3. Roots of the Zapatistas' internationalism
3.1. Who are the Zapatistas?
The first of January 1994, 502 years after the beginning of the invasion of illegal immigrants from Europe into the American continent, was the day in which it was declared that US commodities and capital could freely and legally enter with no restriction into Mexico. It was the day of implementation of the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The same day, an army of indigenous people entered San Cristobal and other cities of Chiapas, wearing ski masks, carrying guns, and proclaiming revolutionary laws from the balcony of the city council. The world woke up in the new year and sleepy eyes and hung-over brains knew of an indigenous army called the EZLN, Zapatista Army of National Liberation, for short "the Zapatistas". Their aim was not a socialist state, nor a planned economy, nor to bring consciousness to allegedly unconscious people, as was the case in old socialist traditions. Their aim was living with dignity, and nothing less than the simple task of building a new world. Yet, they could not say how this new world would look -- they did not have a plan for you and me. In fact, they wanted you and me to talk to them, and together bring about a new world, meeting our needs and aspirations.
The indigenous people who took up arms came from the poorest region of Mexico, and one of the poorer in Latin America. But it exports coffee to the world and energy to all of Mexico (10% of electricity and 90% of hydroelectric energy). It is one of the one of the most important regions of strategic reservoir of biodiversity -- the knowledge bank of the developing industry of biotechnology -- where the Lacandona Jungle offers the greatest number of vegetable and animal species per square mile in North America and one offering the greatest variety in the world. It has huge reservoir of petroleum, making it one of the greatest areas of strategic potential in the world. And it is a region in which 80% of the population suffers of malnutrition, 50% has no potable water and 66% has no sewage system. A region in which the daily livelihood of the great majority of the people depends on a diet of coffee, tortillas, corn and beans, acquired through petty trade, such as selling crafts to tourists (one bracelet = 20 pence--it takes one day of work for a woman to produce four of them) or selling crafts to the local shops (owned by the coletos) in conditions similar or worse to the old putting-out system; and day works at meagre pay for the rich rancheros. Alternative -- or complementary -- ways to get by have been, historically access to the common lands -- the ejidos -- which have been increasingly strangled by the falling price of corn.[9]
The ejido is not only land used for economic purposes. To a certain extent it gives people autonomy and it constitutes the material basis for indigenous traditional forms of collective democracy. It is the basis of indigenous traditions of collective democracy, in which a community, a village, a region, makes decisions affecting everybody's life collectively. Decisions may range from the sending of a child in need to a hospital, to the decision to refuse the last government offer at the negotiating table. Decisions are taken in ways so different from western democracies, based on the forced separation between the people of a community [10], separation that is only mystically overcome at the moment of the vote (once every 5 years [11]). Consensus seeking, rather than voting, is their way to democracy. Consensus seeking requires time and ability to listen. But it does not produce majorities or minorities; it does not promote victory and defeats, vanity and resentment. Take away their common land, further worsen their condition of living, and you have also destroyed indigenous democracy, their way of living, and their opportunity to practice a different life.
This comes about through three weapons associated to the implementation of NAFTA.
First, the institutional weapon. The logic of the market and competitiveness accompanying the NAFTA agreements meant that Mexico -- among other things -- had to prepare for the invasion of cheap corn produced by highly mechanized farming in the US. This, of course, can be done by concentrating land property in the hand of big farms, mechanization, and increased productivity to face US competitiveness. It is an old story. But corn is not only the staple food for the great majority of people in Mexico. It is also the major source of income for large sections of the campesinos and indigenous population in Chiapas, Guerrero, Tabasco, and other Mexican states. Large part of this corn is produced by campesinos in common land, the ejido, the result of the Mexican revolution at the beginning of the century, and with its roots in Maya traditions. The "modernization" of the Mexican agriculture includes the expropriation of the ejido, their fragmentation and sale on the market. This is what the abrogation of Article 27 of the Mexican constitution proclaims, in line with NAFTA and the global competitive race.[12]
Second, the economic weapon. Meanwhile, price of corn on the wholesale market has started to fall, together with campesinos income. Currently, a ton of corn is paid on the market about 100 pounds, 10 pence, a kilo. For the poorest section of the population, it takes many hours to harvest a ton of corn, with no machinery. A reduction in the price of corn through unrestricted entrance in the market by U.S. agri-business corporations, points in the same direction of the abrogation of Article 27 of the constitution, implying the abolition of the ejido, the abandonment of common land, and of indigenous identity and culture.
Third, the military weapon. People have an alternative besides giving in to the dictate of the new constitution and the market. It is to say "¡Ya basta!", "Enough!", as the indigenous population of Chiapas, and groups and movements all around Mexico have said. When this happens, neoliberal strategies (as any other strategy of accumulation in the history of capitalism) rely on force to back up the market; markets were never a spontaneous process, they always had to be imposed. The force of military actions, murders, rapes, policing, imprisonment and torture, are all well documented.
Section 3.2.: Globalization and the Zapatistas' internationalism
