| Pier Paolo Frassinelli (Independent
Scholar) and Maggie Ronayne (Junior Representative
for Northern Europe – National University
of Ireland, Galway) maggie.ronayne@NUIGALWAY.IE
Spanish abstract
Zapatistas organizan encuentro por la defensa
del patrimonio cultural en Mexico
La presente nota muestra el interes del
EZLN en la defensa de la memoria colectiva
del pueblo. El martes 12 de agosto 1999
hubo un importante encuentro nacional en
defensa del patrimonio cultural que había
sido convocado por los Zapatistas para detener
la propuesta de Ley General del Patrimonio
Cultural, que busca privatizar el patrimonio
histórico de Mexico. Aqui reproducimos el
discurso de bienvenida que diera a este
encuentro el Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos.
Introduction
‘Let’s talk about relations of production’
- Bertold Brecht (Address to the Writers’
International Conference in Defence of Culture,
Paris, June 1935)
The translation which follows this paper
is the address by Subcomandante Marcos -
the spokesperson of the EZLN[1]
- to the first National Meeting in Defence
of Cultural Heritage, which took place in
the indigenous territory of La Realidad,
Chiapas, South-East Mexico, on Tuesday,
12 August 1999.[2]
There are various reasons why this presents
a useful piece for translation and discussion
in the World Archaeological Bulletin.
First, it is important to remind the world
of the constant, armed aggression against
the indigenous people of Chiapas by the
Mexican government. On the same day
on which the meeting was called, for instance,
there was a military attack against the
rural, indigenous community ‘Amador Hernandez’,
within the Zapatist territory. Such
aggression has continued into the year 2000.
Secondly, this meeting - which was attended,
among other organisations and members of
‘civil society’, by the General Council
of the Representatives of the School of
History and Anthropology (ENAH) and by representatives
of the National Institute of History and
Anthropology (INAH) - has an obvious relevance
to archaeologists. The EZLN called
for the meeting in order to help create
a coalition of forces in opposition to the
new government proposal for a ‘General Bill
on Cultural Heritage’. This bill entails
the privatisation of the historical and
other cultural property of Mexico.
Thirdly, 12 WAC members are currently addressing
the issue of the destruction of cultural
property in conflict situations, with the
aim of arriving at a series of recommendations
for WAC action in such situations.
The example of cultural property in Mexico
and its relationship to indigenous insurgency
indicates both the complexity and the necessarily
broad socio-economic scope of the analysis
required in that process.
The specific context invoked in Marcos’s
address is the currently dominant ideology
and practice of ‘neo-liberalism’.
In recent years, Latin America has seen
an unprecedented implementation of the policies
inspired by the dogmas of this ideology
although this is not peculiar to Mexico
and its neighbouring countries, being common
to the contemporary international scenario
as a whole. Neo-liberalism is the
key feature of what many are overly fond
of calling ‘globalisation’, a definition
which is in need of sharp qualification,
for it implicitly hides and erases inequalities
and differences cutting across our supposedly
global world. Archaeologists, anthropologists
and historians, conversely, have been registering
the effects of neo-liberalism in an ongoing,
all-pervasive process of commercialisation
and privatisation of the past for quite
a few years now (Walsh 1992; Samuel 1994;
Lowenthal 1998). However, what is
often lacking in such studies among archaeologists
(see Hodder 1999 and Meskell 1998 for particularly
superficial accounts) is an analysis of
the broader socio-economic processes which
determine and are served by the commodification
of different national and indigenous cultural
heritages on a world scale. Part of
the reason for this lacuna is the failure
in most practices of archaeology to develop
an analysis of the active contribution of
archaeological work in this process of making
commodity-pasts, as a step towards alternative
archaeological practices (see Schmidt and
Patterson 1995 for examples of ‘alternative
histories’ and Patterson 1995 for a social
history of archaeology in Mexico).
The key element, which must be taken into
account within this transnational context
and central to an analysis of the political
economy of archaeology, is the world economic
crisis that has led to the enormous growth
of ‘finance capital’. In the US, to
provide a key example, the (fictitious)
monetary value currently circulating in
the stock market broadly corresponds to
150% of the Gross National Product.
Disproportionate growth of finance capital,
of course, is itself the effect of a socio-economic
crisis that runs deeper. This is the
crisis of the cycle of standardised mass-consumption
that was initiated and fuelled in this century
by such sections of production as the car
industry. As these industries have
saturated the world market, apart from the
relatively new and over-hyped potential
of information technology, there is no section
of production that is today capable of creating
new standards for consumption pervasive
and widespread enough to provide enough
occasions for productive investments.
Within this context, then, a service offered
by the state or a public site of cultural
or historical interest, in as far as they
represent a social necessity or a valuable
good, are particularly appetising potential
loci for the valorisation of a part, at
least, of the obsolescent mass of finance
capital. As a result, we are witnessing
the accelerated commodification of the past
and the interrelated and exponential development
of the tourist industry on a world scale.
More specifically to the point, Mexico is
now part of NAFTA (the American-led area
of free market trade) and heavily indebted
(in particular to the state across its northern
border): in 1995 its foreign debt amounted
to 120 billion dollars, 86 billion of which
was owed to US banks. After that year,
Clinton’s administration subscribed to a
new ‘aid’ programme for a further 50 billion
dollars. This is how a country with
a rich historical and cultural heritage,
a huge foreign debt and a corrupt and anti-democratic
government can end up in a situation in
which transnational capital, in desperate
need of sites for profitable investment,
sets the scene for a programme of privatisation
which includes that same national heritage.
And the indigenous people? That is
the issue that in Mexico could make a difference.
Differently from many other areas, where
the conditions of dependency created by
tourism and all-pervasive commodification
have been alternatively superimposed or
willingly accepted as the only way of survival,
in Chiapas there is a significant movement
of indigenous resistance. A long discussion
could be had on ethical issues related to
the use of armed struggle in the EZLN strategy;
[3]
or about the ‘acceptance’ of this process
of commodification by indigenous people
in other regions; and even about the economic
benefits of such commodification in different
local contexts. However, the point
to be stressed here is that the EZLN puts
all of us, and our possible objections to
its policies, in quite an uncomfortable
position. For it is the challenge
of an active, independent, emancipatory,
indigenous agency that the situation of
Chiapas calls us to take a position on.
As Roberto Bugliani (1995) has suggested,
among the many ‘anomalies’ of the EZLN’s
political approach, the chief one is the
relationship that it has managed to create
between revolutionary struggle and the complex
issue of indigeneity. The EZLN, in
fact, has built in a creative way “a strict
connection between tradition and revolution
and maintains a solid relation between the
indigenous past and the multi-ethnic present
of ‘civil society’’. Marcos (in Bugliani
1995:62) states that “the political-military
structure [of EZLN] has adapted itself to
the communal, ancestral forms of organisation”.
Other Latin American revolutionary movements
have been repeatedly dismissed by the claim
that they represent the superimposition
of exogenous ideological doctrines and forms
of organisation over a specific ‘indigenous’
social structure. Although occasional
attempts have been made in the case of the
EZLN, there is little room for such critique
in relation to the situation in Chiapas.[4]
As Marcos has said on various occasions
(ibid:ivi), the ‘leaders’ of the EZLN are
“the best men and the best women of the
tzetal, tzotzil, chol, tojolabal, mam and
zoque ethnic groups…They are the democratic
and collective direction of the EZLN”.
How has this process of construction of
a collective leadership been possible?
How has the EZLN managed to give voice to
and make heard the local communities of
Chiapas - which in most cases do not even
speak the national language?[5]
It is, to a significant extent, its answer
to the problem of communication – the way
in which the indigenous community of Chiapas
had been cut off from the rest of Mexican
‘civil society’ and ‘forgotten’ - which
is one of the key innovations that the EZLN
has introduced into the traditional schemes
of armed struggle. The EZLN has not
imported a pre-packaged, ready-digested
revolutionary ideology into Chiapas.
Rather, it has tried to elaborate a political
project and a mode of communication that
move from the specificity of the cultural
formation of the indigenous people of southeast
Mexico, including the specific forms of
oppression endured by them. As a result,
some readers may be puzzled by the rhetorical
devices used by Marcos in his address.
We ask that it be read in the light of a
dialogical communication. This is
not to say that we should all try to cross
the bridge that separates us from different
communities, indigenous or otherwise, which
are often cut off from each other through
the unavoidably specialist, coded sociolects
that we all use to communicate. This
is not because such a project would not
be desirable, but rather because it would
entail the preliminary creation of an enabling
socio-political environment in order to
achieve it.
This is the precise question that the insurrection
of the EZLN has raised. For it is
not a standard guerrilla group or vanguard
fighting to gain power. Its declared
aim is not to take over political power,
but to create the ‘pre-conditions’ for the
development of a model of democracy and
an idea of justice that would make sense
for all, including the indigenous, forgotten
people of Chiapas. That is, in Marcos’s
words (in Báez 1996:50), a model of democracy
and an idea of justice that mean “land to
the peasants, a decent home, health services,
education, job, wage for all the population”.
Subcomandante Marcos’s address
Welcome to La Realidad and to the first
National Meeting in Defence of the Cultural
Heritage. We wish to let you know
that it is an honour for us, the Zapatists,
to share with you both this meeting and
the noble worries that are its motif and
its way forward.
What has brought us here today is an alarm,
a call for attention, an appeal. The
evil and the wicked that no longer hide
and are in charge of the executive and legislative
power have decided to put on sale everything
that this country, which notwithstanding
them is still our own country, possesses.
Those who govern this country now pretend
to put a price tag on its cultural history
and to convert the national historical heritage
into privatised pieces for collection.
They want to dip history into an aseptic
solution, to use multicoloured fireworks
and special effects to convert it into a
Disney World of the Ancestral, for there
is no other way in which neo-liberalism
can conceive of the past.
For those who today govern us, if the value
of history cannot be quoted in the Stock
Exchange, history has no value. And
if the cultural heritage cannot be sold,
it becomes a useless dead weight - or, even
worse, a potentially dangerous, subversive
threat.
If we used to believe that criminals hide
and commit their crimes in obscurity, the
new generation that forms the political
class of Mexico has helped us to correct
our mistake. The criminals walk in
the light of day, they gain posts in government
and in the ruling parties, they use constitutional
instruments, they control the administration
of justice, they are in charge of the army
and the police.
The emergency call that has brought us
together today was a timely launch by a
community that, once again, is highlighting
the great value of youth. The students,
the academics, the researchers, the administrators
and workers of the National School of History
and Anthropology (ENAH) and of the National
Institute of History and Anthropology (INAH)
have alerted us to a legislative proposal
that exudes corruption and baseness.
This bill proposes the public auction of
Mexican cultural heritage and leaves it
to the ‘free’ game of offer and demand to
determine the price of such a historical
offence.
Thanks to the young scholars of the ENAH,
we have discovered what this bill announces:
the privatisation of every single aspect
of the life of this country.
For this call and appeal, we, the Zapatists,
wish to thank all the members of the community
of the ENAH and the INAH, and we also wish
to tell them that they will always be welcome
among us (it should be clear, though, that
we make exception for those who now hold
managerial positions).
It is not just that we have responded to
the call of those who have made the study
and protection of the national heritage
their life and their destiny. It is
also that we believe that today we have
with us some of the men and the women who
represent the best of Mexican social movements:
democratic teachers’, farmers’, non-governmental
and cultural organisations, unions and fronts.
We have with us some of the workers who
are fighting against the privatisation of
the electric industry. I am referring
to the brothers of the Mexican electricians’
union, to whom we wish to give our welcome
and confirm our commitment to fight with
them in defence of that other national resource
which is the electric industry.
Those here who represent the heroic student
movement of the National University of Mexico
[UNAM] also deserve a special mention.
They have recently been chased as never
before, they have been hit and smeared,
vilified and persecuted in every possible
way, and still, against all odds, they resist
and keep alive a movement which is not just
for themselves, but, as with every struggle
that grows from below, is for everybody.[6]
I also wish to salute and applaud the men
and women who still today resist in the
brigades, in the guards, in the meetings
and in the General Strike Committee.
I wish to do it not just because I want
them to know that they are not alone, not
just because applause hurts less than the
blows of the military forces. But
I also want to do it to mark once more the
distance that separates those who are below
and those who used to represent, and no
longer do, their hope. Those who are
now in government only for the electoral
pools and dispense blows and prison to anybody
who is signalled by their electronic means
of communication.
Salute, therefore, brothers and sisters,
students of the National University of Mexico.
We know that our applause does not cure
the blows inferred by those who call themselves
‘revolutionary and democratic’.[7]
But they are still a relief. Because
those who are below find a relief in recognising
each other and they grow by forging a unity
in the struggle.
For those who I am now going to mention,
I am not asking for a salute, but just for
an attentive listening. I am referring
to the indigenous men, children, women and
elders of the Zapatist communities, who
are today suffering a real campaign of terror
led by the Mexican army and by the public
security police of the state of Chiapas.
The Zapatist indigenous communities today
pay, with no discount whatsoever, the price
for their support of the student movement
of the National University of Mexico, of
the fight of the electricians’ Union and
of the struggle for the defence of our memory,
that is led by the communities of the National
School of History and Anthropology and of
the National Institute of History and Anthropology.
Today we are more persecuted, harassed,
hit and attacked than ever before.
The Power pretends to humiliate our dignity,
the dignity of the students, the dignity
of the electricians and of the defendants
of cultural heritage.
As I have been ordered to do by the Zapatist
people, I communicate to you, and through
you to the other students and electricians,
that there is nothing that they can do to
us that could intimidate us or reduce the
admiration and support that you deserve
from us. Whatever may happen, I repeat,
whatever may happen, it won’t diminish our
support to the movement of the National
University of Mexico, to the workers of
the electricians’ union, to the struggle
of the communities of the ENAH and INAH.
Eventually it will increase, but in no way
could our support to you, however small
that may be, diminish. We know that
you already know this. However, the
indigenous people ask me to repeat it to
you not for you to know it, but for you
not to forget it.
Brothers and sisters who have come to the
National Meeting in Defence of the Cultural
Heritage, you probably remember the words
that we used in the public appeal with which
we called for this meeting. In case
you don’t, I shall repeat them. They
say, ‘In defence of memory’. This
is why we are here. This is why we
have brought ourselves together. We
can’t allow our memory to be sold.
This is not just because by losing it we
would start to lose irredeemably our own
selves, but also because memory is the only
hope which we have been left - with it and
through it - to create our future.
If today we are on the defensive, this
is because the day is still dominated by
evil and wickedness. Because the night
is still the privileged space of memory.
But also because the night of memory is
the site where a new day is already taking
shape…and announcing itself.
The time will come in which we will put
an end to and expel both evil and wickedness.
There will be no corner of the night or
the day for them. They won’t even
rech our memory or remembrance. They
will be what they already are, a nightmare.
Only, such a nightmare will be finally over.
Brothers and sisters, it is the time for
words, yet again. Let’s create the
best space we can for them (the space that
is and will always be inside us) and let
them find and meet us.
Let speak, then, all who are different.
Let them speak and meet memory; let them
conspire with memory and through memory
let them carve a better future: tomorrow.
This is the word of the Zapatists: in defence
of cultural heritage and for everyone…
Democracy! Freedom! Justice!
From the mountains of southeast Mexico,
Subcomandante Marcos
Acknowledgements
Maggie Ronayne and Pier Paolo Frassinelli
wish to thank the editorial board of the
journal Unay Runa (Peru) for sending
the transcription of Marcos’s speech and
granting permission to reproduce it.
They also thank Roberto Bugliani, an Italian
writer and scholar, for answering some questions
about the EZLN.
References
Báez, R. 1996. Le ragioni dell’EZLN.
[The Claims of the EZLN] La contraddizione
55:45-51.
Bugliani, R. 1995. Le rotture
rivoluzionarie dell’EZLN. Appunti sul pensiero
politico del subcomandante Marcos.
[The Revolutionary Breaks of EZLN. Notes
on Subcomandante Marcos’s Political Thought].
La contraddizione 51:61-67.
Hodder, I. 1999. The Archaeological
Process. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lowenthal, D. 1998. The
Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History.
Cambridge: University Press.
Meskell, L. 1999. Introduction:
Archaeology Matters. In L. Meskell
(ed.), Archaeology Under Fire.
Nationalism, Politics and Heritage in the
Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East.
London: Routledge.
Patterson, T. 1995. Archaeology,
History, Indigenismo, and the State
in Peru and Mexico. In P. Schmidt
and T. Patterson (eds.), Making Alternative
Histories, pp. 69-86. Santa Fe:
School of American Research Press.
Samuel, R. 1994. Theatres
of Memory. London: Verso.
Schmidt, P. and Patterson, T. 1995.
Making Alternative Histories.
Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
Walsh, K. 1992. The Representation
of the Past. Museums and Heritage
in the Post-Modern World. London:
Routledge.
El discurso de bienvenida del Subcomandante
Insurgente Marcos
Bienvenidos a La Realidad y a este primer
Encuentro Nacional en Defensa del Patrimonio
Cultural. Queremos que sepan que es honor
para nosotros, los zapatistas, el participar
junto a ustedes en esta reunión y en la
noble inquietud que es su motor y camino.
Lo que hoy nos convoca es una alerta, un
llamado de atención, un pliego. El mal y
el malo que ya no se esconden y actúan con
fuero legislativo y ejecutivo han decidido
poner en venta todo lo que este país, que
sigue siendo nuestro a pesar de ellos, tiene.
Quienes gobiernan ahora pretenden ponerle
etiqueta de precio a la historia cultural
de México y convertir al patrimonio histórico
nacional en privatizada pieza da colección,
dar un baño aséptico a la historia para,
después de adornarla con foquitos multicolores
y agregarle algunos efectos especiales,
convertirla en un Disney World de lo Ancestral,
que no de otra forma concibe el neoliberalismo
al pasado.
Para quienes hoy nos gobiernan, si
la historia no se cotiza en la bolsa de
valores no tiene valor alguno. Y si el patrimonio
cultural no se puede vender, es algo inútil
y estorboso, además de que tiene un peligroso
potencial subversivo.
Si creíamos que los criminales se escondían
y aprovechaban la oscuridad para sus fechorías,
la nueva generación que padece la clase
política mexicana nos has sacado del error.
Los criminales andan a la luz del día, ostentan
puestos gubernamentales y partidarios, disfrutan
de fueros constitucionales y son quines
tienen en sus manos la administración de
la justicia y las fuerzas militares y policiacas.
Hoy, la emergencia que nos convoca fue
lanzada a tiempo por una comunidad que vuelve
a poner en alto el valor de los jóvenes.
Los estudiantes, académicos, investigadores,
administrativos y manuales de la Escuela
Nacional de Antropología e Historia (ENAH)
y del Instituto Nacional de Antropología
e Historia (INAH) nos han alertado sobre
una iniciativa de ley que rezuma podredumbre
y bajeza. La iniciativa en cuestión propone
la subasta pública del patrimonio cultural
de México y que sea el ‘libre’ juego de
la oferta y la demanda del que determine
el precio de esa molestia histórica.
Gracias a estos jóvenes estudiantes de
la ENAH hemos descubierto lo que ese proyecto
legislativo anuncia: la privatización de
todos y cada uno de los aspectos de la vida
de este país.
Por el llamado, por la convocatoria y por
la señal de alerta, nosotros, los zapatistas,
les damos las gracias a todos los miembros
de la comunidad de la ENAH y del INAH, y
les decimos que son y siempre serán bienvenidos
(claro que excepción hecha de quién ahora
padecen como directora).
No sólo los zapatistas hemos escuchado
el llamado de quienes han echo del estudio
y resguardo del patrimonio nacional su vida
y destino. Hay también hoy con nosotros
hombres y mujeres que representan a algo
de lo mejor del movimiento social en México:
maestros y maestras democráticos, organizaciones
de colonos, no gubernamentales, culturales,
sindicatos, frentes. Están con nosotros
algunos trabajadores que luchan contra la
privatización de la industria eléctrica,
me refiero a los hermanos trabajadores del
Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas, a quienes
les mandamos nuestro saludo y le reiteramos
nuestro compromiso de luchar junto a ellos
en la defensa de ese otro patrimonio nacional
que es la industria eléctrica.
Mención especial merecen quienes ahora
nos acompañan representando al heroico movimiento
estudiantil de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma
de México. Acosados como nunca antes, golpeados
y calumniados, perseguidos y denigrados
de mil y una formas, los universitarios
resisten y sostienen, contra viento y marea,
un movimiento que no es sólo por ellos,
sino que, como todas las luchas que de abajo
nacen, es para todos.
Para ellos y ellas, para quienes hoy resisten
en las brigadas, en las guardias, en las
asambleas y en el Consejo General de Huelga,
pido hoy a todos ustedes un saludo, es decir,
un aplauso. No sólo para que sepan que no
están solos, no sólo porque los aplausos
duelen mucho menos que los golpes de los
granaderos, también para marcar más la distancia
frente a quienes eran, ya no más, la esperanza
de los de abajo y ahora gobiernan para las
encuestas y reparten golpes y cárcel a quienes
les son señalados por los medios electrónicos
de comunicación.
Salud pues, hermanos y hermanas estudiantes
de la UNAM, sabemos que el aplauso que ahora
les mandamos no cura los golpes propinados
por quienes se dicen ‘revolucionarios y
democráticos’, pero algo alivian. Porque
los de abajo se alivian saludándose y se
crecen hermanando luchas.
Para los y las que voy a mencionar no pido
un saludo, sólo un oído atento. Me refiero
a los hombres, niños, mujeres y ancianos
indígenas de las comunidades zapatistas
que hoy sufren una verdadera campaña de
terror encabezada por el ejército mexicano
y la policía de seguridad pública del estado
de Chiapas. Las comunidades indígenas zapatistas
pagan hoy, rigurosamente y sin escantinar
nada, el precio de su apoyo al movimiento
estudiantil de la UNAM, a la lucha del SME
y a la defensa de la memoria que encabezan
las comunidades de la ENAH y el INAH. Hoy
somos más perseguidos que nunca, más hostigados,
más golpeados y más atacados. El Poder pretende
derrotar en nuestra dignidad, la dignidad
de universitarios, electricistas y defensores
del patrimonio cultural.
Por orden de los peublos zapatistas les
comunico a ustedes, y a través de ustedes
a los universitarios y a los trabajadores
electricistas, que nada de esto que nos
hacen nos intimida ni logrará reducir ni
la admiración ni el apoyo que ustedes se
merecen. Pase lo que pase, escuchen bien,
pase lo que pase, no variará nuestro apoyo
al movimiento de la UNAM, a los trabajadores
del SME y a la lucha que hoy encabezan las
comunidades de la ENAH y del INAH. En todo
caso aumentará, pero de ninguna manera se
reducirá, el apoyo que, aunque pequeño,
les damos. Sabemos que ustedes lo saben,
los pueblos me piden que se los diga, no
para que lo sepan, sino para que no lo olviden.
Hermanos y hermanas asistentes al Encuentro
Nacional en Defensa del Patrimonio Cutlural:
Tal vez ustedes recuerdan las parablas con
las que termina la convocatoria que se hizo
pública para este encuentro. Si no es así,
ahora se las repito. Dicen: ‘En defensa
de la memoria’. Para eso estamos aquí, para
eso hemos sido convocados. No podemos permitir
que la memoria sea puesta en venta. No sólo
porque perdiéndola, empezaríamos a perdernos
irremediablemente todos nosotros, también
porque la memoria es la única esperanza
que nos queda para, con ella y por ella,
abrir un mañana.
Si hoy estamos a la defensiva es porque
aún el mal y el malo dominan el día, porque
la noche sigue siendo aún el espacio predilecto
de la memoria, y porque es en la noche de
la memoria donde otro día se forja ya…y
se anuncia.
Tiempo llegará en que, entre todos y todas,
encontremos al fin al mal y al malo y lo
espulsemos. Y no habrá rincón del día o
de la noche para ellos, no los alcanzará
la memoria ni el recuerdo. Y sólo serán
lo que ahora son, es decir, una pesadilla,
pero ahora al fin acabada.
Hermanos y hermanas: Es otra vez el tiempo
de la parabla. Hagámosle el espacio mejor,
que siempre será dentro nuestro, y dejemos
que sea ella la que nos busque y encuentre.
Que hablen, pues, los todos que son diferentes.
Que hablen y encuentren la memoria, que
con ella conspiren y que con ella labren
el futuro mejor: el mañana. Esta es la parabla
de nosotros los zapatistas: en defensa del
patrimonio cultural y para todos...
¡Democracia! ¡Libertad! ¡Justicia!
Desde las montañas del Sureste Mexicano
Subcomandante Marcos
[1]
The EZLN is the Zapatist National Liberation
Army, which began its ‘official’ insurrection
on 1st January, 1994.
[2]
‘La Realidad’ [reality] is a village
in the forest of Lacandona, one of the
strongholds of the Zapatist resistance.
It is both a geographic and a symbolic
location. In the valleys and the
gorges around La Realidad live some
of the indigenous communities who have
started the Zapatist insurrection but
also mythical characters such as Durito,
the speaking scarab, and old Antonio.
This name pre-exists the insurrection
of the ‘faceless people’ and it has
offered Marcos the opportunity to play
with the words ‘La Realidad’ and la
realidad - ie. pragmatism and utopia.
As people arrive at ‘La Realidad’, Marcos
says ‘welcome to reality’.
[3]
However, when we consider the issue
of the use of violence in Mexican politics,
we should not forget that the Mexican
government is formed by a party-state
that has held power without interruption
for more than 70 years; or that the
Mexican head of state - President Ernesto
Zedillo - replaced his predecessor Salina
de Gortari by ‘winning’ an electoral
contestation (21st August
1994) marked by all sorts of irregularities.
[4]
The role of Marcos and the question
of his ‘identity’ has as might be expected,
been used to suggest that the insurrection
in Chiapas is the product of ‘outside’
interests. A Zapatista communiqué
answers one such ‘suggestion’: ‘Marcos
is black in South Africa, gay in San
Francisco, an anarchist in Spain, an
indigenous Indian in Mexico, a pacifist
in Bosnia, a Palestinian in Israel,
a communist after the end of the Cold
War, a woman alone on Saturday night
in any city in Mexico, an unhappy student,
a dissident from the market economy,
an artist without a gallery and, of
course, a Zapatista in south-east Mexico’.
(in Bugliani 1995, 61).
[5]
This is the chief reason that Marcos
has taken on the role of spokesperson.
[6]
On the 6th February 2000,
the Mexican Federal police entered the
UNAM in order to bring to an end the
strike, which had kept the university
closed for over nine months. The
strike began as a protest against the
imposition of fees and privatisation
of the university under neo-liberal
policies. The fees, in particular,
were a condition of a loan from the
IMF. Over a thousand students
were arrested and as we write on 30th
March, approximately two hundred are
still in prison as a result of the break-up
of the strike.
[7]
This is a reference to the Mexican ruling
parties: the government party, PRI (Revolutionary
Institutional Party) and its alter ego
in opposition, PRD (Revolutionary Democratic
Party).
|