What's with all the disrespect of Marcos?

[R_P_A_S]

I'm starting to note a shift of support for Marcos and the EZLN. I think some of you who are "happy to blow shit up" types are running out of enthusiasm over this guy and his continuous support, dedication and contribution to the people in Chiapas and any oppressed soul out there.

Sure Marcos seems to be taking a reformist path rather than revolution. Sure Marcos is not shooting his gun at government officials, planning attacks on state capitals or the EZLN is not engaging in guerrilla war with the Mexican Government. Sure!

Sometimes is easy to sit on your computers and talk shit on people out in the real world who have dedicated the last 12 years of their lives to their struggle and to help give the voiceless a voice and the tools to help themselves. Is not everyday that you give your life up to fight that battle.

Some of you guys and your comments lead me to believe that you feel the right to disrespect some one just because the fail to live up your fanatical daydreams of some super hero coming from the sky above and smashing capitalism and "blowing shit up"

Is easy and safe from your bedroom to say and think that. But don't try to be condescending to a man who has helped those people and who is still at it. you should be ashamed to criticize him and the people of chiapas' struggle. just because is not going the way you envisioned it, or the way Lenin said it should be OR WHATEVER!

I have my self grown a lil impatient with Marcos too. I wish this would "speed up" and I wish there be some immediate changes in Mexico and for the Mayan people. But as you seen from 12 years of struggle a few things have been done here and there. and obviously its not enough thats why the EZLN is still at it and still operates. I am maturing and starting to understand that sometimes it takes time. and instead of giving them the finger and talking shit I have to give props where is due and support them in any way i can.

I also believe that Marcos might be saving the best for last. and the Zapatistas too. They are obviously not idiots and they are obviously not as unorganized as some of this "revolutionary-armies" around the world who engaged into an all out war against a much more powerful state who smashes them and nothing gets ever accomplished, and there's no point made.

most likely change, immediate revolutionary change.. might not come in Marcos time. But i believe the Zapatistas have been building trust,respect and solidarity of the people of mexico and world wide to one day have full support to maybe engage in a revolution.

viva al EZLN!
hasta la victoria siempre!

[R_P_A_S]

so no comments?

[manic expression]

I agree. The EZLN and Marcos have done a lot for many people (an understatement), and that speaks for itself.

[Louis Pio]

Hmm I don't agree; Marcos is a fraud in every way and no Mexican workers listen to him anymore. One of my comrades in Militante asked Marcos (mr zero) if a united front between the APPO, the CND and the Other Campaign in the struggle against the swearing in of Calderón on December, Mr Zero just laughed, however I think he will be forced to do if if he doesn't want to be more left out of the recent movement than he already is, I mean the thing is that he has NOTHING to do with the recent developments, he just tries to gain from it, but giving his politics he has had no succes whatsoever.

I think this quote explains it quite well:

The EZLN
The duty of revolutionaries is not to abstain from such a movement, but rather to participate in it fully, while at the same time pointing out the methods and programme that the movement should adopt in order to go forward, engaging in a discussion with ordinary working people, instead of sneering from the sidelines. The leadership of the EZLN has made a number of important mistakes during this process. First they said the elections were of no importance, when it was clear that millions saw the July 2 elections as a way of expressing their desire for fundamental change. Then the ruling class organised fraud, proving that for them too the elections were crucial. Marcos and the EZLN leadership abstained as millions marched on the streets of Mexico and filled the Zocalo square many times. When he finally issued a statement, it was one that could not connect with the movement, because although it denounced electoral fraud it still insisted that AMLO "is our enemy".

In relation to Oaxaca the position of the EZLN leaders was also very timid, when they said they would observe the movement taking place there, in order to learn, but that they would not participate in it directly. It seems that now their attitude has changed, as they have started to organise solidarity nationally through the Other Campaign, and they even called for a national strike on November 20 (though the Other Campaign really has a negligible influence within the trade union movement and November 20 is a national holiday in Mexico anyway). The main problem here is the very sectarian attitude towards the movement against electoral fraud and the PRD in general, without understanding that the PRD leadership is one thing, but the millions who are starting on a potentially revolutionary path under the banners of AMLO and the PRD are something completely different. Thus in a meeting in Nuevo Leon, on September 16, subcomandante Marcos ridiculed a worker from the Marxist Tendency Militante for proposing a united front between the APPO, the CND and the Other Campaign in the struggle against the swearing in of Calderón on December 1. Reality however is stubborn, and we can confidently predict that the EZLN leaders will be forced to participate in the movement on December 1, or risk being ignored by the millions from the CND, the PRD, the APPO and the unions who will certainly be there.

It is ironic that the leaders of a movement which claims allegiance to the great Mexican peasant revolutionary leader Emiliano Zapata, forget that the 1910-17 Mexican revolution actually began as the struggle against electoral fraud committed against Francisco Madero. Emiliano Zapata was certainly part of that movement which had revolutionary implications and which went much further than the struggle for democracy.

[BreadBros]

I agree 100% RPAS, great post.


Marcos is a fraud in every way and no Mexican workers listen to him anymore.

#1. Hes a member of the EZLN, a rural peasant group.
#2. The EZLN is widely supported throughout Mexico, by workers and peasants, with a particularly strong base of support in Mexico City.


One of my comrades in Militante asked Marcos (mr zero) if a united front between the APPO, the CND and the Other Campaign in the struggle against the swearing in of Calderón on December, Mr Zero just laughed, however I think he will be forced to do if if he doesn't want to be more left out of the recent movement than he already is, I mean the thing is that he has NOTHING to do with the recent developments, he just tries to gain from it, but giving his politics he has had no succes whatsoever.

Your argument is pretty bunk. The EZLN are reformists because they don't want to join a united front to protest a bourgeois election? :rolleyes: A large deal of the Otra Campana deals with the fact that in the EZLN's view all of the national parties are neoliberal capitalists opposed to the Mexican people. Your quote just shows his reticence to get involved in what may initially appear to be pointless reformist causes, although as hes recognized if they represent a desire for change he has no problem with supporting them, I don't see whats wrong with this viewpoint at all.

[YKTMX]

The problem with the Zapatista movement, great as it is, it that's it's always been reformist and non-revolutionary, and quite explicitly.

Marcos has said from the start that he doesn't think the Zapatistas should aim for "state power". That is, the EZLN and the indigenous movement is a problem, not a threat, to Mexican capital. The EZLN have made very little attempt to connect their struggle with the workers' struggle, favouring their "autonomy" over generalized class struggle.


Quite frankly, the whole history of the Zapatista movement, from the initial rebellion to the modern "reformist" road are just an indication of how "autonomist Marxism" (Anarchism) is not a threat to capitalism. While the capitalist class dominates the state apparatus, there's no hope of liberation. So movements that declare with pride that they don't desire "state power", as if being powerless is some kind of moral imperative, are declaring themselves defeated from the outset.



3. The Sixth Commission (that section of the EZLN that is responsible for participating in the national work of the Sixth Declaration) does not seek to attain any position of state power much less be the vanguard of the Other Campaign (See end of article “Marcos in Zapata’s Morelos”).

That represents a desire to be slaughtered.

[BreadBros]

The opposition to desiring state power or being vanguardists is because they aren't Leninists and don't seek to recreate class society with them at top. It makes very little sense for a movement that arose out of a peasant rebellion over indigenous rights to somehow translate that into a socialist government. The lack of connection with workers and desire for autonomy arises out of the fact that there isn't much of a broad worker's movement in Mexico to begin with. What exactly are you hoping that they'll do? They've obviously expressed connection and alliance with worker's rebellions in Oaxaca and Atenco among other places but I'm unaware of any worker's movement in Mexico that they've somehow distanced themselves from or attempted not to connect to. Not desiring to have state power doesn't mean a desire to keep the status quo, it means a desire to abolish state power and the current society as a whole.

[YKTMX]

The opposition to desiring state power or being vanguardists is because they aren't Leninists and don't seek to recreate class society with them at top.

I hope you're not suggesting that's what "Leninists" intend?


It makes very little sense for a movement that arose out of a peasant rebellion over indigenous rights to somehow translate that into a socialist government.

Agreed. It's a peasant rebellion and it so it will reflect the class interests of the peasantry.


The lack of connection with workers and desire for autonomy arises out of the fact that there isn't much of a broad worker's movement in Mexico to begin with.

They should be creating one then, shouldn't they.


What exactly are you hoping that they'll do?

Nothing. I have no illusions about the rebellion. It's about the peasants of that region (quite rightly) protecting their land and their lives from encroachment. I support that absolutely, but the Zapatista movement has little significance beyond that.


Not desiring to have state power doesn't mean a desire to keep the status quo, it means a desire to abolish state power and the current society as a whole.

Abolishing state power by ignoring it? The state will not just go away if you cover your eyes and close your ears long enough.

It doesn't matter how "autonomous" little communities in Mexico become, the Mexican state, and therefore Mexican capitalism, will still dominate.

[Leo]

Originally posted by YKTMX
The problem with the Zapatista movement ... it that's it's always been reformist and non-revolutionary, and quite explicitly.

I... *chokes* ... I ... *chokes again* ... agree with you here.

*Starts throwing up*

But with all seriousness, I don't think EZLN is no threat in no way to the Mexican bourgeoisie. Their demands aren't revolutionary (they are reformist and nationalist) and they go around waving the national flag and singing the national anthem. Besides Marcos doesn't care one bit about the urban proletariat, which is not surprising considering that he was a hard line Maoist in the past and still has sympathies to Gramsci who was Stalin's man in the Italian Communist Party.

[YKTMX]

sympathies to Gramsci who was Stalin's man in the Italian Communist Party.


...please.

[Louis Pio]

Your argument is pretty bunk. The EZLN are reformists because they don't want to join a united front to protest a bourgeois election? A large deal of the Otra Campana deals with the fact that in the EZLN's view all of the national parties are neoliberal capitalists opposed to the Mexican people. Your quote just shows his reticence to get involved in what may initially appear to be pointless reformist causes, although as hes recognized if they represent a desire for change he has no problem with supporting them, I don't see whats wrong with this viewpoint at all.


No point being that they don't wanna unite with the mexican workingclass but rather play high and mighty from the corner, the word for that is secterianism.
Any revolutionary should work from what the situation is, not from what they want it to be. The fact is that EZLN's line HAS alienated them and therefore left them impotent. And you don't really change anything being in that position.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by YKTMX+December 01, 2006 01:43 pm--> (YKTMX @ December 01, 2006 01:43 pm) Marcos has said from the start that he doesn't think the Zapatistas should aim for "state power". That is, the EZLN and the indigenous movement is a problem, not a threat, to Mexican capital. [/b]

Being a "threat to the state" with aim of "state power" is not necessarily a threat to capital.

*cough* Lenin *cough* coup *cough*


Originally posted by [email protected]
Quite frankly, the whole history of the Zapatista movement, from the initial rebellion to the modern "reformist" road are just an indication of how "autonomist Marxism" (Anarchism) is not a threat to capitalism.

Problem with the ELZN is that they are a peasant movement, with programed declaration of peasant intrests.

Landless hungry peasant can't wait for a '68 in the cities, same way as an urban proletarian can't rely on a reformist peasant movement for "leadership".


YKTMX
While the capitalist class dominates the state apparatus, there's no hope of liberation.

So, regrardless of the fact that the basis of anarchist programme is the destruction of the state, you still blame anarchism for a flaws in one peasant movement.

That's interesting.