Por un mundo donde quepan muchos mundos
Tommy De Cock and Gunther Lippens - 05.08.2002 18:04
For a world where many worlds fit : the Zapatista uprising
In 1994, the Zapatista National Liberation Army EZLN seized power in several towns in the Mexican Southern province of Chiapas, an event that came into the news around the world. Due to the lack (and manipulation) of information, the Zapatistas have been falsely accused of being 'just another army rebel movement'. In this article, we will discuss what makes them actually totally different, and we will see that the Zapatista society structure carries a high level of anarchistic principles, even if it wasn't intended to be called that way.
On New Years day in 1994, the local indigenous population of Chiapas, decided to rebel against the oppressive and exploitative Mexican governement (which was, and still is, at any time 'advised' by the U.S.), a Low Intensity War which is still going on nowadays.
Ever since, the Zapatista army has been constructing an alternative society, in which direct democracy, 'mandar obedeciendo’ (leading by obeying) and self-management are the fundamental and basic principles of the society. The EZLN, even though hierarchically structured, has no absolute power. In other words, the Zapatista armed forces do not want to take power on behalf of the people, they consider themselves just as defenders of the fundamental rights of the local population:
[1] We do not struggle to take power, we struggle for democracy, liberty and justice
More than 500.000 people are involved in the Zapatista network. They are organised into small communities, which have their own decision-making processes through the community assemblies, in which everyone, man or woman, elder than 12 years old can freely participate. For the state-wide coordination between the communities, regional councils were formed, the so called autonomous municipalities. Every community can elect their representative, subject to recall if they are not 'leading by obeying', which is truly compatible with the concepts of revolutionary syndicalism!
The Zapatista army itself is commanded by the 'Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee' (CCRI), which is composed of delegates from the different communities, and as such is no military body.
The military power is thus subordinated to civilian leadership and approval, which makes the whole movement even more unique.
Moreover, the CCRI does not have the power to make such important decisions as peace or war. These decisions are made through the so-called Consultas, which are referendi starting from the very base, with the intense discussions in the communities themselves.
In spite of the extreme poverty of the Chiapas region [2], libertarian structures have been able to develop throughout the region. Even if the Zapatistas never claimed to be anarchists, their ideas should deserve the attention of every libertarian socialist in the world:
[3] The fact that these stuctures are not conciously anarchist but arise from a blend of indigenous practice, Marxism and Liberation Theology should not prevent us standing in solidarity with them.
It is clear that the Mexican government and president Fox are trying everything they can to suppress the liberation movement of the Mayan population. Year by year Mexico’s military budget is increasing [4], and local large landholders’ private armies (the so-called “guardias blancas”) act with total impunity. According to Amnesty International, “since the emergence of the EZLN in 1994 widescale human rights violations committed by the security forces, or illegal armed civilians or so-called paramilitary groups, have been reported in Chiapas” [5].
The war against drugs is used as a pretext for the U.S. military and security assistance to Mexico, even though the indigenous insurgents are explicitly not suspected of involvement with drugs trafficking [6].
It is clear that the war on drugs is not the primary object of U.S. aid to Mexico, but just used as a convenient cover. Much more important is it to maintain the political stability in Mexico, which is an absolute necessity for the all-important economic profitabality. This new “religion” of neoliberalism and corporate colonialism, dictated by the NAFTA [7], is a threat to the local population of Chiapas, and in general a threat to anyone who dares to promote local economic self-sufficiency and autonomy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bibliography
[1] What makes us different in our political proposal, Marcos, August 30, 1996,  http://www.struggle.ws/mexico/ezln/marc_to_cs_se96.html
[2] Demographically, Chiapas is considered the poorest of Mexico’s 31 states. However, in terms of resources, it is considered to be one of the richest states, including some of the richest oil reserves.
[3] The Zapatistas and 'Direct Democracy', A. Flood, 1999,
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt
[4] The first 2 years after the Chiapas uprising alone Mexico’s military budget was increased by more than 40% ("Mexico Military Assumes More Visible Role Throughout Country," The Sunday Herald, Monterey, CA (July 28, 1996)).
[5] AI Index: AMR 41/040/2001
[6] In the Zapatista conflict zone of eastern Chiapas, the communities have strict rules against all drugs and alcohol.
[7] North American Free Trade Agreement
 E-Mail: creativeurge@hotmail.com
|
