peso crisis of 1994 hit. Encouraged,
Washington stepped in with a $40 billion bailout package that helped
Mexico stabilize its finances and return to the capital markets in just
seven months. Although wrenching, the devaluation turbocharged NAFTA by
dramatically lowering the costs of Mexican labor and exports. The
government's fiscal discipline has earned the country a coveted
investment-grade rating on its debt. And the current recession is mild
by historic standards. Most analysts see growth quickening to 3.5% next
year.

Yet even with a rebounding economy, Mexico will not generate enough jobs
to accommodate its fast-growing workforce. While U.S. companies praise
the work of their Mexican employees, they now make it abundantly clear
that there are other, cheaper locales. An assembly worker in Mexico
earns $1.47 an hour; his counterpart in China makes 59Â¢ an hour,
according to a new report by McKinsey & Co. Top Delphi executives have
warned for months that some work may be shifted to China because of the
many advantages it offers. ``Delphi and other automotive suppliers are
courted every day by other countries, not only with lower-cost labor but
also with new incentives and tax breaks,'' says David B. Wohleen,
president for electrical, electronics, safety & interior. ``Mexico will
need to significantly pick up the pace to remain a competitive
alternative,'' he warns.

No one feels the China threat more keenly than Daniel Romero, president
of the National Council of the Maquiladora Export Industry. Mexico's
maquiladoras, which assemble goods for export using imported parts and
components, have been around since the mid-1960s. Under NAFTA, the
number of plants rose 67%, to 3,655 in seven years. Yet more than 850
have shut down since 2000, with many shifting to cheaper locales.
Employment is down more than 20% from its peak of 1.3 million workers.
Romero and a group of maquiladora managers traveled to China last year,
and came away dispirited. ``They have aggressive tax incentives, low
salaries, very aggressive worker training, and a supply chain that
allows them immediate access to the latest technology,'' says Romero.

The agriculture sector is suffering even more than the maquiladoras, as
subsidized U.S. food imports flood the country. Some 1.3 million farm
jobs have disappeared since 1993, according to a new report by the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a Washington think tank.
``NAFTA has been a disaster for us,'' says JuliÃ¡n Aguilera, a pig farmer
from Sonora. He and his peers have staged big demonstrations to protest
a 726% increase in U.S. pork imports since the pact took effect.
``Mexico was never prepared for this.''

Nor was the U.S. As the campesinos lost their livelihood, they headed to
the border. By most estimates, the number of Mexicans working illegally
in the U.S. more than doubled, to 4.8 million, between 1990 and 2000.
Despite tightened security after September 11, hundreds of thousands
continue to cross the border. The money sent back to their families will
hit $14 billion this year, more than the $10 billion Mexico expects in
foreign direct investment.

The exodus has turned rural hamlets into ghost towns. PanindÃcuaro in
MichoacÃ¡n, one of Mexico's poorest states, has one of the highest
incidences of migration, with one out of every seven people leaving.
PanindÃcuaro's priest, Melesio FarÃas, recently said mass for a young
father who died trying to cross the Arizona desert. ``I tell them to
forget the U.S. and to work at home,'' says FarÃas. ``But if Mexico
can't offer them jobs, why should they?''

Salinas' band of technocrats and their successors didn't do enough to
prepare vulnerable sectors for NAFTA's onslaught. Long-promised programs
to help 20 million campesinos switch to export crops never materialized.
Nor has the government offered inducements to channel investment into
areas where it is most needed. The six border states, along with the
capital, nabbed 85% of foreign outlays last year. Little has been done
to foster local suppliers for the import-dependent maquiladoras. Less
than 3% of the industry's parts are sourced in Mexico. ``Society at
large and a good chunk of the economy have failed or refused to adjust
to globalization,'' argues Luis Rubio, who heads the Center of Research
for Development, a Mexico City think tank. ``And the government has done
absolutely nothing to help.''

This laissez-faire attitude is in stark contrast to China. There,
state-owned banks have bankrolled investments in industrial parks, power
plants, highways, and other infrastructure to provide low-cost
facilities for foreign manufacturers. These multinationals had to source
as many components as possible from domestic suppliers, and the
government wasn't bashful about demanding transfers of technology to
Chinese partners. Also, Beijing sealed off weak sectors like financial
services or retailing. As a condition for entry into the WTO in 2001,
China is phasing out these policies, but domestic companies now have a
headstart.

Even if China-style tactics are not possible, Mexico could still hone
its competitiveness. The PRI under Salinas took advantage of its
monopoly on power to ram through painful reforms that paved the way for
NAFTA. Now under a multiparty system, the politicians struggle to make
difficult choices. Mexico will need to spend $50 billion to upgrade its
power grid. But legislation to open the constitutionally protected
sector to private investment has run into nationalist sentiment and
union opposition, even while electricity rates are as much as 40% higher
than in China. Grupo Mexico, the world's third-largest copper producer,
is considering moving refining operations to Amarillo, Tex., where
electricity costs 4Â¢ per kilowatt-hour, vs. 8.5Â¢ in Sonora.

Education is another critical area where reform has stalled. William
Spurr, head of the North American transport division of Canada's
Bombardier, which builds railcars in Hidalgo, sees a need for more
skilled workers. ``There's a very good talent pool, but there aren't
enough of them,'' he says. ``If I opened a plant in India, I'd have all
the engineers and technicians I need.'' To be fair, the government's
finances have been sapped by a $100 billion bank bailout after the peso
crisis. Even under those circumstances, the number of science and
engineering college grads has nearly doubled over the past decade, to
73,300. Yet that number still pales next to India, which graduated
314,000 students in those subjects, while China handed out diplomas to
363,000. Congress has so far foiled Fox's efforts to raise taxes to
improve education.

To get a glimpse of what the right training can do, consider the case of
Tecnomec AgrÃcola, a maker of farm and earth-moving equipment in
Aguascalientes, in central Mexico. ``We never had a tradition of
exporting. NAFTA definitely changed that,'' says founder JosÃ© Leoncio
ValdÃ©s. It was hard going at first. ``We couldn't get in to see people
in the U.S. because we were from Mexico and they figured we were
unreliable,'' recalls the 55-year-old engineer. Then in 2000, ValdÃ©s
dispatched his son JosÃ© to earn a degree in engineering and business
administration at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. On his first
spring break, young JosÃ© conducted a weeklong session with Tecnomec
managers. He used Lego blocks to build a replica of the factory and
figure out how to better track inventory, boost quality, and control
waste. Tecnomec soon boosted productivity by 21%. Now its exports total
$1.4 million a year, nearly a quarter of annual sales.

Mexico could use more Tecnomecs. Just 50 companies account for half of
all exports -- and the top tier is dominated by multinationals.
Thousands of other Mexican businesses have gone under in the face of
foreign competition. ``We are at a watershed,'' says Jaime Serra Puche,
Mexico's chief NAFTA negotiator. ``Either we take the steps to become a
true North American country or we just become a big Central American
country.''

Serra Puche is one of many prominent Mexicans trying to figure out how
to improve NAFTA. ``If we were going to do it all over again today, I
would insist on introducing a lot of considerations,'' says President
Fox, who believes that NAFTA should be modeled more on the European
Union, with provisions for free movement of labor and cross-border
grants to compensate poorer countries for dislocations. Proposals for a
single currency and a North American energy cooperation plan have also
surfaced. But don't expect any breakthroughs soon -- not while the U.S.
heads into elections and trade has reemerged as a contentious issue.

So for now the burden will remain on Mexico. Salvador Kalifa, an
independent economist based in Monterrey, recalls that when the
conquistador HernÃ¡n CortÃ©s reached Mexico, he burned his boats to
prevent crew members from fleeing. ``With NAFTA, we burned our boats and
threw ourselves into globalization,'' says Kalifa. ``There is no turning
back.''

Updated tour dates

2004-11-27T17:19:00.000-08:00

Hey Everyone,

Despite a nasty truck breakdown, the tour is rocking its way across the country. Here are the updated dates. for events with 'TBA's', please e-mail chiapasbrigade@hotmail.com to get exact info.

Thanks to everyone who has helped out.

December 16 Victoria, BC
Location and exact time TBA
Organized with Building Bridges

December 10 Vancouver, BC
Simon Fraser University,
Location and exact time, TBA
Organized by Simon Fraser Public Interest Research Group

Wednesday, December 8th, Neilson BC
Exact time and Location TBA

Monday, December 6th, Lethbridge Alberta
Location and time TBA
University of Lethbridge
Organized with Alberta Public Interest research Group Lethbridge

Friday, December 3, Calgary Alberta
7pm Unitarian Church meeting room
1703 1st NW

Thursday, December 2, Edmonton Alberta
5:00pm in the Alumni Room in the
Students Union Building
www.apirg.org

Friday, November 26, Winnipeg, Manitoba
7pm Mondragon Cafe
http://friendsofgrassynarrows.com http://winnipeg.indymedia.org/item.php?id=41&type=E

Monday, November 22, Thunderbay
10:55 am High school class, closed to general public
7pm Lakehead University

Sunday, November 21st, Thunderbay
7pm Unitarian Church downtown
http://thunderbay.indymedia.org

Thursday, November 18th, Sudbury,
7pm Sudbury Arts Council
124 Cedar St. Suite 102
Organized with Autonomy and Solidarity
3pm, Sociology class, Laurention University
Closed to the Public
12am, Student centre, Laurention

Wednesday, November 17th, North Bay
7pm Nipissing University, room: A133.

Tuesday, November 16th, Sault Ste Marie
7pm Algoma University Auditorium
Organized with Algoma Solidarity and Action (ASA)

Thursday, November 11, Montreal
5:30 pm, McGill University
Shatner Building Room 433 A
3480 McTavish Street
Organized with STAC Montreal
www.stacmontreal.net

Monday, November 8th, Guelph Ontario
7pm Bullring café, Guelph University
3pm Guelph University, number 1200 Thronborough
Intro to Women’s studies Class
Organized with OPIRG Guelph
www.opirg.org

Monday, November 1st, Waterloo Ontario
5:30 pm Waterloo University, Student Life centre
Room 3103
Organized with OPIRG Waterloo

Thursday, October 28, Kingston Ontario
7:30 pm Sleepless Goat café
91 Princess Street
Organized with the Goat and OPIRG Kingston

John Ross Interview

2004-11-25T16:59:00.000-08:00

John Ross interviewed by Chris Arsenault
http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/mexico/2689.html

Z Magazine (ZNet)
November 05, 2004
Chris Arsenault is coordinator of Students Taking Action in Chiapas. He is currently on a speaking tour talking about Chiapas ten years after the
uprising, and promoting participatory Zapatista economic structures.

It's been ten years since the Zapatistas of Chiapas, Mexico, launched their rebellion to create "a world where many worlds fit". Once the darlings of progressive movements around the world, the continuing struggle and development of autonomous institutions in Chiapas is taking place with little media fanfare.

John Ross has written several books on the Zapatista struggle including Rebellion from the Roots‚ and The War Against Oblivion‚. La Journada, Mexico's foremost independent daily, describes Ross as, "the new John Reed covering the new Mexican revolution".

Freelance journalist and Chiapas Solidarity activist Chris Arsenault sat down with Ross at his home on the first floor of the Hotel Isabel in Mexico City to talk about current realities in Zapatistas territory.

Chris: You‚ve been covering the Zapatistas and the situation in Chiapas for more than ten years now. In terms of daily life for the indigenous in the base communities, what‚s changed since the 1994 insurgency?

John: In 1994, we didn‚t know this area very well, but we began to go into the villages and we could see that there was no infrastructure. Ten years later, at the very least, we see schools in communities, and some clinics. And we see that a whole array of collectives and cooperatives has developed.

The most visually startling image of these communities is the enormous number of murals painted on all the walls. There are over 400 murals in Zapatista communities in the 38 autonomous municipalities.

I think some things are more material or concrete, but what you can never measure is the way people feel about themselves - 'the seizing', as archbishop emeritus of San Cristobal, Samual Ruiz, calls it, the Indians becoming the subject of their own destiny. In a real sense, the Zapatistas have done that. They've taken control of their own destiny. They have created a system of autonomous municipalities in five regions, which are in effect building their own way to live, a real autonomy. That is diametrically distinct from what it was ten years ago.

Chris: We've heard a little bit about peace talks. The former Zedillo government signed, and then refused to implement, the 1996 San Andres Accords, which would have given the Zapatistas autonomy. In 2001, the Zapatistas launched their March on the Capital to push for a lasting peace agreement. It was compared to Martin Luther King‚s march on Washington, winning the Zapatistas tremendous popular support, but it failed to produce a lasting agreement.

Has there been any movement towards peace since the March, and if not, do you see any hope for meaningful talks or a legitimate peace agreement in the near future?

Ross: No, no and no. There's not going to be any peace talks - there's really nothing to talk about. The Zapatistas negotiated for 22 months for the San Andres Accords, which would have been a landmark agreement, extending a form of autonomy to 57 distinct indigenous peoples in Mexico. The Mexican Congress mutilated that law, after years of struggle, after referendums that drew millions to vote in favour of this law, so the Zapatistas said, "why do we have to ask the government permission to establish autonomy?"

In a real sense, the Zapatistas are just doing what they agreed upon with the government - they're just establishing their own autonomy. I think the distinction here is that 5 or 6 years ago, when the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) still ran the show and the President was a guy named Zedillo, the government would have come down hard with the military or police.

What the Zapatistas do now, in terms of building an autonomous structure, is being ignored by the government.

[President Vicente] Fox tried to take command of the situation. He sent the COCOPA [Constitutional Reforms on Indigenous Rights and Culture] accords to Congress; Congress shot them down. Fox realized he was getting deeper and deeper into a problem he could never resolve - although he had promised to resolve it in "fifteen minutes" - and he's just washed his hands of it.

In a sense, this has been a great boon for the Zapatistas; they haven't had the kind of pressure you would expect from the government. The government would like to forget about them.

Chris: You talk of Fox trying to "wash his hands" of the situation, but most of the violence directed against Zapatista support bases has come from paramilitary organizations, not the official army. Most observers feel Zedillo‚s administration backed these groups, or at least turned a blind eye to their atrocities. Are paramilitaries still active in Chiapas and what is their relationship with Fox's administration?

Ross: I've debated the question of the paramilitaries for a long time. I for one don't believe there are active paramilitaries in the way there were in the period immediately following the rebellion, on through the Acteal massacre [when 45 unarmed villagers were killed in a church] and the months after.

There are disaffected PRIistas in many communities, essentially because the Zapatistas are doing much better than the PRI communities. Now that the PRI is out of power, it can‚t service the communities and its electoral clientele is leaving - and often joining the PRD [Party of the Democratic Revolution, who are social democrats] in Ocosingo and other places in the jungle and the highlands.

The PRI communities are now emigrating out of the area. The highest migration rates in southern Mexico come from Chiapas - small coffee farmers affected by the collapse of coffee prices, small corn farmers - most of them from PRI communities. The Zapatistas have this infrastructure, so people don't leave. They are able to take care of their own, through, for example, the Mut Vitz coffee collective, which sells organic coffee when the price of regular coffee has fallen.

There are a lot of disaffected PRIistas living in communities right next to the Zapatista communities, and I think this makes for tensions.

The term "paramilitary" - which really applies to an organization trained, financed and armed by the military, but is not the military, yet does what the military asks them to do - is not really accurate in this situation.

Paramilitary‚ has become a pejorative term for any people who create problems with the Zapatistas. I take the term with a grain of salt.

Chris: How are the Zapatistas creating the schools, clinics, and economic cooperatives that have made them better off than their PRIista counterparts?

Ross: I think we have to understand that creating autonomy is a fiction unless you have some way of financing it. The main source of funding for the Zapatistas, in terms of what the EZLN generates to operate, is organic coffee. You have the Mut Vitz Coffee Cooperative, with 28 communities and 6 autonomous municipalities, and they're selling between ten and fifteen containers a year now. They have over 500 farmers who are accredited as organic growers. There's a steady market there and it brings an enormous amount of money back to Zapatista communities.

There's a lot of NGO money - well, not a lot of NGO money, but a lot of NGO activity, and NGO activity generates infrastructure as well. The problem, at least in the first couple of years, is that all the money goes back to Mut Vitz or Oventic - to communities that are near the road, where there is a greater access. The back-country communities get nothing.

Under the reorganization system of the Caracoles last August, a deal was worked out where the Juntas of Buen Goberino, or "good government committees", were established, and the NGOs now have to go to the good government committees and say: "we'd like to do this in this community". And the Juntas say, "well, yes you can do that, but you also have to give us ten percent of the seed money for some other project"‚ It‚s a way of redistributing the wealth.

And then there's plain old civil society solidarity, which is certainly not as heavy as it was in the past. For example, in the first few years of the rebellion, when the Zapatistas were unable to leave their communities to go out and plant corn so they‚d have food to eat in the winter, it was civil society that provided tons and tons of corn to the Zapatista communities to keep them alive.

In many respects the Zapatistas have been somewhat forgotten; they're not on the front pages. But money still comes in.

Chris: What role has the American security apparatus played in the conflict, and how has that role evolved through ten years of Zapatismo?

Ross: The role of the US military is somewhat reduced in Chiapas. There are still probably 18 000 troops in the jungles, cañadas and highlands of Chiapas. The army has announced no reduction in troops, and they would be the first to announce that reduction. It is a presence and it could be used any time it was warranted or unwarranted to oppose the Zapatistas.

The difference is that the military does not patrol with the kind of intensity it did in the past. It‚' pretty much confined to barracks; and there must be a lot of stir-crazy soldiers who can't figure out what they're doing out there in the jungle.

Last year, the US trained over 600 Mexican officers; the previous year it was over 700. Mexican officers are everywhere, not only at the School of the Americas, but at the Center for Special Forces in Fort Bragg North Carolina, right through to the army propaganda school in Indianapolis and the war college in Ft. Lebonworth. Those officers will come back and serve an average of 20 years in the Mexican military, and they will always have this US contact with them.

The man who designed the counter-insurgency program that resulted in the deaths at Acteal, Mario Ramond Castillo, was in fact trained at the Center for Special Forces. Essentially, the folks who fought the war against the Zapatistas were US trained officers.

The Mexican military is armed lock, stock and just about barrel by the U.S. There is an enormous amount of American hardware in the country: transport planes, munitions, guns, hummers, right down to the ready-to-eat meals all come from the Pentagon.

Chris: Do you think the EZLN could still defend themselves militarily if they had to?

Ross: I don't know what the condition of their arms is. My sneaking suspicion is that if you don't have a constant supply and upgrading of arms, then your military capacity diminishes. For all I know, they may have that capacity and may be renewing it, but we haven't seen any signs.

The last time the Zapatista army and the Mexican military exchanged gunfire was on June 10th of 1998, in what is now called San Juan de la Libertad. The army came down and tried to dismantle the autonomous municipality, and ten people were killed. That shootout - that massacre, because nine of the ten people killed were civilians - ended when the Zapatistas started firing back. That was the first time they had fired back in awhile.

The weapon of the Zapatistas has been the word, not the gun; "el fuego y el palabra‚"[Fire and Word], and el palabra is certainly more dominant at this stage of the game. One thing you always have to remember is that one guerrilla fighter is worth ten fighters in a standing army, particularly in a terrain where people know the landscape and where to hide.

We saw this first in 1994 when the army chased the Zapatistas back into the jungle. And again in 1995 when the army invaded the jungle and Zapatista communities just abandoned ship and started moving down the river banks and left town. The army is at a real distinct disadvantage in the jungle.

I think they would be able to stand off the military for long enough that it wouldn't be worth the military's time to continue.

Chris: Can we talk about what's happening with genetically engineered corn in Chiapas? What steps are the Zapatistas taking to safeguard against it?

Ross: Well, we don't know much about transgenic corn in Chiapas, except that people are very, very afraid of it. We do know what‚s going on with transgenic corn in the next states over: Oaxaca and Puebla. In 2001, through some strange circumstances, a small village way up in the Sierra del Norte of Oaxaca discovered that their cornfields were contaminated by transgenic corn - specifically, by Bt corn. The story is that since NAFTA kicked in, the amount of corn imported into Mexico has increased from year to year. It‚s currently around 6 million tons, and will probably be a little more next year.

We have good reason to believe that 4 million of those 6 million tons are transgenic corn. US farmers can't sell that corn in Europe or Japan, so we think they're dumping it across the border. When we go to some of the major corn handlers, they say, "well, we can't sort the corn out". The demand here has been either all corn imports stop or the corn is sorted out so we know where it goes.

Years ago, trying to sort out the animal and human corn that was coming into the country, green dye was put into the box cars for the animal feed. Within weeks green tortillas were showing up in the Mexican market. There is no distinction between the two; one is a pretext for the other.

We find [GM] corn in Jalapa, at the top of the Sierra del Norte, across the Sierra in Puebla, and in eleven out of 22 corn growing regions in Puebla and Oaxaca, where corn first appeared 7000-10 000 years ago. This is the cradle of corn; there would be no corn without these places. And we find now that Bt and Starling corn is growing in these Milpas. We see that the plasma of the 300 to 3000 distinct types, families and varieties of Mexican corn, are endanger of being homogenized. To me, that's really the greatest danger of GE corn - to eliminate biodiversity, to eliminate millions of years of biological history.

When you start making corn a commodity - which it is not to the indigenous people - you're threatening a whole culture and way of life. The Mayan people are the people of the corn. When you talk about changing the corn, you're talking about changing a way of life that has existed for millennia. The Zapatista Army of National Liberation, which represents in many respects the Mayan people, is going to resist.

Chris: You mentioned the anti-globalization movement. When the Zapatistas first came on the international scene they were seen as something new, a movement that rejected the "free-market", and made no attempt to seize state power. You‚'e traveled a lot around Latin America covering a variety of social movements. Do you think the idea of rejecting state power is becoming a new norm for social movements, or do you think Chiapas is an isolated case?

Ross: I think it is actually a social movement, and there are a number of examples we can look at throughout Latin America. One such example is the picketero movement and other youth movements in Argentina - this kind of horizontal, non-hierarchical left. I think we see some of that within the Sin Tierras [landless workers] Movement in Brazil. Although the structures are different, we certainly see an echo of Zapatismo.

Most importantly, in Bolivia, a movement of that kind was responsible for the defence of water resources against the Bechtel Corporation, forcing Bechtel to retire. This was one of the great victories for the anti- globalization movement.

The water war was the first anti-globalization battle that was taken on as a result of Seattle, and it was won. I think amongst those people, Oscar Olivera and his committee, there is a real understanding of the Zapatismo approach of not organizing to take over state power.

I should mention that all of the political ideas that came out of the Zapatista rebellion of 1994 ˆ wonderful ideas about communal decision making, serving the community, and organizing in a way that did not aim to take state power ˆ all these ideas were welcomed by the left all over the world as a new model, a model to change the world.

I think we needed the Zapatistas more than they needed us. If you look at the historical moment, NAFTA had just been signed, many folks in the labour movement or the human rights movement who had been battling NAFTA for a number of years were in a sense lost. All of a sudden, here in the first hour of the North America Free Trade Agreement, the Zapatista Army of National Liberation rises up against it. We rush to their defence. We saw it as a way of helping us build our movement, and learning from them as well.

In the end, I think the Zapatistas didn't stage their rebellion to save us. They did that to save themselves in the face of a globalization that, even as far back as 1993-94, threatened the corn of the "people of the corn". After ten years they've done pretty well saving themselves, and that is the real purpose of the Zapatista rebellion.

A Very Human Struggle

2004-10-31T21:02:00.000-08:00

The Zapatistas inspire support from human rights campaigners across the world. In the aftermath of the Acteal massacre, Carlos Montemayor describes the vision and the struggle of Mexico's indigenous peoples.

In 1994 an army of destitute Indians, the Ejercito Zapatista de Liberacion Nacional (EZLN), sprang up in the Mexican region of Chiapas, challenging the country with complex questions about its history and social fabric. But the Zapatista insurrection had its roots in events almost three decades before. On 23 September 1965 a group of young radicals attempted to ambush the garrison of Ciudad Madera, near the Chihuahua hills in Sonora. This sparked an armed struggle which has lasted for 30 years, reaching a peak during 1971-77.

Throughout the 1980s, movements active in Chiapas helped to found what eventually became the EZLN. Today's armed struggle has its origins in popular organisations defending agrarian reforms and worker's rights and resisting the extreme discrimination suffered by indigenous communities. Behind the movement are thousands of children and older people who provide information, food, safe passage, clothing, arms and medicines. The family networks have penetrated large regions and have defeated all the military's efforts to dismantle it. However the latest move by the army to enclose the Chiapas forest, threatens this source of support.

The EZLN unlike other guerrilla movements, has had media attention from day one. This is partly due to globalisation, new international strategies of resistance and the spread of human rights organisations across the world.

The EZLN also differs from other groups in its influence on other sectors such as students, the National Democratic Convention, Consulta National, forums for the indigenous communities, and international meetings like the American Continental (Regional) Forum and the Intercontinental Meeting for Humanity and Against Neoliberalism (both held in 1996). Mexican intellectuals, artists and researchers participated in negotiations in San Cristobal de las Casas and San Andris Larrinzar, and numerous people have visited Chiapas. The EZLN launched its Fourth Declaration of the Lacandona Jungle to form the Zapatista Front. It set out not to be a political party but a form of civil resistance with a new political focus.

The EZLN's politics are rooted in the experience of the indigenous peoples. Those of us who have no indigenous blood have spoken too often about what does and does not constitute indigenous culture and about what indigenous peoples should and should not think. In the meantime, most aspects of the indigenous spirit have gained ground. This could be described as a process of 'Indianisation' of the socialist ideal. Western socialist notions have been subordinated to the communitarian culture of the Indian peoples. In Subcommandante Marcos's words: 'One-person decisions and vertical decision-making gave way to collective and horizontal decision-making.'

The traditional authority structure amongst indigenous people is strikingly democratic: not in the western sense, but in a unique, collective way. Indigenous authority takes shape over many years, and through many religious and civic activities that strengthen loyalty to tradition and to the community as a whole. Positions of authority do not bring riches but they carry the responsibility of sharing one's own goods: feeding the community and guests of the community. Every year the authorities change at every level. Every year the community builds on the spiritual maturity of its authority and on the respect which the community itself has for that authority. This explains the close integration of the Zapatista's military, political and community organisations.

First, there is a communal structure, the Clandestine Indigenous Revolutionary Committee (CCRI), organised along communal lines, with 'horizontal and collective' decision-making. This is the supreme Zapatista authority and its decision-making follows an age-old democratic pattern. Public discussion takes place in an atmosphere of respect, patience and wisdom unknown in western assemblies. Issues must be negotiated until a consensus is reached. What matters is the consent of the community, not the imposition of the will of the majority over the minority. Everyone's opinion has equal weight.

The armed body of the EZLN is called the General Command, and its head is Subcomandante Marcos. The General Command must obey the community as represented by the CCRI - the military authorities 'command while obeying'. Sometimes the EZLN's communiqués are signed by the CCRI, at other times by the CCRI and the General Command.

In Western cultures, past events have little relevance to the future. For the indigenous people the past is part of, and exists alongside, the present. Indigenous memory is a process of revitalising past times. Its celebrations, dances, prayers, oral tradition, are all part of a present inextricably linked with the past. So when they speak of Emiliano Zapata (or any other historic hero) they are talking about a living force. This world view in which past and present are simultaneous, constitutes a new understanding of society. This is why Zapata is the reincarnation of a force which is fighting not only in southern Mexico but in every corner of the country. This force, springing from the indigenous community, is made up of the common ownership of land, embracing the poor and their fighters. Zapatismo differs from other armed peasant groups which only identify themselves with a particular individual whose death, brings the movement to an end.

For those of us from the Judeo-Christian tradition, the planet seems to be at our disposal. For the indigenous peoples, though, land is a living partner; their communities are at the disposal of nature. Earth, rivers, rain, sowing and reaping all form part of an everyday living process. Each stage of the agrarian process, each element in nature -insects, the climate, the seasons - is part of how the indigenous communities understand the world.

In the west, it is of greater value to protect the rights of individuals than to preserve community values. For indigenous peoples, the values and sense of belonging to a community which aspires only to serve the world are paramount. This mean that constitutional reforms mean one thing for local land tenants but something quite different for indigenous communities which are often forced into the jungles and mountains either by political repression or to make room for dams and tourist resorts.

The indigenous vision of shared ownership of land, collective labour, civil and religious responsibilities, political and domestic values, is based on written law with high regard for equality. This is a judicial and political exercise which has been practised for centuries as a means of self-defence. They have a clear sense of their own identity and want to be respected for who they are. They do not want to act outside Mexican society but to be accepted inside it with a legal recognition they have termed 'autonomy'. Today, these communities have no autonomy but are isolated, marginalised and discriminated against. The final recognition of proper autonomy cannot be a concession or mere invention, but the beginning of a process of institutional openness, the first step towards a new administrative framework in Mexico.

The culture of the Indian peoples is a bulwark against the pressures to conform that come from neoliberalism and globalisation. The Zapatista's international struggle is an appeal, first of all, not to lose the human face of all the peoples of the earth.

It is also an appeal to focus on all the networks of support and solidarity that can work against the isolation of the EZLN's struggle. The international presence, in the form of world opinion, the media, human rights organisations, the International Red Cross, donors of foodstuffs and clothing, all contribute to the EZLN's goal of a new form of freedom, a chance to escape from the military and political encirclement of the Chiapas, an encirclement intended to snuff out its struggle and silence its voice.

This international support is necessary because this is not just an issue for the Indian communities of Mexico, but also a fact of life outside. The EZLN is the self-defence of a minority that symbolises every other minority, not just in weak and impoverished places, but also in powerful regions of the so-called First World.

We are witnessing increasing violence against minorities, both personal and state-inspired. These minorities may be Turks, they may be black people, they may be Asians and Hispanics. Racial discrimination is part of a much wider gamut of social exclusions. Discrimination may be economic, and take the form of poverty, unemployment, loss of social security and work. In Israel, in Germany, in France, in the United States, in Iraq, in Mexico, in any number of countries this is the case. What idea of humanity does this discrimination against the poor, this discrimination on the basis of skin colour, this violation of human rights imply? This contempt for others is a denial of humanity. Is this what we can expect today, at the end of the Cold War, when there remains but one great winner, when, with globalisation, a small group of countries and transnational companies exercise their hegemony over the world? This power that won the Cold War, does it propose to create a better human being? Or instead, does it propose to deepen discrimination, insisting on the superiority of one race, of one culture, of one economy, over all the others?

At a time when the violence of economic and racial discrimination seems to be growing, at a time when the powerful are ever fewer and the weak ever more numerous, a message comes from the Indians of Chiapas. From the Mayan peoples of Chiapas a call has been sounded: no one must be excluded from humanity. Discrimination in any form is a way of denying the human condition, of rejecting life, of turning one human being against others, against himself or herself.

This is why the EZLN's struggle and the bravery of the Zapatista Indians of Chiapas extends far beyond Mexico. This is a chapter in the human struggle to be recognised as human. This struggle did not begin yesterday and will not end tomorrow. But it does aspire to end. For this, it will have to triumph in every region of the world. After 30 years of armed struggle, an achievement of the EZLN was to bring a government to the negotiating table. That government has shown two major weaknesses: its failure to understand either the struggle or the indigenous mentality. A growing spectre of violence and a dangerous process of militarisation across the country can only be attributed to the government's resistance to negotiate. The recent massacre in Acteal has forced the government to shake off its stupor, at least for a while. We hope the government has the will to negotiate a lasting peace through dialogue rather than by force.

Translated by Marcos Braccaitta and Ben Webb. Marcos Montemayor is a poet and novelist, and writes for the Mexican newspaper La Jornada.

Female Mayor in Chiapas

2004-10-30T22:19:00.000-07:00

Female Chiapas Mayor

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=59&ItemID=6515
by Diego Cevallos October 29, 2004
IPS Printer Friendly Version
EMail Article to a Friend

MEXICO CITY - In December María Sánchez will become the first woman to govern an indigenous municipality in the southeastern Mexican state of Chiapas, where she is bucking local tradition. "I am the first, but there will be many more," she says.

"I can see that my brothers and sisters respect me and I respect them, which is why I have been able to achieve this great triumph, which won't be the only one for indigenous women," Sánchez told IPS from Chiapas in a telephone interview.

In two elections, in June and early this month, she managed to break with the indigenous customs and traditions of the municipality of Oxchuc and of a large part of the impoverished state of Chiapas, according to which women are not capable of governing.

Sánchez' case is an exception. In Mexico, indigenous women not only suffer the brunt of high levels of marginalisation and poverty, but in some parts of the country, they are forced to marry against their will, at a young age; in some cases, they may even be sold.

Indigenous women in Mexico have a life expectancy of 71.5 years, compared to 76 years for indigenous men. Indians make up around 10 per cent of the total population of 102 million.

While 18 per cent of men belonging to native ethnic groups are illiterate, this figure reaches 32 per cent for women. And just 8.9 per cent of indigenous women make it to secondary school.

On average, 10 ten per cent of the country's indigenous people between the ages of five and 24 do not attend school -- a proportion that rises to 42 when taking only girls and women into account.

"I have been lucky to be able to study, because I took on that challenge. But now I am facing something much more difficult, which is leading my community," Sánchez remarked.

Sánchez, who studied accounting and administration at university, will in December take over as mayor of Oxchuc, a municipality extending over 72 square kilometres which is home to approximately 40,000 members of the Tzetzal ethnic group, who live in dire poverty.

Oxchuc is near the area dominated by the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN), a poorly armed indigenous guerrilla group that has not fired a single shot since 1994.

In elections held in accordance with local indigenous tradition, which were not officially recognised, Sánchez stood in June as candidate for mayor. Despite the opposition of the municipality's elders, she won the support of the majority.

Sánchez then went on to win the early October elections organised and endorsed by the Electoral Institute of Chiapas.

"To us, the municipal elections of Oct. 3 were just a formal requirement, as the community had in fact already elected me," she pointed out.

The candidacy of Sánchez, of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), was questioned by the elders of Oxchuc, who claim to be the defenders of customs and traditions, as well as by her male rivals, who point out that the mayor-elect is the wife of outgoing Mayor Norberto Santiz.

"I haven't received any help from my husband. It is the community which has given me its support in order to try to pull out of this tremendous poverty," she stated.

"I will govern for everyone, because paying attention only to one's supporters or friends are things that have already done a great deal of harm to indigenous peoples. As the first female mayor I have a great responsibility," she added.

In Oxchuc, 87.8 per cent of the inhabitants work in agriculture, illiteracy stands at 31 per cent, 88.7 per cent of houses have dirt floors, and 82.7 per cent of them have flimsy wooden walls.

According to the mayor-elect, who will serve a three year-term, neither the EZLN nor other organisations have influence over Oxchuc. "We are surrounded by groups, but here in our community we don't have those problems," she said.

"I respect the Zapatistas and hope that they also respect our community. The worst we could do would be to create divisions among indigenous peoples."

According to the EZLN, women hold leadership positions in their area of influence, which is not far from Oxchuc. The group accuses the PRI, to which Sánchez belongs, of harassing their members and supporters, even by use of military means.

Studies conducted by the Mexican government indicate that the Zapatistas control less than 15 per cent of the 75,634 square kilometres of Chiapas. EZLN authorisation is needed to enter those areas, which are administered according to customs and laws dictated by the Zapatistas.

The EZLN, which does not take part in local or national politics, says real justice, communal living and respect for women and the environment prevail in its territory. Since the Zapatistas engaged in fighting with government troops in the first two weeks of January 1994, there have been no skirmishes with the army, thanks to a "pacification law" or truce.

There are no precise figures as to how many indigenous people live in the area under EZLN control, but unofficial estimates indicate that the total is at least 100,000.

Since President Vicente Fox's electoral triumph put an end to seven decades of PRI governments in 2000, the Zapatistas have lost the prominent role they had gained by mobilising supporters of democracy and the rights of indigenous peoples.

Surrounding the Zapatista region, there are communities and organisations opposed to the EZLN, and violent incidents have occurred on more than one occasion.

The bloodiest was a Dec. 22, 1997 massacre, when members of the Catholic civil society organisation "The Bees" were attacked in the town of Acteal by right-wing paramilitaries, who killed 21 women, 15 children and nine men.

A late 1990s study by the Jesuit-affiliated Agustín Pro Juárez Human Rights Centre found evidence that the so- called Anti-Zapatista Indigenous Revolutionary Movement, which purportedly has ties to the PRI, is operating in Oxchuc and surrounding areas.

But according to Sánchez, "That isn't true. There are no violent groups in Oxchuc. Here, the only thing we want is to live in peace and escape poverty."

"We respect the Zapatistas' way of thinking, but we also hope that they respect ours, for the good of everyone," she insisted.

"What the people in Chiapas want is work, since we are poor and suffer great hardships. I have come to make my contribution," the mayor-elect added.

STAC Tour dates: Fredricton and Toronto

2004-10-15T11:14:00.000-07:00

Hey Everyone,

The Black Star Boot Cooperative is beginning a Cross Canada Tour to talk about the situation in Chiapas ten years later and the boot project.

Here are the first couple dates

Fredricton, October 20th

When: 7pm, Wednesday, October 20th
Where: MULRONEY HALL room 101 at St. Thomas University.

Toronto, Saturday, October 23rd
Anarchist Bookfare, STAC is tabeling
From 10 am - 4 pm
At the 519 Church St Community Centre
For more info on the bookfair check out:
http://ontario.indymedia.ca/twiki/bin/view/Toronto/BookfairHome

Toronto, October 24th, Presentation
Scadding Court Community Centre, 707 Dundas St. West, at Bathurst
Sunday 5:30 - 7pm

Tour Info and Bios

Today, in a climate of paramilitary harassment and violent poverty, euphuistically deemed low intensity warfare, the Zapatistas are creating a variety of institutions which function outside the domination of the state or market. They are building economic democracy through women’s artisan co-ops, fair trade coffee farms and a non sweatshop boot cooperative in Oventic Caracole.

The 1st of January Boot Co-op produces boots for indigenous communities for free. Fifteen comrades work there, 5 days a week, 8-10 hours a day, for no salary! All the money the cooperative makes from sales to Mexican Nationals and foreigners goes back to the entire community for public services. ‘Everything for everyone, nothing for ourselves’, as the saying goes.

Members of Students Taking Action in Chiapas (STAC) recently returned from meetings with the boot co-op and other Zapatista institutions. We are organizing a cross Canada speaking tour to discuss what’s happening in Chiapas ten years after the insurgency and to build links of solidarity between Zapatista institutions and workers, students and activists in the over-developed. In addition to public education work, we will be selling non-sweatshop Zapatista boots and sending the money back to communities in resistance.

Organizational Bio

Students Taking Action in Chiapas (STAC) is a grassroots NGO which builds schools and solidarity with the Zapatista communities in rebellion. Since our creation in 1999 we have sent more than 35 volunteers to act as international observers and school builders in rebel communities along with $5000 dollars for autonomous infrastructure development. We are partnered with SERAZ (the autonomous school board in the region of Oventic Caracole Chiapas) and Schools for Chiapas in the US.

STAC now has chapters across the country, all of which are organized through local consensus decision making and then federated nationally and internationally. STAC is not committed to any one political ideology. Our basis of unity is simple: We organize through consensus. We do not except money or help from corporations or other unsavory entities and ‘solidarity not charity’ is the overarching philosophy for our work.

The idea of ‘solidarity not charity’ has inspired us to get involved in mobilizations against the FTAA, IMF and G8. A significant proportion of our efforts go into education about globalization and the situation in Chiapas.

Speaker Bios

Chris Arsenault: is youth activist and co-founder of STAC. He has extensive experience in Chiapas, working in Francisco Gomez, Guadalupe Teyepac, La Realidad and Oventic. Chris has covered the situation in Chiapas as freelance journalist for CBC Radio, the Chronicle Herald, CKDU news and www.rabble.ca. He has been a guest lecturer about Chiapas and Globalization at Queen’s University, the University of Western Ontario, Anahuac University in Mexico City, the University of New Brunswick (UNB), St. FX, St. Mary’s and other academic institutions.

Adam Squibb: is a Newfoundland based activist with a degree in International Development from Dalhousie University. He was active with the mobilization against the FTAA in Quebec City and has traveled to Chiapas with STAC.

Students Taking Action in Chiapas is a Canadian based grassroots NGO
dedicated to building schools and Solidarity with the Zapatistas of
Chiapas, Mexico.
Halifax 902-454-2095
Montreal 514-526-5158
Mexico (DF) 011-52-55-26-14-6092
educationcoordinator@stacmexico.com
www.stacmexico.com, www.stacmontreal

On the Road in Gringolandia: John Ross

2004-10-11T21:18:00.000-07:00

http://www.counterpunch.org/ross09072004.html
September 7, 2004

On the Road in Gringolandia
The Politics of Darkness: North / South
By JOHN ROSS

The ambiance inside the Garden was as toxic as an Al Qaeda bioterrorist Jihad. In the spotlight, a smugly chortling Bush lip-synched doom to 20,000 beardless Caucasian conventioneers. "This will not happen on my watch" the President pandered from the podium while the Twin Towers crumbled on the big screen behind him, apparently so brain-damaged that he did not remember that it had already happened. The Caucasians zeig heiled appropriately. "Four more years!" they regurgitated.

"Four more wars!" I screamed hoarsely and my colleagues in the press corps backed off to avoid contamination by my alarming lack of journalistic objectivity. An agitated gnome in an elephant's head hat two rows in front of me who had been haranguing the sky boxes where Al Franken and Michael Moore were quarantined to prevent a public lynching, lunged at me menacingly when I refused to stand up and cheer the bilious Bush.

Shamelessly harping on the nearly 3000 souls toasted on 9/11, the third anniversary of whose incineration would be mourned the very next week, Bushwa pumped up the paranoia as the lynch mob swooned in the aisles. Although the President often mumbles in a patois only his fellow Texans can decipher, his intentions were crystal clear. Filling the hearts and minds of the American electorate with fear and loathing is his most ballistic missile, and the malignant exploitation of national tragedy his hole card in the battle to retain the White House.

I longed for an overripe tomato to toss at this dangerous bozo strutting around down below on the circular stage but the sentries at the Garden gates, perhaps remembering an earlier Eden, had proscribed all round fruit from being carried onto the premises.

The craven spectacle that profaned the hallowed home court of the Knicks and countless classic championship slugfests, was my first stop on a campaign trail I will cover for the next months as I wend my way across the country from right coast to left, reminding my fellow Americans of their true his and herstory as depicted in my latest instant cult classic, "Murdered By Capitalism", a personal memoir of life and death on the U.S. Left.

Indeed, I had just touched down at LaGuardia en route from tropical Chiapas where I had been celebrating the first anniversary of the Zapatista "caracoles" (political/cultural centers) and the "Juntas de Buen Gobierno" (JBGs or Good Government Commissions) that now administer the five autonomous regions and 29 autonomous municipalities in the highlands and jungle of Mexico's southernmost state. The anniversary week had been filled with many cumbia dances and basketball tournaments and earnest evaluations of the JBG's first year of work. They still made a lot of mistakes, the members of the Juntas confessed but 50 rebel schools had been built in the autonomous zones in recent seasons and they were learning each day how to apply the Zapatista ethos of "mandar obedeciendo" or "governing by obeying the will of the people", a concept so foreign to Bushite brains that the rebels might as well be discoursing in Martian. Above all, the Zapatistas spoke from their hearts, an organ which Bush and his boys, despite their claims of "compassionate conservatism", have never been able to locate. The contrast between the toxic megalomania at the Garden and the unselfish, heroic resistance of the Indians was as stark as a sudden plunge into Dante's Inferno.

The Zapatistas, and for that matter the legions of oppressed who take up most of the space on this lonely planet, were in fact keeping close tabs on the blasphemy in the Garden. Much as protestors proclaimed in Chicago 1968 during another party's perverted presidential convention, the whole world was watching. They know that what happens here in the north from now until November could very well prove to be a life and death decision for them.

This is one reason why the multitudes assembled for the humongous August 29th march on the RNC, the largest protest ever registered at any political convention in U.S. history, mattered so much beyond the nation's borders even if the corporate media hype-hoppers failed to notice that twice the number of participants estimated in United For Peace & Justice's permit application had filled Seventh Avenue from gutter to gutter for 20 city blocks, a half million strong and I mean strong!

The phantasmagoric pageant featured every conceivable devil image of the Bush: with horns, with bloody hands, as a shrub, a skunk, a snake, a vampire with a stake through his heart. 500,000 throats spat out his name in venomous unison as we approached the Garden. I high stepped past the arena with my middle finger rigidly upraised in a "Chinga Tu Pinche Madre!" I dedicated to the compas back home in Chiapas.

And after the slog through the mid-Manhattan grit, we retired to the Park from which we had been barred by the Bloomberg gang on the pretext that our marching feet would destroy a lawn previously torn up by corporate rock concerts and highbrow cultural fandangos to which the great unwashed had not been invited. Re-seeding the Great Lawn had cost the city $18 million USD and now Bloomberg, who had the unmitigated chutzpah to compare the peace mob to 9/11 terrorists and then offer those who would wear buttons labeling themselves "peaceful protestors" discounts at such venues as the Museum of Sex, shelled out $103 million in police overtime to keep the peaceniks off the grass, a dim-witted display of cognitive dissonance by the bean-counting, billionaire mayor that bordered on the pathological.

Stopping off first to visit the gay penguins at the Central Park Zoo, we meandered northwards to the Great Lawn where brass bands and guitar players were tootling and strumming, and haki-sack, softball and non-violent training for Tuesday's mass civil disobedience were being plotted. Paunchy replicas of New York's Finest prowled the perimeter of this huge, busy, billowing throng, squinting at the defiant partygoers and sniffing out criminal activity. Whose Park? Our Park!

Our Streets too although the cops did not much cotton to our incessant chanting of this declaration of possession. In a disturbing prelude to the coming Republican fracas on Friday evening August 28th, the NYPD set the lawless tone by pepper-spraying, mauling, and hauling off (250 arrests) participants in perhaps the most gargantuan Critical Mass ever staged east of the Mississippi. 5000 cycling protestors peddling rakishly down Second Avenue were set upon by the Men In Blue so brutally that Frank Morales, the pastor at St Mark's, threw open the church doors to provide sanctuary from the pigshit storm.

All convention week, the oinkers man- and woman-handled the protestors, making nearly 2000 mostly illegal arrests (San Francisco's record 2400 arrests on the first morning of Bush's war remains in tact.) In a snit because Bloomberg had denied them a new contract, police ire was mollified by great gobs of overtime and lots of red meat in the form of demonstrators being clubbed into the pavement like so many baby harp seals. Those so detained were then dutifully cuffed behind their backs, dumped off at a crumbling pier house on the Hudson where they were herded into cattle pens and later than sooner transferred to the Tombs before being released back onto the streets, an ordeal which took up to 60 hour in durance vile before a New York State Superior Court Judge found the city in gross violations of the U.S. Constitution, and imposed half million dollar a day fines upon Bloomberg and his cronies until all the arrestees were free at last.

Such institutional sadism was pioneered by former NYPD bozo John Timmony at Bush's 2000 coronation in Philadelphia and Timmony's more recent bloodletting at the so-called Summit of the Americas last November in Miami.

But despite wholesale human rights abuse, the New York peace mob was undeterred in telling Bush, Bloomberg, and their accomplices to drop dead. Six times during the four day klavern, Bush's enemies invaded the convention floor disguised as Republican clones to diss the outgoing president. During the battle of Herald Square on Thursday night, delegates were spat upon, mooned, and pied, and garbage and eggs were tossed at their buses, at least one of which got its tires flattened. How all of this entirely justified acting up would play out in swing states like Missouri had the Kerryites fretting. Many of us, who feel that John Kerry is just Bush's lesser than evil twin, don't really give damn. The choice for us and the rest of the world too is not one between these two clowns of war but between war and that elusive state that passes for peace with justice.

For a week, the Fuji blimp and the black helicopters buzzed the scummy sky above the lower east side, garnishing breakfast, lunch, and supper with home-fried fascism. In the graveyard at St. Mark's, the infernal choppers did their damndest to drown out the reading of the names of the dead in Iraq by women in flowing white gowns, 25 Achmeds for every G.I. John Doe.
Despite the deafening onslaught, the forces of darkness could not staunch the hemorrhage of condemnation for Bush's death mission.
On the resistance scale, poetry is often our most potent WMD. The Bowery Poetry Club threw open its doors 24 hours a day to accommodate the angst of local bards. I read from my new book at the aptly-named KGB bar on east fourth to a respectable crowd while just blocks away readings at St. Mark's and Judson Memorial were packed to the gunnels with peace warriors. The rancid arrogance of the Bushwas was countered by Naomi Klein who I caught in an Episcopal Cathedral and the parents of Rachel Corrie and the decapitated Nick Berg who spoke from the altar of a Catholic temple to which 1400-pound tombstones listing the names of those taken in Iraq had been pushed all the way from Boston. The late lay saint, Phil Berrigan's daughter died in on the boulevards of Manhattan.

But perhaps the most creative protest during convention week was that of the Men In Black Bloc who arrived en masse at Sothby's, an auction house recently indicted for criminal price-fixing, to crash a sale of Johnny Cash memorabilia exclusively arranged for RNC delegates. And at the Brecht Forum one evening, during a benefit for Lynn Stewart, that feistiest of attorneys now on trial for acting as the blind sheikh's legal beagle, I was gifted with a sliver of one of her unforgettable apple pies, a morsel which stirred dormant patriotic allegiances. I mean, are we not all as American as Lynn Stewart's subversive apple pies?

Whatever happens next November 2nd; we need to remember that the U.S. presidential election transcends national boundaries. Everywhere I have walked in the world of late, from the muddy crocodile-laced rivers of the Ecuadorian Amazon to the jungles and mountains of Zapatista autonomous territory in Chiapas to the blasted boulevards of Iraq and the damaged olive groves of Palestine, the world is beseeching us to remove this malignant cancer named George Bush from the body of Mother Earth. It is a mission that we have an unbreakable obligation to fulfill. But replacing Bush with John Kerry would be a great mistake. I like how my camarada Nuri Fernandez in our Mexico City Beat Bush group explains it:" first, we bury Bush and then we will take care of John Kerry."

She's right on target. Blowing Bush away is only half the job. Now with surging numbers and reborn momentum infused by the massive resistance to last week's bullshit in the Garden, John Kerry had best change his tune or get out of the way before our marching feet trample him into the forgetful dust of oblivion.

John Ross will be on the spot in Mexico City for much of July and August before sallying forth to do maximum mischief at the Republican National Convention in Manhattan from where he will launch the intergalactic tour of his latest instant cult classic "Murdered By Capitalism--A Memoir of 150 Years of Life & Death on the U.S. Left".

Plan Puebla Panama: Intro from Global Exchange

2004-10-06T21:16:00.000-07:00

http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/mexico/ppp/ppp.html

Plan Puebla Panama (PPP)
Battle Over the Future of Southern Mexico

Plan Puebla Panama (PPP) is a mega project which seeks to open up the southern half of Mexico and Central America to private foreign investment and establishing the foundation for the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). The plan depends upon multi-lateral development bank support and private investment to create infrastructure that will attract industry and expand natural resource extraction. With the Inter-American Development Bank as the head of the PPP's financial structure and major credit and technical assistance coming from the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, among others, controversial projects have already begun.

This is the first step in the latest push to globalize the Americas with the end goal of incorporating all of the Western Hemisphere (except Cuba) under the FTAA. Essentially the PPP will create development corridors from the 9 southern Mexican states of Puebla, Veracruz, Oaxaca, Chiapas, Tabasco, Campeche, Yucatan, and Quintana Roo, through the most southern Central American country of Panama. The PPP will create an elaborate infrastructure of ports, highways, airports, and railways aimed to connect the development of the petroleum, energy, maquiladora, and agricultural industries. While the PPP's proponents assert that its main objective is to improve the quality of life for area inhabitants, critics of the Plan see it as an attempt to exploit the abundant, cheap labor force and precious natural resources in order to attract foreign investment eager to reap the benefits of an area stricken with poverty and rich in biodiversity.

Maquiladoras, factories in which low paid workers assemble import component parts for re-export, will be strategically placed throughout the region to attract the 50% of the population in the nine states that make less than the regular hourly wage of $1.90/hr (1999). Since Southern Mexico is home to 714 of the nations' 850 poorest municipalities (National Council of Population (CONAPO)), the Fox administration hopes to use this comparative advantage to compete with the maquiladora industry in Asia. In fact, this year alone has seen the creation of 92 maquiladoras in the region where employers can count on wages that are 30%-40% lower than those in the northern half of the country. Labor activists contend that the PPP hopes to create mass migration to areas concentrated with maquiladoras where transnationals have historically paid unlivable wages. International trade law and unilateral corporate agreements include loopholes that exempts transnational corporations from national labor and environmental laws. Critics conclude that the lack of environmental and labor regulations coupled with unlivable wages, will guarantee that transnational corporations reap the benefit while the social and cultural fabric of small communities is dismantled.

Environmental activists fear that the exploitation of primary materials (minerals, timber, petroleum, biodiversity, and water) will lead to environmental degradation for exportation without profit being dispersed to local communities. Mexico currently ranks 2nd in the world in rate of deforestiation (National Forest Inventory 2000) and 73rd in environmental sustainability among 122 nations (La Jornada, 7/23/01). The PPP, many organizations have warned, will lead to further environmental degradation due to the planned deforestation, overexploitation of natural resources, inefficient laws, and extreme poverty.

The elimination of the ejido system, or communal land holdings, as guaranteed under Article 27 of the Mexican constitution, in order to further foreign investment under NAFTA, catalyzed the corporate consolidation of land in northern Mexico. The modification of Article 27 represented a significant impact to the indigenous and peasant communities. By allowing the sale, purchase or rent of ejido land and the elimination of the redistribution petition, large agribusinesses and landowners have the ability to increase land acquisition while leaving many landless without any social provision to ensure land security and sustainability for the poor communities. Also, the use of land as collateral, risks farm foreclosure, the loss of land rights, and provokes the concentration of natural resources. As a result of its elimination, transnational corporations under the PPP will continue to have access to hundreds of hectares of primary resources, while installing unsustainable land practices, like monoculutres of African Palm and the Eucalyptus plantations.

The Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC), a central component of the PPP, states that its focus is to create innovative ways to manage biodiversity. But critics assert that it will facilitate the exploitation and privatization of biodiversity and its accompanying traditional knowledge. The exemplification of this process is a practice known as biopiracy which indigenous groups in Chiapas and Oaxaca have already spoken out, describing them as "a robbery of our traditional indigenous knowledge and resources". Mesoamerica is one of the most biological rich and diverse region on the planet and the survival of indigenous cultures and unique ecosystems make Mesoamerica a region rich in "green gold." Mesoamerica is now subject to mass privatization of genetic resources, as well as whole ecosystems, especially water. This coupled with unsustainable primary resource exploitation, converts Mesoamerica to an attractive region for extraction by multinational corporations.

In the end, critics conclude that the PPP will lead to massive displacement of campesino and indigenous communities, further environmental degradation, and development with the end goal of exportation for profit rather than eliminating poverty. As a result, in less than a year since the announcement of the PPP, hundreds of organizations and communities have formed campaigns of resistance in order to pressure global powers to support alternative economic development models.

In North America activists can join NoPPP, a network of northern-based organizations forming strategic alliances to stop the Plan Puebla Panama. We also support our southern partners' diverse initiatives for more equitable, locally-planned and ecologically sound forms of community development. The PPP was developed without any prior consultation with local communities, and is completely contrary to our southern partners' community-based initiatives for economic, social, cultural and ecological justice.

The NoPPP is a group of northern-based organizations that:

Supports important previous and ongoing PPP organizing in Mexico and Central America
Develops popular education materials in English and Spanish
Conducts broad-based popular education campaigns on PPP
Mobilizes US constituencies to lobby Congressional representatives
Conducts campaigns focusing on International Financial Institutions and corporations promoting PPP
Promotes mutual information and education exchange (between North and South)
Supports voices struggling to establish economic, social and cultural autonomy
Supports the capacity building efforts of Central American and Mexican-based community organizations
Strengthens North-South, North-North and South-South relationships
These principles guide our work to stop the Plan Puebla Panama. To join the NoPPP e-mail :acerca@sover.net or visit: http://www.asej.org/ACERCA/ppp/ppp.html#noppp

The Masks of Chiapas: Naomi Klien

2004-10-04T21:23:00.000-07:00

Ya Basta! The Masks of Chiapas

by Naomi Klein > December 6 2000

On the weekend, the man in the mask came down from the jungle and held a press conference. In the new year, he will travel to Mexico City and address Congress on the need for an Indian bill of rights.

Subcomandante Marcos, voice of the Zapatista National Liberation Army, has been keeping a low profile lately. But he's back, in trademark ski mask, rifle over his shoulder, and pipe hanging from his mouth. Rumour has it he is a university professor who fled to the hills to lead an indigenous uprising in Chiapas, but Marcos has no comment. Showing his face, he jokes, would disappoint his female fans.

It's a mark of the Zapatistas' influence that the very first act by Mexico's new president was to order a partial withdrawal of troops from Chiapas. Vicente Fox also invited the Zapatistas to resume negotiations that broke down under his predecessor. Marcos told reporters he's ready to talk, but not until Mr. Fox completes the troop withdrawal and releases all political prisoners.

It's clear that Mr. Fox sees settling the Zapatista standoff as key to Mexico's stability. Less understood is how powerful the Zapatistas are outside of Mexico—and why. How did this band of indigenous insurgents become symbols (some would say masked mascots) of the international anti-free-trade movement? Why, in the words of a report commissioned by the U.S. military, did the uprising go from being "a war of the flea"—remote and easy to control—to "a war of the swarm"—ubiquitous and impossible to contain?

The answer dates back to Jan. 1, 1994, the day the North American free-trade agreement came into force in Mexico. The Zapatistas chose that day to "declare war" on the Mexican army. A communique placed NAFTA, which banned subsidies to indigenous farm co-operatives, within a long history of colonialism that has impoverished Mexico's native peoples. "Ya Basta!" they said. Enough is enough.

The message was posted on the Internet. Dozens of mirror sites went up, translating and posting regular communiques from the Zapatistas. Caravans of activists hit the road for Chiapas. Groups from Cincinnati to Milan cropped up, calling themselves Ya Basta! And at every demonstration, there were more black masks: Marcos clones, multiplying. Though they were the first rebels to use the Internet, the Zapatistas are less a testament to the power of technology than to the power of language. Marcos's communiques skip lightly from gruesome lists of atrocities to cracks about football games, to Shakespearean verse. He is a master of political metaphor, challenging his supporters to break out of staid old left thinking and build a movement fluid enough to adapt to the global economy.

The Zapatistas' goal is not to seize state control for their ideological camp, but to build an international movement that can rein in corporate power globally and restore community power locally. They call this a movement of "one no and many yeses." Like all indigenous struggles, the Zapatistas are fighting to preserve their heritage. But rather than throwing up blockades and locking out the world, they are inventing a new way to protect their land: opening the doors and inviting the world inside. In 1996, 3,000 activists travelled to Chiapas to attend a gathering "for humanity and against neo-liberalism."

The Zapatistas have taken what could have been a narrow ethnic dispute and made it universal. A Zapatista, Marcos says, is anyone who is fighting for communal space against market forces. And from behind their masks, the Zapatistas have forged a new kind of leadership and heroism, one especially tailored to an age suspicious of both heroes and leaders. Paradoxically, it is leadership without a face, heroes you have to imagine.

This article first appeared in The Globe and Mail.

The Unknown Icon: Klien on the Zapatistas

2004-10-04T21:18:00.000-07:00

The Unknown Icon

by Naomi Klein > March 3 2001

I've never been to Chiapas. I've never made the pilgrimage to the Lacandon jungle. I've never sat in the mud and the mist in La Realidad. I've never begged, pleaded or posed to get an audience with Subcomandante Marcos, the masked man, the faceless face of Mexico's Zapatista National Liberation Army.

I know people who have. Lots of them. In 1994, the summer after the Zapatista rebellion, caravans to Chiapas were all the rage in north American activist circles: friends got together and raised money for secondhand vans, filled them with supplies, then drove south to San Cristobal de las Casas and left the vans behind. I didn't pay much attention at the time. Back then, Zapatista-mania looked suspiciously like just another cause for guilty lefties with a Latin American fetish: another Marxist rebel army, another macho leader, another chance to go south and buy colourful textiles. Hadn't we heard this story before? Hadn't it ended badly?

Last week, there was another caravan in Chiapas. But this was different. First, it didn't end in San Cristobal de las Casas; it started there, and is now criss-crossing the Mexican countryside before the planned grand entrance into Mexico City on March 11. The caravan, nicknamed the "Zapatour" by the Mexican press, is being led by the council of 24 Zapatista commanders, in full uniform and masks (though no weapons), including Subcomandante Marcos himself. Because it is unheard of for the Zapatista command to travel outside Chiapas (and there are vigilantes threatening deadly duels with Marcos all along the way), the Zapatour needs tight security. The Red Cross turned down the job, so protection is being provided by several hundred anarchists from Italy who call themselves Ya Basta! (meaning "Enough is enough!"), after the defiant phrase used in the Zapatistas' declaration of war. Hundreds of students, small farmers and activists have joined the roadshow, and thousands greet them along the way. Unlike those early visitors to Chiapas, these travellers say they are there not because they are "in solidarity" with the Zapatistas, but because they are Zapatistas. Some even claim to be Subcomandante Marcos himself—they say we are all Marcos.

Perhaps only a man who never takes off his mask, who hides his real name, could lead this caravan of renegades, rebels, loners and anarchists on this two-week trek. These are people who have learned to steer clear of charismatic leaders with one-size-fits-all ideologies. These aren't party loyalists; these are members of groups that pride themselves on their autonomy and lack of hierarchy. Marcos—with his black wool mask, two eyes and pipe—seems to be an anti-leader tailor-made for this suspicious, critical lot. Not only does he refuse to show his face, undercutting (and simultaneously augmenting) his own celebrity, but Marcos's story is of a man who came to his leadership, not through swaggering certainty, but by coming to terms with political uncertainty, by learning to follow.

Though there is no confirmation of Marcos's real identity, the most repeated legend that surrounds him goes like this: an urban Marxist intellectual and activist, Marcos was wanted by the state and was no longer safe in the cities. He fled to the mountains of Chiapas in southeast Mexico filled with revolutionary rhetoric and certainty, there to convert the poor indigenous masses to the cause of armed proletarian revolution against the bourgeoisie. He said the workers of the world must unite, and the Mayans just stared at him. They said they weren't workers and, besides, land wasn't property but the heart of their community. Having failed as a Marxist missionary, Marcos immersed himself in Mayan culture. The more he learned, the less he knew. Out of this process, a new kind of army emerged, the EZLN, the Zapatista National Liberation Army, which was not controlled by an elite of guerrilla commanders but by the communities themselves, through clandestine councils and open assemblies. "Our army," says Marcos, "became scandalously Indian." That meant that he wasn't a commander barking orders, but a subcomandante, a conduit for the will of the councils. His first words said in the new persona were: "Through me speaks the will of the Zapatista National Liberation Army." Further subjugating himself, Marcos says that he is not a leader to those who seek him out, but that his black mask is a mirror, reflecting each of their own struggles; that a Zapatista is anyone anywhere fighting injustice, that "We are you". He once said, "Marcos is gay in San Francisco, black in South Africa, an Asian in Europe, a Chicano in San Ysidro, an anarchist in Spain, a Palestinian in Israel, a Mayan Indian in the streets of San Cristobal, a Jew in Germany, a Gypsy in Poland, a Mohawk in Quebec, a pacifist in Bosnia, a single woman on the Metro at 10pm, a peasant without land, a gang member in the slums, an unemployed worker, an unhappy student and, of course, a Zapatista in the mountains."

"This non-self," writes Juana Ponce de Leon who has collected and edited Marcos's writings in Our Word Is Our Weapon, "makes it possible for Marcos to become the spokesperson for indigenous communities. He is transparent, and he is iconographic." Yet the paradox of Marcos and the Zapatistas is that, despite the masks, the non-selves, the mystery, their struggle is about the opposite of anonymity—it is about the right to be seen. When the Zapatistas took up arms and said Ya Basta! in 1994, it was a revolt against their invisibility. Like so many others left behind by globalisation, the Mayans of Chiapas had fallen off the economic map: "Below in the cities," the EZLN command stated, "we did not exist. Our lives were worth less than those of machines or animals. We were like stones, like weeds in the road. We were silenced. We were faceless." By arming and masking themselves, the Zapatistas explain, they weren't joining some Star Trek-like Borg universe of people without identities fighting in common cause: they were forcing the world to stop ignoring their plight, to see their long neglected faces. The Zapatistas are "the voice that arms itself to be heard. The face that hides itself to be seen."

Meanwhile, Marcos himself—the supposed non-self, the conduit, the mirror—writes in a tone so personal and poetic, so completely and unmistakably his own, that he is constantly undercutting and subverting the anonymity that comes from his mask and pseudonym. It is often said that the Zapatistas' best weapon was the internet, but their true secret weapon was their language. In Our Word Is Our Weapon, we read manifestos and war cries that are also poems, legends and riffs. A character emerges behind the mask, a personality. Marcos is a revolutionary who writes long meditative letters to Uruguayan poet Eduardo Galeano about the meaning of silence; who describes colonialism as a series of "bad jokes badly told", who quotes Lewis Carroll, Shakespeare and Borges. Who writes that resistance takes place "any time any man or woman rebels to the point of tearing off the clothes resignation has woven for them and cynicism has dyed grey". And who then sends whimsical mock telegrams to all of "civil society": "THE GRAYS HOPE TO WIN. STOP. RAINBOW NEEDED URGENTLY."

Marcos seems keenly aware of himself as an irresistible romantic hero. He's an Isabelle Allende character in reverse—not the poor peasant who becomes a Marxist rebel, but a Marxist intellectual who becomes a poor peasant. He plays with this character, flirts with it, saying that he can't reveal his real identity for fear of disappointing his female fans. Perhaps wary that this game was getting a little out of hand, Marcos chose the eve of Valentine's Day this year to break the bad news: he is married, and deeply in love, and her name is La Mar ("the Sea"—what else would it be?)

This is a movement keenly aware of the power of words and symbols. Rumour has it that when the 24-strong Zapatista command arrive in Mexico City, they hope to ride downtown on horseback, like indigenous conquistadors. There will be a massive rally, and concerts, and they will ask to address the Congress. There, they will demand that legislators pass an Indigenous Bill of Rights, a law that came out of the Zapatistas' failed peace negotiations with president, Ernesto Zedillo, who was defeated in recent elections. Vincente Fox, his successor who famously bragged during the campaign that he could solve the Zapatista problem "in 15 minutes", has asked for a meeting with Marcos, but has so far been refused—not until the bill is passed, says Marcos, not until more army troops are withdrawn from Zapatista territory, not until all Zapatista political prisoners are freed. Marcos has been betrayed before, and accuses Fox of staging a "simulation of peace" before the peace negotiations have even restarted. What is clear in all this jostling for position is that something radical has changed in the balance of power in Mexico. The Zapatistas are calling the shots now—which is significant, because they have lost the habit of firing shots. What started as a small, armed insurrection has in the past seven years turned into what now looks more like a peaceful, and mass movement. It has helped topple the corrupt 71-year reign of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, and has placed indigenous rights at the centre of the Mexican political agenda.

Which is why Marcos gets angry when he is looked on as just another guy with a gun: "What other guerrilla force has convened a national democratic movement, civic and peaceful, so that armed struggle becomes useless?" he asks. "What other guerrilla force asks its bases of support about what it should do before doing it? What other guerrilla force has struggled to achieve a democratic space and not take power? What other guerrilla force has relied more on words than on bullets?"

The Zapatistas chose January 1, 1994, the day the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) came into force, to "declare war" on the Mexican army, launching an insurrection and briefly taking control of the city of San Cristobal de las Casas and five Chiapas towns. They sent out a communiqué explaining that Nafta, which banned subsidies to indigenous farm co-operatives, would be a "summary execution" for four million indigenous Mexicans in Chiapas, the country's poorest province.

Nearly 100 years had passed since the Mexican revolution promised to return indigenous land through agrarian reform; after all these broken promises, Nafta was simply the last straw. "We are the product of 500 years of struggle . . . but today we say Ya Basta! Enough is enough." The rebels called themselves Zapatistas, taking their name from Emiliano Zapata, the slain hero of the 1910 revolution who, along with a rag-tag peasant army, fought for lands held by large landowners to be returned to indigenous and peasant farmers.

In the seven years since, the Zapatistas have come to represent two forces at once: first, rebels struggling against grinding poverty and humiliation in the mountains of Chiapas and, on top of this, theorists of a new movement, another way to think about power, resistance and globalisation. This theory—Zapatismo—not only turns classic guerrilla tactics inside out, but much of leftwing politics on its head.

I may never have made the pilgrimage to Chiapas, but I have watched the Zapatistas' ideas spread through activist circles, passed along second- and thirdhand: a phrase, a way to run a meeting, a metaphor that twists your brain around. Unlike classic revolutionaries, who preach through bullhorns and from pulpits, Marcos has spread the Zapatista word through riddles. Revolutionaries who don't want power. People who must hide their faces to be seen. A world with many worlds in it.

A movement of one "no" and many "yesses".

These phrases seem simple at first, but don't be fooled. They have a way of burrowing into the consciousness, cropping up in strange places, being repeated until they take on this quality of truth - but not absolute truth: a truth, as the Zapatistas might say, with many truths in it. In Canada, where I'm from, indigenous uprising is always symbolised by a blockade: a physical barrier to stop the golf course from being built on a native burial site, to block the construction of a hydroelectric dam or to keep an old growth forest from being logged. The Zapatista uprising was a new way to protect land and culture: rather than locking out the world, the Zapatistas flung open the doors and invited the world inside. Chiapas was transformed, despite its poverty, despite being under constant military siege, into a global gathering place for activists, intellectuals, and indigenous groups.

From the first communiqué, the Zapatistas invited the international community "to watch over and regulate our battles". The summer after the uprising, they hosted a National Democratic Convention in the jungle; 6,000 people attended, most from Mexico. In 1996, they hosted the first Encuentro (or meeting) For Humanity And Against Neo-Liberalism. Some 3,000 activists travelled to Chiapas to meet with others from around the world.

Marcos himself is a one-man-web: he is a compulsive communicator, constantly reaching out, drawing connections between different issues and struggles. His communiqués are filled with lists of groups that he imagines are Zapatista allies, small shopkeepers, retired people and the disabled, as well as workers and campesinos. He writes to political prisoners Mumia Abu Jamal and Leonard Peltier. He is pen-pals with some of Latin America's best-known novelists. He writes letters addressed "to the people of world".

When the uprising began, the government attempted to play down the incident as a "local" problem, an ethnic dispute easily contained. The strategic victory of the Zapatistas was to change the terms: to insist that what was going on in Chiapas could not be written off as a narrow "ethnic" struggle, and that it was universal. They did this by clearly naming their enemy not only as the Mexican state but as the set of economic policies known as "neo-liberalism". Marcos insisted that the poverty and desperation in Chiapas was simply a more advanced version of something happening all around the world. He pointed to the huge numbers of people who were being left behind by prosperity, whose land, and work, made that prosperity possible. "The new distribution of the world excludes 'minorities'," Marcos has said. "The indigenous, youth, women, homosexuals, lesbians, people of colour, immigrants, workers, peasants; the majority who make up the world basements are presented, for power, as disposable. The distribution of the world excludes the majorities."

The Zapatistas staged an open insurrection, one that anyone could join, as long as they thought of themselves as outsiders. By conservative estimates, there are now 45,000 Zapatista-related websites, based in 26 countries. Marcos's communiqués are available in at least 14 languages. And then there is the Zapatista cottage industry: black T-shirts with red five-pointed stars, white T-shirts with EZLN printed in black. There are baseball hats, black EZLN ski masks, Mayan-made dolls and trucks. There are posters, including one of Comandante Ramona, the much loved EZLN matriarch, as the Mona Lisa.

It looked like fun, but it was also influential. Many who attended the first "encuentros" went on to play key roles in the protests against the World Trade Organisation in Seattle and the World Bank and IMF in Washington DC, arriving with a new taste for direct action, for collective decision-making and decentralised organising. When the insurrection began, the Mexican military was convinced it would be able to squash the Zapatistas' jungle uprising like a bug. It sent in heavy artillery, conducted air raids, mobilised thousands of soldiers. Only, instead of standing on a squashed bug, the government found itself surrounded by a swarm of international activists, buzzing around Chiapas. In a study commissioned by the US military from the Rand Corporation, the EZLN is studied as "a new mode of conflict—'netwar'—in which the protagonists depend on using network forms of organisation, doctrine, strategy and technology." This is dangerous, according to Rand, because what starts as "a war of the flea" can quickly turn into "a war of the swarm".

The ring around the rebels has not protected the Zapatistas entirely. In December 1997, there was the brutal Acteal massacre in which 45 Zapatista supporters were killed, most of them women and children. And the situation in Chiapas is still desperate, with thousands displaced from their homes. But it is also true that the situation would probably have been much worse, potentially with far greater intervention from the US military, had it not been for this international swarm. The Rand Corporation study states that the global activist attention arrived "during a period when the United States may have been tacitly interested in seeing a forceful crackdown on the rebels".

So it's worth asking: what are the ideas that proved so powerful that thousands have taken it upon themselves to disseminate them around the world? A few years ago, the idea of the rebels travelling to Mexico City to address the congress would have been impossible to imagine. The prospect of masked guerrillas (even masked guerrillas who have left their arms at home) entering a hall of political power signals one thing: revolution. But Zapatistas aren't interested in overthrowing the state or naming their leader, Marcos, as president. If anything, they want less state power over their lives. And, besides, Marcos says that as soon as peace has been negotiated he will take off his mask and disappear.

What does it mean to be a revolutionary who is not trying to stage a revolution? This is one of the key Zapatista paradoxes. In one of his many communiqués, Marcos writes that "it is not necessary to conquer the world. It is sufficient to make it new". He adds: "Us. Today." What sets the Zapatistas apart from your average Marxist guerrilla insurgents is that their goal is not to win control, but to seize and build autonomous spaces where "democracy, liberty and justice" can thrive.

Although the Zapatistas have articulated certain key goals of their resistance (control over land, direct political representation, and the right to protect their language and culture), they insist they are not interested in "the Revolution", but rather in "a revolution that makes revolution possible".

Marcos believes that what he has learned in Chiapas about non-hierarchical decision-making, decentralised organising and deep community democracy holds answers for the non-indigenous world as well—if only it were willing to listen. This is a kind of organising that doesn't compartmentalise the community into workers, warriors, farmers and students, but instead seeks to organise communities as a whole, across sectors and across generations, creating "social movements". For the Zapatistas, these autonomous zones aren't about isolationism or dropping out, 60s-style. Quite the opposite: Marcos is convinced that these free spaces, born of reclaimed land, communal agriculture, resistance to privatisation, will eventually create counter-powers to the state simply by existing as alternatives.

This is the essence of Zapatismo, and explains much of its appeal: a global call to revolution that tells you not to wait for the revolution, only to stand where you stand, to fight with your own weapon. It could be a video camera, words, ideas, "hope"—all of these, Marcos has written, "are also weapons". It's a revolution in miniature that says, "Yes, you can try this at home." This organising model has spread throughout Latin America, and the world. You can see it in the anarchist squats of Italy (called "social centres") and in the Landless Peasants' Movement of Brazil, which seizes tracts of unused farmland and uses them for sustainable agriculture, markets and schools under the slogan "Ocupar, Resistir, Producir" (Occupy, Resist, Produce). These same ideas were forcefully expressed by the students of the National Autonomous University of Mexico during last year's long and militant occupation of their campus. Zapata once said the land belongs to those who work it, their banners blared, WE SAY THAT THE UNIVERSITY BELONGS TO THOSE WHO STUDY IN IT.

Zapatismo, according to Marcos, is not a doctrine but "an intuition". And he is consciously trying to appeal to something that exists outside the intellect, something uncynical in us, that he found in himself in the mountains of Chiapas: wonder, a suspension of disbelief, myth and magic. So, instead of issuing manifestos, he tries to riff his way into this place, with long meditations, flights of fancy, dreaming out loud. This is, in a way, a kind of intellectual guerrilla warfare: Marcos won't meet his opponents head on, but instead surrounds them from all directions.

A month ago, I got an email from Greg Ruggiero, the publisher of Marcos's collected writings. He wrote that when Marcos enters Mexico City next week, it will be "the equivalent of Martin Luther King Jr's March on Washington". I stared at the sentence for a long time. I have seen the clip of King's "I have a dream" speech maybe 10,000 times, though usually through adverts selling mutual funds, cable news or computers and the like. Having grown up after history ended, it never occurred to me that I might see a capital-H history moment to match it.

Next thing I knew, I was on the phone talking to airlines, cancelling engagements, making crazy excuses, mumbling about Zapatistas and Martin Luther King. Who cares that I dropped my introduction to Spanish course? Or that I've never been to Mexico City, let alone Chiapas? Marcos says I am a Zapatista and I am suddenly thinking, "Yes, yes, I am. I have to be in Mexico City on March 11. It's like Martin Luther King Jr's March on Washington." Only now, as March 11 approaches, it occurs to me that it's not like that at all. History is being made in Mexico City this week, but it's a smaller, lower-case, humbler kind of history than you see in those news-clips. A history that says ,"I can't make your history for you. But I can tell you that history is yours to make."

It also occurs to me that Marcos isn't Martin Luther King; he is King's very modern progeny, born of a bittersweet marriage of vision and necessity. This masked man who calls himself Marcos is the descendant of King, Che Guevara, Malcom X, Emiliano Zapata and all the other heroes who preached from pulpits only to be shot down one by one, leaving bodies of followers wandering around blind and disoriented because they lost their heads.

In their place, the world now has a new kind of hero, one who listens more than speaks, who preaches in riddles not in certainties, a leader who doesn't show his face, who says his mask is really a mirror. And in the Zapatistas, we have not one dream of a revolution, but a dreaming revolution. "This is our dream," writes Marcos, "the Zapatista paradox—one that takes away sleep. The only dream that is dreamed awake, sleepless. The history that is born and nurtured from below."

This article first appeared in The Guardian.

Refuse to look away: North American Activism and the Rebellion in Chiapas

2004-09-30T23:02:00.000-07:00

http://www.zmag.org/chiapas1/rebessay.htm
Refuse to look away: North American Activism and the Rebellion in Chiapas
Justin Podur

At the end of the day, all anyone wants is to live with dignity. To eat
three times a day, to have some say in what happens to you, to watch
children grow, to teach them and learn from them. To know you'll be taken
care of when you're sick. To know you'll have a chance to learn and do
things. Maybe to be able to walk out in the air, to be able to breathe that
air. To sing songs in your language, to learn songs from your elders and
teach them to your children. These aren't culturally specific desires. They
aren't western norms or middle class aspirations.

Maybe these aren't aspirations but roles people want to play. But the script
says that there aren't enough roles like this. The script calls for millions
and millions of people who don't get to eat three times a day. For people
who have to watch their children starve. Who have to work all day and never
see what they worked for.

This script—called capitalism, colonialism, white supremacy, patriarchy,
authoritarianism, militarism—divides the world into worlds. A first world
here, a first world there, a third world here, a third world there. The
first worlds talk—they get all the best lines. The third and fourth worlds
listen. Obey. They aren't permitted to speak unless spoken to. They aren't
permitted to rage, except against each other.

The script is not like that of a neighborhood play. The actors can't quit if
they don't like it. It is enforced—by guns and bombs, by fire and hunger and
hatred. It reaches into every corner of the world and assigns roles to every
person in it, from birth. From birth you know if you're to be white or
brown, rich or poor, man or woman, fourth world or third or first.

The lines are quite familiar, to anyone who has lived in the world a while.
So is the fate of those who try to rewrite, to improvise. First world would-
be rewriters face ridicule, charges of insanity, discomfort, even prison.
Third and fourth worlders face torture and death. And yet we have a moral
responsibility to try to rewrite the script. To write out the roles of
biopirate, CEO, paramilitary commando, bomber, state propagandist. To write
in the things we like.

Isolation is the enemy of the rewriter. In a corner of this continent, a
group of people are trying to rewrite the script. They are trying to write
in intercommunalism, democracy, respect for women, food, land, education,
health care, human rights, leaders who take orders rather than give them.
The script would like to see them isolated. Seeing them isolated, it would
see them quieted. Seeing them quieted, it would see them dead, or returned
to their former roles as takers of orders, as eaters of scraps, as workers
who are not rewarded.

As long as there is a project going to try to change the script, anyone who
would rewrite it is invited. The price of failure is more of the same. But
success would mean food and dignity and democracy, for everyone.
I.

How does the script play itself out in Chiapas? What does the order require
there?

The order requires inequality, poverty, and non-development. Chiapas is a
state of people who do not get their fair share in a country of people who
do not get their fair share.

Mexico's literacy rate is 87%. Chiapas' is 69%. In Mexico, 79% of households
have running water. In Chiapas, 58%. In Mexico, 88% of households have
access to electricity. In Chiapas, 67%1. 72% of children do not complete the
1st grade. Of 3.5 million people in the state, 1.5 million lack access to
medical care. 54% of the population are malnourished.2 The RAND corporation,
a right-wing think-tank, says that "In nearly 15 percent of the Chiapas's
111 municipalities, over 70% of the population lack electricity, drainage,
or toilets. One index of marginalization shows that 85% of the population
lives in a desperate condition." 3

Indigenous people build their communities on communally held land, their
right to which was protected by the Mexican constitution. But when the
constitution conflicts with the script, screw the constitution. Mexico under
Salinas revoked the protection of communally held lands. And price supports
for farmers. And agricultural subsidies and credits4.

The script requires poor, desperate, hopeless people. The state and the
market deliver. The order requires racism. In North America, indigenous
people are moved around whenever resources are found, their lands
are 'developed' without consulting them, they are dispossessed and made
refugees of with abandon5. In the United States, the absolute majority of
males between 18 and 35 have been (mis)handled by the criminal justice
system in some way6.

These are not the victims of progress. They are not obstacles who had to be
swept aside for progress to occur. They are suffering people whose roles as
sufferers are written into the script. How else to take a person's rights
away, to make a victim of a person, except by pretending that they are
something other than you? How else to extract petroleum, gas, coffee,
cattle, hydroelectric power, wood, and corn, and leave nothing in return but
poverty7?

The order requires violence. Most of us (people, I mean) believe that humans
are not made to suffer endless indignity and poverty. We do not face these
things quietly, but we can be made to suffer them only through fear. There
are now 70 000 soldiers in Chiapas.

The presence of the army is characterized by "constant threats, thefts,
rapes, unauthorized detentions, and constant intimidation through incursions
into territories and regions, which place many indigenous communities in a
permanent situation of insecurity and terror."8 Zapatista leaders are
jailed9. Paramilitaries linked to the army are active, and commit human
rights violations in a "situation of generalized impunity."10
The order requires ecological destruction.

A modern agriculture, which is an agriculture for export, which means people
growing things that they do not get to eat, is ecologically expensive. It
requires the destruction of forests. The use of chemical fertilizers and
herbicides and pesticides, in large quantities. It means erosion and
degradation of the soil11. This says nothing about the mining of petroleum
or of hydroelectric power generation. But that's just business as usual.
What about when the army is trying to put down an insurgency?

One tactic, favored in Vietnam, Colombia, Indonesia, and Cambodia, for
example, is the forest fire. Unprecedented amounts of forest have been
burning, 46 thousand hectares as of May 1998. These are neither the normal
burnings of the agricultural cycle nor are they caused by epidemic bad
weather. Rather, they are one of many consequences of disobedience12.
II.

The surprise rebellion of January 1, 1994 won some initial successes, but
the EZLN was forced to retreat into the Lacondon jungle as 70 000 troops
came to occupy the state. The EZLN has honored a cease fire agreement with
the Mexican government. It has concentrated not on building a force with
many weapons, and advanced training, but on organizing and reaching out—to
villagers, to Mexicans outside of Chiapas, to the rest of the world.

One Zapatista statement says "We do not wish to seize power but to exercise
it." The Zapatistas have created a system of autonomous municipalities,
based on village assemblies13. The principles of local autonomy, of
community and communal landholding, and leadership whose primary
responsibility is to obey the community, have enabled the communities to
withstand years of occupation by the army14. Indigenous women have organized
militant nonviolent resistance to military occupation, and in some places
have succeeded in curtailing army violence15.

But while communities without any resources can organize, they cannot
develop without property. If they can be thrown off of their land, if they
can be made refugees of, if their fields can be burned, if they can be made
dependent on the government for food, then their efforts will have failed.
And the script has many recourses available.
III.

How presumptuous it is to believe that one can change the script. Who are
these poor indigenous people, to believe they can administer their own
affairs without the state? Who are they to believe they can seize the
property of their betters and get away with it? Who are these unarmed women,
or poorly armed soldiers, who believe they can stand against the army? If
those who would change the world- system can adapt to circumstances, so can
the world-system adapt.

The Mexican army has made numerous innovations for undermining those who
would fight poverty and hopelessness. It has engaged in a 'blanketing
strategy' or 'saturation strategy', occupying the state with a large number
of troops. It has succeeded in this because of "much-enhanced communications
and mobility, thanks in part to US aid."16 Add to this the paramilitaries,
many openly linked to the state, to Mexico's leading political party, or the
army17, and you have a recipe for human rights violations, economic and
social disruption, creation of refugees, and a climate of fear and
intimidation.

In 1997, at Acteal, 45 people were murdered in a church by paramilitaries,
with soldiers nearby18. The message is fairly clear: The Zapatistas cannot
protect you. The army will not protect you. Accept your role. Know your
place.

One of the threats to the 'situation of generalized impunity' is the
presence of human rights observers, foreign or otherwise. Witnesses
complicate crimes. These observers have been able to constrain the Mexican
government's violence, even when the US government wanted to see the
Zapatistas destroyed19.

What's a repressive state to do? Keep the observers out. To that
end, "government agents began stepped up efforts to videotape, warn, and
question foreign activists, especially those who were traveling on tourist
visas but seemed engaged in activism, not tourism… some were deported."20
Over 200 activists have been deported since 1997. In April 1998, 12
foreigners were interrogated before being deported21.
IV.

So the script adapts, and the rewriters adapt, and the script adapts again.
What now? What are would-be rewriters to do?

Find out what the script requires of you, and don't do it. Refuse your role.
You are required to not watch, to not be a witness, to not know, to not tell
others. You are required to participate in the dispossession of indigenous
people here, and there, to be quiet and not speak up when it happens, or to
actively support it.

Are you a member of the elite? The script requires you to be happy with your
privileges. Are you a man? You are asked to oppress women and homosexuals,
to keep women out of work and dependent on you, to not share the work of
your house and your children.

Are you at the top of the racial caste system? You are required to oppose
those below you and resent them when they ask for what is theirs. You are
required to acquiesce as they are locked up, harassed, lied about and lied
to. Do you have land, wealth? You are required to believe it is yours by
right, not theirs who worked to create it, nor theirs from whom it was
stolen. You are required to defend what you have with all the vast resources
available to you.

Are you not a member of the elite? The system cannot function without your
obedience. You are asked to not realize that your work creates the wealth.
To not realize that your discomfort bolsters the system. To not realize that
leaders should take, not give orders. To not realize that there are better
ways to organize society. And most importantly, to not talk to others about
any of this.

In the short term, there are North Americans who are helping the Zapatistas
financially—directly or by allowing them to market their coffee at a just
price. There are people who are organizing delegations of human rights
observers. There are people who are pressuring the North American
governments to stop their key role in the repression. There are people who
do media work, education, demonstrations, letter-writing. All these efforts
could use more rewriters.

In the longer term, there are North Americans who have made proposals for a
just economy22, for just treatment of indigenous peoples23, for an
antiracist society24, for a sane foreign policy25. Any takers? Any other
proposal-makers?

Endnotes

1 Quoted in "Understanding Chiapas", by Food First: 1991 Statistics from
Anuario Estadistico de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
2 Quoted in Marcos, "The Southeast in two Winds", 1994
3 (RAND corporation, 'The Zapatista Social Netwar', 199
4 (RAND corporation, 'Zapatista Social Netwar', 199
5 See for example, Ward Churchill, 'Struggle for the Land'
6 See, for example, Jerome Miller, "Search and Destroy: African American
Males in the Criminal Justice System"
7 Chiapas exports all of these commodities, despite the poverty statistics
listed above
8 from "Conclusions to the work of observation carried out by the
International Civil Commission for human rights observation", translated by
the Irish Mexico Group.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 In "Understanding Chiapas", by Food First, 1994
12 La Jornada, May 13, 1998 "Who is starting forest fires in Chiapas?"
13 "The Mexican Zapatistas and Direct Democracy", Worker's Solidarity no. 55
14 "The EZLN and Indigenous Municipalities", Mariana Mora, April 1998, on
the Irish Mexico Page
15 Ibid.
16 "Zapatista Social Netwar", RAND Corporation, pg.74
17 "On the Offensive: Intensified Military Occupation in Chiapas Six Months
since the Massacre at Acteal", Global Exchange, 1998.
18 Ibid.
19 "Zapatista Social Netwar", RAND Corporation, pg.50
20 Ibid., pg. 83
21 Ibid.
22 See www.parecon.org for an example
23 See "I am an Indigenist", by Ward Churchill, in his "Struggle for the
Land"
24 See "Killing Rage", by bell hooks
25 See any of the writings of Steven Shalom or Noam Chomsky

Intro to STAC and the Situation in Chiapas

2004-09-30T22:46:00.000-07:00

http://www.rabble.ca/rubble.shtml
Trip to Chiapas
by Chris Arsenault November 5, 2001

The eight-hour cattle truck ride through poverty-stricken southeast Mexico left fifty-seven volunteers, seven from Canada, nauseous, tired and frustrated by the time they reached Guadalupe Tepeyac — a Zapatista community high in the mountains of Chiapas state.

However, on that warm Friday on July 27, 2001, the volunteer’s situation seemed slight when compared to that of the people of Guadalupe Tepeyac. Their town was destroyed by the Mexican army in 1995 and they have been refugees, struggling for survival, ever since.

The reason for the army’s campaign of destruction was, ironically, the same one that feulled the volunteer’s desire to help — the Zapatistas. On New Year’s Day, 1994, the Zapatista National Liberation Army — with 2,000 poorly armed indigenous peasants — took over a quarter of Chiapas, beginning what The New York Times called, “The first post-modern Latin American revolution.”

“I wanted to learn more about the Zapatistas and their struggle for land, democracy, history and freedom from foreign exploitation.” said Paul Earle, a dreadlocked volunteer with Canadian-based Students Taking Action in Chiapas (STAC) and a third-year student at Trent University.

“A lot of Western activists talk about the problems in the South, caused by neo-liberal economics. I wanted to see the front for myself and get my hands dirty with people who are struggling every day.” said Earle.

A Little Bit of History

The Zapatistas were instrumental in kick-starting the new global movement against neo-liberalism. Before 1994, conditions in rural Chiapas were deplorable; one in four children died before the age of five, and most houses lacked electricity or running water (in an oil-rich state that produces 60 per cent of Mexico City’s hydroelectric power).

However, the Zapatistas chose January 1, New Year’s Day, for their revolution. It coincided with the day the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into effect. The tri-lateral trade agreement forced the removal of Article 27 from the Mexican constitution, a clause that guarantees land to those who worked it. The Zapatistas called NAFTA a “death sentence.”

Back to July

For the beginning of the volunteer program, Canadian volunteers met up with volunteers from Mexico and the U.S., mostly young activists, and teachers, in Mexico City’s main square. Together, they boarded a tourist bus and drove twenty-four hours, along winding mountain roads, past small stores and huge ads, into Zapatista Chiapas to work and meet with revolutionary organizers.

“All of us must join and share in our struggle.” said Amos, the superintendent of autonomous schools for Zapatista- Chiapas. “It’s a struggle for conscience; to take from the injustices and make a new kind of education taken from our struggles and suffering,” he said.

The Zapatistas are creating a curriculum that teaches indigenous history, language, tradition and resistance. In time they want to open their schools up to the international community, so

anyone can get an education from the perspective of the oppressed rather than the oppressor.
After four days of meeting with the community, bathing in waterfalls, talking politics and dancing with our indigenous hosts, the volunteers packed their bags and boarded three cattle trucks (eighteen people and all their luggage crammed on each one) heading for Guadalupe Tepeyac. Halfway through the bumpy drive, the trucks pulled to the side of the road. Mexican soldiers with machine guns boarded the vehicles, demanding passports. The army is always less than friendly toward volunteers helping the Zapatistas.

Fortunately, they didn’t want to raise an international incident by hurting us, so they had little choice but to let us pass. “I was a little nervous when they started yelling in Spanish,” said Corbett Hancey, a volunteer from Halifax . “But what I experienced was the mild side of the harassment people in these mountains face every day.” Massacres of entire communities are not unheard of in Chiapas. In December of 1997, paramilitaries killed forty-five unarmed children, women and men in Acteal as they left church.

The sun was setting when the trucks reached Guadalupe Tepeyac. A group of the village leaders greeted the weary volunteers with applause. “We understand the sacrifices you made to come here. Thank you,” said Aron. He a community leader sporting a soccer shirt and several silver teeth. “The army destroyed all of our houses, so we don’t have much to offer you,” he said apologetically.

The volunteers looked at him in awe. “How can he be apologizing to us for enduring these conditions for two weeks?” remarked Marina, a Trent student. “I wonder how he and his family have managed six years of fearing for their lives as refugees?”

Volunteer Duties

“We worked, carrying big loads of rubble, cleaning buildings and using ten foot poles to knock broken tiles off of roofs.” So said Rob Parker, a student at Saint Mary’s university in Halifax. “When people told me not to work too hard, I’d just look down at my t-shirt (with Ché Guevara's picture) and go grab another load.”

Most volunteers agreed, helping fix the town was the most satisfying part of the trip. The reconstruction will continue long after the volunteers go home; we donated 40,000 pesos — enough for the local people to build three schools.

When work finished for the day, volunteers passed the time drinking coffee, smoking harsh filterless cigarettes and discussing the future of the anti-globalization movement.
We also practiced organizing collectively to mirror the Zapatistas — a skill which took us a few days to master. The Zapatistas govern themselves by grassroots democracy. Every person over twelve can vote on issues concerning her or his autonomous community in a format similar to a protest spokescouncil. In some communities, land is owned collectively, in others, families control their own small farms.

The Townspeople

“I couldn’t believe how kind the people were,” said Paul Earle. “Three women were up at five every morning making our tortillas. Once, I was coming back from a swim when an indigenous woman carrying her baby came out of her house with piping hot corn on the cob. I couldn’t talk to her very well, because of the language barrier, but I thanked her and she smiled.”

Most of the people in Guadolupe Teyepac are still refugees, so we walked six hours to meet them where they were staying in La Realidad. They answered our questions and gave speeches while donning masks, a Zapatista tradition that illustrates the facelessness of the indigenous poor and, more importantly, protects “agitators” from state harassment.

“The government won’t recognize our autonomous schools,” said one student who didn’t give his name. “We need our own schools to teach our language (Tzotzil — an indigenous dialect) and culture.”

Celebration

After the question session and photo-op, La Realidad burst into a multinational dance party. The students and teachers broke out a marimba (a huge drum-like instrument played by more than ten musicians) and we rocked the night away. Two worlds met that night and had a good time together.

The local people left around eleven that night — they had to walk three hours, with all the drums, to get back to their makeshift shelters. At midnight, the cattle trucks arrived to pick us up.

Before hauling myself on to the truck, I remembered something Paul Earle had said in a speech a few days earlier: “The Zapatistas are an inspiration to all of us. People in every country, of every nationality fighting for freedom can look to this small corner of the world as an example. The Zapatistas are winning what we are all fighting for. They did it with no education, no money and no help. Only hope. If they did this against all odds, than why the hell can’t we?”