The Zapatistas

[alanjjohnstone]

Often, social movements disappear from the media spotlight and many assume that they have vanished. In the Chiapas the Zapatistas remain but appear to be undergoing yet another transformation, adapting to changing circumstances.

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/12/mexico-zapatista-rebels-retreat-201312309224904558.html

[Ed]

One of my favouriteshttp://roarmag.org/2011/02/i-shit-on-all-the-revolutionary-vanguards-of-this-planet/

[Ed]

This was only a year agohttp://javiersoriaj.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/marchan-zapatistas-en-ocosingo-las-margaritas-y-san-cristobal/ Ocosingo , Chiapas. From the early hours of today thousands of Zapatista supporters from five snails began to peacefully occupy the central squares of cities in Ocosingo, San Cristobal de las Casas , Las Margaritas, Altamirano and Comitan .At 6:30 pm the bases that came to Ocosingo began to gather near the University of the Jungle , and from there began to march towards the city center .At this point in the square bases Ocosingo keep coming and occupy all spaces not wide woodlands from the City Hall Square to the city parish .It is expected that the Indigenous Revolutionary Clandestine Committee General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation ( EZLN) issued a message in the coming hours .At the time that many unsuspecting believed the world would end , Mayan communities EZLN support bases , with their faces covered , most of them very young , wait in silence perfectly formed under a persistent drizzle .Unusually for this period has been raining all night.[ Hermann Bellinghausen , sent
Published: 21/12/2012 -c Or, as we read in process:SAN CRISTOBAL DE LAS CASAS, Chiapas – . Thousands of members of indigenous communities EZLN base area and the high jungle surprised this morning with marches in the villages of Ocosingo, Margaritas and the municipal seat .Earlier, indigenous balaclavas and bandanas over their faces out of their communities and traveled hundreds of trucks to wager on the inputs of the three municipalities .No guns , with the national flag and the Zapatista (black with a red star in the center) the thousands of farmers in these demonstrations began three locations , the same as in 1994 took , but with guns to declare war on the government of Carlos Salinas de Gortari.Without the presence of Subcomandante Marcos, the Zapatista indigenous will focus on the municipalities to raise awareness around noon a message to the people of Mexico .Since May 2011 the EZLN support bases did not manifest . At that time they expressed their support for the victims of the war on drugs Felipe Calderon , integrated in the Movement for Peace with Justice and Dignity , led by poet Javier Sicilia .Now a political message is expected because coincidentally manifested in the boot of government and Enrique Peña Nieto chicpaneco president Manuel Velasco.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qH8nxafgKdMhttp://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/01/201313014344451496.html

[alanjjohnstone]

This BBC article is worth a read. I particularly like when she is asked if any of the Zapatista's demands have been achieved and she says not one but quickly adds but neither has any of the other Mexicans had their demands fulfilled…much like ourselves and the reformists.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-25550654

[Anonymous]

The Comandante Marcos said that he is not a vanguardist, he must be joking, or smoking cannabis on his pipe, or drinking too much Zapatistas coffee,  because the whole Zapatistas movement is based on the concept of leadership and vanguardism, without that,  they would not be able to control the push of the peasants. The whole guerrillas movement in Latin America is a total failure including the FARC which are planing to sign a peace agreement with the Colombian government, and the peace talks are taking place in Cuba, they just want to do the same thing as the Sandinista and the Farcundo, which is to become part of the electoral process.The Dominican Republic is a clear example of the total failure of the focos or guerrillas movement, where most of those groups ( Castroists and Maoists ) were completely wiped out by the repressive forces of the state with the help of the US government and the CIA, some of the survivors of that movement are enjoying the benefits given to them by the capitalist state

[Ed]

mcolome1 wrote:

The Comandante Marcos said that he is not a vanguardist, he must be joking, or smoking cannabis on his pipe, or drinking too much Zapatistas coffee,  because the whole Zapatistas movement is based on the concept of leadership and vanguardism, without that,  they would not be able to control the push of the peasants. The whole guerrillas movement in Latin America is a total failure including the FARC which are planing to sign a peace agreement with the Colombian government, and the peace talks are taking place in Cuba, they just want to do the same thing as the Sandinista and the Farcundo, which is to become part of the electoral process.The Dominican Republic is a clear example of the total failure of the focos or guerrillas movement, where most of those groups ( Castroists and Maoists ) were completely wiped out by the repressive forces of the state with the help of the US government and the CIA, some of the survivors of that movement are enjoying the benefits given to them by the capitalist state

Have you got anything to back that up, a source or something where they are saying that the peasents must be led? From everything I've read from them they speak very strongly against leadership. Subcommandante Marcos is merely a spokesperson part of the idea behing wearing the balaclava is that he can be replaced at any time by anyone. More of a concept, a figure head, than an actual leader. We had a conversation last year about whether our election candidates should have their faces shown in election adverts. With the phrase 'the party's case not the face' being used. One member suggested our candidates wear a paper bag over their head in the photos. A similar idea in my opinion. From what I've read by them it seems their organizational methods should be praised. It's their nationalism and refromist demands that should be criticized.Another thing as well are they actually actual peasents or are they waged agricultural workers? Do peasents really still exist, anywhere?:

[Ed]

Sort of related http://roarmag.org/2014/01/zapatistas-piqueteros-movements-power/

[Anonymous]

 

Ed wrote:

Have you got anything to back that up, a source or something where they are saying that the peasants must be led? From everything I've read from them they speak very strongly against leadership. Subcommandante Marcos is merely a spokesperson part of the idea behing wearing the balaclava is that he can be replaced at any time by anyone. More of a concept, a figure head, than an actual leader. We had a conversation last year about whether our election candidates should have their faces shown in election adverts. With the phrase 'the party's case not the face' being used. One member suggested our candidates wear a paper bag over their head in the photos. A similar idea in my opinion. From what I've read by them it seems their organizational methods should be praised. It's their nationalism and refromist demands that should be criticized.Another thing as well are they actually actual peasents or are they waged agricultural workers? Do peasents really still exist, anywhere?:

---

I do know pretty well  the history of the guerrillas movement of Latin America, and the Zapatistas is not so unique, and. it is not the most popular one. and it is not the one with the largest support, and it is not the only one with one public speaker, and they are vanguardists, even more, the concept of guerrillas is based on the same concept of Lenin that workers can not obtain political consciousness by themselves, they always need intellectuals The Trinitarios had the same type of organization and they were conducted by  a leader named Rubirosa, and it was a Maoist groupI knew Manolo Tavares Justo,  and I was part of his organization known as the 1J4 which became Linea Roja after he was killed, he was very popular,( more popular than Marcos, and Camilo Torres,  they were able to close business, schools, and universities, and move thousands of workers )  but when he went to the mountain none of the peasants gave him any  support, and he was killed defending a bourgeois constitution, and he used  to say that he was not a leader either, and he was the leader of the 1j4 and of  the guerrillas fighters, and he was motivated by the Castroist around him to initiate a guerrillas group. Due to the failure of his adventure, his organization had several splits and Maoism was adopted later on, and it was one of the few organization that rejected Castroism, and Guevarism,  and considered that the Cuban revolution was a  nationalist bourgeois revolt, and they entered in conflicts with the others political groups including the MPD-ML which later one became a political group backed by the HoxhaistsThe best evidence that the Zapatistas is conducted by a group of leaders are the declaration of Marcos himself, they publish a declaration and then, he says something different, and on  their last declaration they tried to congratulate themselves with the ruling class of Mexico and then he made a different declaration.They are just a nationalist  political organization who want to develop a national capitalist society conducted by Mexican corporations, and the Mexican ruling class. Their main concern is the so called neo-liberalism, the same concern of Fidel Castro and Hugo ChavezMost of the members of those guerrillas groups have ended in collaboration with the ruling class of their countries of origin, and at the present time the FARC is trying to sign a peace agreement with the Colombian government and the talks are taking place in Cuba, and the main purpose is to be legalized and become part of the electoral process, like the Sandinistas and the FaracundoThe first ones that use the terms peasants are the Zapatistas themselves, the term also means agriculture workers. If you guide yourselves by what has been  written about them, we can also guide ourselves what it has been written about  the Colombian FARC which is one of the oldest guerrillas groups and they control an enormous territory in Colombia, and they leaders also claim that they are not leaders either, but they are fighting in the names of the Colombian peasants. Populism ended in Russia but it has been continued by those groups He has received the support of the ruling class of France and others capitalists from Europe, and this is a Castroist backed movement, and he is not covering his face because he can be replaced by another person, some members of this type of groups are covering their face because they can be killed by the military forces

[Ed]

I'm afraid you've not really provided anything about the EZLN. You seem to be writing them off, for the crime of being from latin america. As if all people south of the US border are the same or all movements from south of the border are incapable of being anything but dictatorial vanguards, just because others have. I have no doubt that, that is not what you really think. But to me that seems to be the way you are reasoning your argument. It seems as though you are resting your case on guilt by association."They are just a nationalist  political organisation"Absolutely no question that this is 100% accurate. Just one of their many failings. Even worse than that they could easily be accused of ethno-nationalism. Even though many of their reformist demands also call for equal treatment for all Mexican workers and even though they recognise that the struggle against capitalism is an international one."who want to develop a national capitalist society conducted by Mexican corporations, and the Mexican ruling class."However, this seems completely contradictory to their stated aims. Especially as they are fighting against the Mexican ruling class and corporations."Their main concern is the so called neo-liberalism"It's true he does phrase it like this regularly. But it's also true that for the vast majority of the world neoliberalism is the only form of capitalism that exists, whether it be the left neoliberalism of party's like Labour or the right neoliberalism of the Conservatives. (insert any leftwing right wing party of other nations in their place)Rather than being closer to Leninist ideologies they are far closer to anarchists or autonmists. Utopian, certainly. But leninists? Again where's the proof? He was Maoist inspired in his youth. But surely since then the actions of the EZLN have proven that to no longer be the case. Silent, non-violent protests hardly conform to the Maoist principle of 'political power only comes through the barrel of a gun'. They have given up armed struggle for non-violent protest is it still accurate to call them guerillas?"The first ones that use the terms peasants are the Zapatistas themselves, the term also means agriculture workers."This was not really a challenge or a criticism of your comment. Merely a curiosity about your personal opinion on the matter. You're absolutely right that's what the zapatistas call them, and it annoys me immensely. I will concede that you have a far greater knowledge of south and central america than I. However, I feel your criticism is overly harsh, and focused on the wrong areas.Also 14th of June. Comrade, I had no idea you had so many years! You must have been knee high to a grasshopper.

[Anonymous]

Ed wrote:

I'm afraid you've not really provided anything about the EZLN. You seem to be writing them off, for the crime of being from latin america. As if all people south of the US border are the same or all movements from south of the border are incapable of being anything but dictatorial vanguards, just because others have. I have no doubt that, that is not what you really think. But to me that seems to be the way you are reasoning your argument. It seems as though you are resting your case on guilt by association."They are just a nationalist  political organisation"

I do not think you know me in order to make that kind of statement, because I did work for a long time in reformist movement of Latin America, and the genuine conception of socialism-communism never reached that area, and socialism reached the USA through the Canadian and the British, the only thing that the world knew was Leninism, Stalinism and State capitalism, the only genuine socialism movement that existed in Latin America was in Jamaica, and that organization was very close to the principles of World Socialist Movement, and rest, Castroist or Maoist, they just rendered admiration to the concept of the guerrillas idols, or the leadership icon.I do not have to provide anything new to the EZLN history, because their  plattform is not new , is just a repetition of the old ones with a new mask, and a new way to cheat the working class,  it is another leftwing reformist movement who is using the anti-imperialist sentiments of the peoples of Mexico, and it is supported in Latin America by the Castroists and the Chavezistas

Ed wrote:

Absolutely no question that this is 100% accurate. Just one of their many failings. Even worse than that they could easily be accused of ethno-nationalism. Even though many of their reformist demands also call for equal treatment for all Mexican workers and even though they recognise that the struggle against capitalism is an international one."who want to develop a national capitalist society conducted by Mexican corporations, and the Mexican ruling class."However, this seems completely contradictory to their stated aims. Especially as they are fighting against the Mexican ruling class and corporations."Their main concern is the so called neo-liberalism"It's true he does phrase it like this regularly. But it's also true that for the vast majority of the world neoliberalism is the only form of capitalism that exists, whether it be the left neoliberalism of party's like Labour or the right neoliberalism of the Conservatives. (insert any leftwing right wing party of other nations in their place)Rather than being closer to Leninist ideologies they are far closer to anarchists or autonmists. Utopian, certainly. But leninists? Again where's the proof? He was Maoist inspired in his youth. But surely since then the actions of the EZLN have proven that to no longer be the case. Silent, non-violent protests hardly conform to the Maoist principle of 'political power only comes through the barrel of a gun'. They have given up armed struggle for non-violent protest is it still accurate to call them guerillas?"The first ones that use the terms peasants are the Zapatistas themselves, the term also means agriculture workers."This was not really a challenge or a criticism of your comment. Merely a curiosity about your personal opinion on the matter. You're absolutely right that's what the zapatistas call them, and it annoys me immensely. I will concede that you have a far greater knowledge of south and central america than I. However, I feel your criticism is overly harsh, and focused on the wrong areas.Also 14th of June. Comrade, I had no idea you had so many years! You must have been knee high to a grasshopper.

[Anonymous]

There is another armed group that is growing in Mexico, and it is called: "Auto-defensas" ( Self-defenses ) and they are composed of workers who have  armed  themselves in order to fight the drug cartels, and they have taken several towns, municipalities,  and villages in Mexico, and the government military forces are killing them too, and they are attacking back to the police and armed forces of the state.They are not Anarchists, Leninists, Trotskyist, Maoists, Guevarists,  Castroists, or whatever might be politically named, they are just peoples who are tired of the violence that existed in the Mexican society,  and against the violence produced by the drugs cartels, and the armed forces of the state, and against the brutal  violence that exist against women and children. http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139462/patricio-asfura-heim-and-ralph-h-espach/the-rise-of-mexicos-self-defense-forces

[alanjjohnstone]

mcolome1 wrote:

There is another armed group that is growing in Mexico, and it is called: "Auto-defensas" ( Self-defenses ) They are not Anarchists, Leninists, Trotskyist, Maoists, Guevarists,  Castroists, or whatever might be politically named, they are just peoples who are tired of the violence that existed in the Mexican society,  and against the violence produced by the drugs cartels, and the armed forces of the state, and against the brutal  violence that exist against women and children.

 The UK press mostly just call them vigilante groups. Is it just a one-issue group, simply anti-drug cartel.?There has been little analyses of its components. We should be wary , the KKK was an  Confederate vigilante group to stop carpet-bagging Northerners taking advantage of the defeated South but swiftly transformed into racist terrorists. Are they mexican land-owners  as the district of activity seems to be the rich farm-land regions. 

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

 The UK press mostly just call them vigilante groups. Is it just a one-issue group, simply anti-drug cartel.?There has been little analyses of its components. We should be wary , the KKK was an  Confederate vigilante group to stop carpet-bagging Northerners taking advantage of the defeated South but swiftly transformed into racist terrorists. Are they mexican land-owners  as the district of activity seems to be the rich farm-land regions. 

 I think it is only a vigilante group fighting against the drugs cartels, and the police and the armed forces have retaliated against them, but it is not a group with political orientation, and they have a leader who is a doctor, and nobody knows who is behind himDue to the economical and sociological conditions of the Mexican society, it is very hard to predict in what type of organization it  might end, and probably some of those groups are being financed by rich land owners.A similar situation took place in Colombia where  self defenses groups were formed. and they were financed by rich land owners, to defense themselves against the guerrillas, and later one they became a criminal organizationPeoples in Mexico now they have fear against the drugs cartels and the self defenses groups

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

The UK press mostly just call them vigilante groups. Is it just a one-issue group, simply anti-drug cartel.?There has been little analyses of its components. We should be wary , the KKK was an Confederate vigilante group to stop carpet-bagging Northerners taking advantage of the defeated South but swiftly transformed into racist terrorists. Are they mexican land-owners  as the district of activity seems to be the rich farm-land regions. 

http://www.amazon.com/Death-Squads-Self-Defense-Forces-Paramilitary/product-reviews/0807859699/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1This book covers with certain ample details the emerge of paramilitary groups in Latin America, some financed by the CIA, or rich land owners

[alanjjohnstone]

It seems that one of the drug cartels, the Knights Templars, was itself originally – or claimed to be – a self defense organisation. It accuses the current self-defense groups of being fronts for the rival New Generation drug cartel.In Northern Ireland the nationalist and loyalist paramilitaries also got locked into a conplicated turf war for the illegal drugs trade. If it is the rich land-owners financing the vigilante movement, just how long will it be before they use it against the peasants and farm workers trying to organise labor unions?

[Author]

Posts