This paper examines the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) as a distinctive revolutionary movement rooted in the indigenous Mayan communities of Chiapas, Mexico. Beginning with the movement's emergence on January 1, 1994—the day NAFTA took effect—the paper analyzes how the Zapatistas differ from prior socialist revolutions by rejecting state seizure in favor of local autonomy and democratic self-rule. Drawing on scholars including Massimo De Angelis, Neil Harvey, and C. Wright Mills, the paper explores the intersections of globalization, neoliberalism, agrarian dispossession, biodiversity, and indigenous rights that define the Zapatista struggle and its relevance to broader global movements.
The essence of Zapatista philosophy and action is the discovery of a new order of revolution. In the wake of failures of other socialist movements — from Lenin's in Russia to the Sandinistas in Nicaragua — the small group of Mayan farmers in southwestern Mexico contend not only with reconstructing revolutionary tactics but also with massive opposition from dominant governments, including those in Mexico and the United States. Governments that continually uphold the principles of capitalism will find in the Zapatistas an idealistic, hopeless cause of swimming against the tide of globalization.
Even before the ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Mexicans struggled with political and economic oppression. The indigenous peoples of Mexico, like the Mayan nations of Chiapas, fared worst. Lowest on the scale of economic, social, and political power, these individuals hearkened to the voice of their martyred namesake Zapata, who was murdered on April 10, 1919. Since his death, and until the efforts of Subcommandante Marcos to revive his brand of socialism, peasant-class Mexicans contended with a legacy of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI). Vicente Fox, playing into the hands of "neoliberal" global economics, could not unburden the invisible masses of Mexico. The struggle continues for "democracy, liberty, and justice," in the words of Marcos himself.
What the Zapatistas experience as day-to-day, practical work, scholars find rich with potential for analysis. Indeed, Marcos and the early instigators of the Zapatistas hastened their political cause from a foundation in academia, and many supporters of the movement come from educated backgrounds unlike the peasants they represent. On January 1, 1994, the day NAFTA took effect, the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) first took up arms and seized several towns in the region of Chiapas. It seemed at first to be just another socialist revolution doomed to failure — one that would meet the same fate as countless other revolutionary movements around the world.
In the Irish Mexico Group article "What Is It That Is Different About the Zapatistas," the author outlines key differences between the Zapatistas and similar movements, and also offers a plethora of primary source material, mainly from the words of Subcommandante Marcos. The piece provides a thoughtful criticism of the Zapatistas, including a comparison with early Mexican anarchism. Moreover, the author analyzes the main difference between the Zapatistas and almost every other peasant movement in history: the proclaimed lack of desire for political control. The Zapatistas call for the democratic self-rule of indigenous people, not for complete control of the Mexican state. Because Zapatista philosophy is based on traditional culture and is essentially an agrarian movement, this lack of lust for power is refreshing but not surprising.
Nevertheless, the Irish Mexico Group does not idealize the movement but rather points out flaws and hypocrisies in its often nebulous ideology. While the Zapatistas adamantly oppose the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, and similar institutions, they do not argue against capitalism per se. Finally, the author points out that the Zapatistas are frequently accused of fragmenting Mexico, especially in relation to the laboring classes.
Zapatistas echo the voices of indigenous people across the globe, and it is for this reason that this relatively small group of jungle-dwellers has garnered so much attention. Furthermore, the Zapatistas seem to be aware of their position in the grand scheme of global economic revolutions. This type of self-awareness and self-consciousness serves to unify the unique needs of the thousands-of-years-old Mayan people with the specific needs of other indigenous populations around the world.
While the Zapatistas' concerns include issues that directly affect people from Europe, the United States, Asia, and Africa, the main EZLN agenda is for autonomy. The Mayan grandmother's need for medical attention and the Mayan baby boy's need for milk and schooling are not irrelevant simply because they apply to specific individuals. This ability to envision connectivity between the individual, the society, and historical context is the crux of what C. Wright Mills calls "the sociological imagination." While the WTO and supporters of free trade emphasize interdependence based on consumption, the Zapatistas feel acutely the need for interdependence based on compassion.
Massimo De Angelis, in his article "Globalization, New Internationalism and the Zapatistas," calls the Zapatista focus on humanitarian interdependence a "new internationalism...rooted in the material conditions of today's class struggle at the international level" (De Angelis, 10). Like the sociological imagination, new internationalism implies a merging of the local with the global — but in this case assumes that "global" does not refer to globalization, NAFTA, or neoliberalism. The grassroots efforts of the Zapatistas aim to link the common concerns of labor activists, environmentalists, feminists, and human rights groups, fostering productive dialogue and cooperation.
Traditional cultures do not operate on the same principles as industrialized nations. Zapatista self-awareness — their sociological imagination — allows for a vision that includes cooperation with capitalism. What the Zapatistas seek to change is the method of implementation. Zapatista leadership implies obedience to the people over obedience to the dogma of the movement, and likewise, Zapatista economics calls for collectivity.
Property redistribution and the "ejido" system prevail in Zapatista-controlled Chiapas communities. In accordance with the NAFTA agreement, the Mexican government seized these common lands, preventing the native people — who had tilled that soil for possibly millennia — from access to basic needs. Forcing cash-crop production on Mexican peasants, the government was prepared to use force when the Zapatistas took up arms in five Chiapas towns and 500 Chiapas ranches. Zapatista military efforts were outmatched, and currently some 30,000 troops surround Zapatista villages in Chiapas. But the bold actions of the EZLN made waves; throngs of protesters in Mexico City joined a chorus of international human rights groups to force the Mexican government to pay attention to the needs of its citizens. Unfortunately, the San Andrés Accords on Indigenous Rights and Culture (1996) were never implemented. Vicente Fox imposed a diluted version on the Zapatistas in 2001, and the struggle continues.
Since NAFTA, economic conditions for Mexican farmers have worsened. Far from offering more jobs and better wages, NAFTA exposed the erroneousness of free trade. Mass production of crops like corn and coffee — which had long been staples of the Mexican diet and economy — crushed the traditional farmer. The ejido system cannot thrive when faced with that level of competition, and many native Mexicans were forced to work for pittances on mestizo farms, never able to climb even an imaginary corporate ladder.
As De Angelis notes, agribusiness multinationals pressed for artificially low prices for goods like corn and coffee, which, in conjunction with cuts in social spending also part of the neoliberal agenda, has created deplorable poverty, racism, and hopelessness in rural Mexico. Adding to these brutal economic weapons are the real military tactics of the Mexican army, which would be backed by the United States military should the need arise to suppress the so-called "rebels." All of this has been carried out in the name of capitalism and corporate profit.
"NAFTA's damage to ejido farming and rural poverty"
"Neoliberalism, citizenship, and biodiversity conflicts"
The conditions of the Mayans and the Zapatista communities mirror the conditions of other people and individuals worldwide, especially as the world seems to shrink. Zapatista sociological imagination reflects the collective consciousness of all indigenous cultures, as Subcommandante Marcos recognizes the universal application of Zapatista ideology. The Zapatistas of southern Mexico serve as a symbol for freedom: political, economic, social, and cultural freedom for all people.
You’re 68% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.