Subcomandante Marcos?

[Goose]

Revolutionary hero? Or tit with a pipe. Who goes on about small children and sweets slightly too much?

If I knew how to/was allowed to start a poll I would, but I don't/am not. So opinions will have to do.

[CommunistBattlelord]

He seems like a bit of a weirdo, but an intellectual. i respect him.
i think he's pretty cool.

but certainly not a "revolutionary hero," as i have never heard of him inciting any revolution...

[Goose]

He's so bloody smarmy. That's what I hate about him. When you read his collected stuff to the press/government, letters and so on, he comes across like the cocky kid at school that thinks he's dead clever cos the teacher spelt something wrong and he spotted it. He's like me at 14, and that's not a good basis for a revolutionary leader. (Me 20odd years later seems a safe bet...)

[FreeFocus]

I respect Marcos, and I've been influenced by him. However, I think the Zapatistas need to refine their approach to be more aggressive.

How are "mainstream," urban Mexicans responding to the Zapatista movement? Mexico is still a deeply racist country, and the Zapatista base is Mayan/other indigenous, but I think there's potential to change the outlook of the people. It would take a concerted effort, though, the likes of which it seems the Zapatistas have not yet embarked upon.

[Andropov]

He holds much Left Sectarianism in his attitudes.
He maybe isnt the greatest Political Intellect either but his goals and aspirations are noble.

[R_P_A_S]

i'd like to see some of you commit your lives to what he has been doing for the indigenous people for over 15 years.

[CommunistBattlelord]

He's so bloody smarmy. That's what I hate about him. When you read his collected stuff to the press/government, letters and so on, he comes across like the cocky kid at school that thinks he's dead clever cos the teacher spelt something wrong and he spotted it. He's like me at 14, and that's not a good basis for a revolutionary leader. (Me 20odd years later seems a safe bet...)

Lmao. i don't know, i mean, if he knows they're wrong and shit, then so be it.
Haha, that was funny.

[RedHal]

wasn't one of the criticisms the Zapatistas made, was that too much focus was made on Marcos? I will always have problems with great white hopes.

[JimmyJazz]

I will always have problems with great white hopes.

Well I certainly wouldn't say he's that!

They claim that the members of the EZLN wear masks to preserve anonymity and horizontal organization, but when Marcos is such a flamboyant leader (I mean his writing and speaking style, and his publicity stunts like posing for Vanity Fair or whatever), it's hard to take that claim too seriously.

Anyway, the two major documentaries on the Zaps - Zapatista and A Place Called Chiapas - are on Google Video and I recommend 'em both. Certainly, despite imperfections, the EZLN has effectively challenged the Mexican Gov't and given voice to those Mexicans being hardest hit by NAFTA.

[RedHal]

Isn't he of spanish blood, I would consider him white. Either way he's more white then Indigenous.

[Goose]

Ah yes, but when he went into the jungle with his books, to teach to philistines and what have you, he realised he wasn't white at all. Fucking trustafarian.

[#FF0000]

Ah yes, but when he went into the jungle with his books, to teach to philistines and what have you, he realised he wasn't white at all. Fucking trustafarian.

The fuck? What are you basing this on? Anything?

[Vendetta]

Who gives a shit if he's white or not? What does that have to do with anything?

[Goose]

The fuck? What are you basing this on? Anything?

I'm basing it on a very sound theory that when he went into the jungle to teach the indigineous population about Marxism, he quickly realised how pointless that was, dumped his books and went for the cult of personality, daft pipe and ski mask option while really saying nothing.

Ergo, middle class white boy goes travelling, buys stripey hat and suddenly is personality cult.

Discuss.

[OI OI OI]

Enough with the petty bourgeois disilusioned revolutionaries like Marcos.

Yes it is cool to carry a gun and wear a mask but you never change society that way.
Guerilla warfare has cost a lot of militants in south America.

Let us not make the same mistakes.

I support Marcos' cause but his methods are outdated and ridiculus!

[Goose]

Enough with the petty bourgeois disilusioned revolutionaries like Marcos.

Yes it is cool to carry a gun and wear a mask but you never change society that way.
Guerilla warfare has cost a lot of militants in south America.

Let us not make the same mistakes.

I support Marcos' cause but his methods are outdated and ridiculus!

Exactly.

I'm just gonna sit here and wait for the rest of this lot to slate me now. Problem with the left is too much debate. If Hitler had said that he'd have shot everyone that disagreed. Doesn't make him right by a long shot, and it shouldn't denigrate debate.

But honestly, while we debate, they're wiping out entire races!

[Asoka89]

Enough with the petty bourgeois disilusioned revolutionaries like Marcos.

Yes it is cool to carry a gun and wear a mask but you never change society that way.
Guerilla warfare has cost a lot of militants in south America.

Let us not make the same mistakes.

I support Marcos' cause but his methods are outdated and ridiculus!

You really know nothing about the Zapatista. Read "Our Word is our Weapon", their tactics are being studied in universities and by scholars, because of how unique it is, because of how modern and unlike traditional focoism it is.

Don't give the IMT a bad name comrade

[Asoka89]

Exactly.

I'm just gonna sit here and wait for the rest of this lot to slate me now. Problem with the left is too much debate. If Hitler had said that he'd have shot everyone that disagreed. Doesn't make him right by a long shot, and it shouldn't denigrate debate.

But honestly, while we debate, they're wiping out entire races!

And Goose.. honestly man, think and then post. Think - post, think- post.

One more time.

Think - post

[Goose]

And Goose.. honestly man, think and then post. Think - post, think- post.

One more time.

Think - post

Mate - when you're surrounded by numpties, it's hard to bother with the thinking section...

[Asoka89]

Mate - when you're surrounded by numpties, it's hard to bother with the thinking section...

Hah, at least you got a sense of humor mate

[OI OI OI]

You really know nothing about the Zapatista. Read "Our Word is our Weapon", their tactics are being studied in universities and by scholars, because of how unique it is, because of how modern and unlike traditional focoism it is.

Yes me too I fight in the mountains with masks and guns and not in the cities and when I take power we have a deformed workers state from the beggining , because of the way the revolution has happened.
Come on man I don't mean that I wouln't support the Zapatistas if the Mexican army attacked but I don't think this is the way to change society.

What if this way is studied in unversities, does it make it good? History has proved that successfull guerilla movements lead to deformed workers states while most of the are unsuccessfull and cost the lives of thousands of militants which fight isolated in the jungle instead of agitating in the cities or create some sort of a movement.




Don't give the IMT a bad name comrade

How am I giving the IMT a ba name.
First of all I m only a sympathizer of the IMT , second of all I don't think that a lot of people in the IMT disagree with my position as it is the correct position;)

[Holden Caulfield]

First of all I m only a sympathizer of the IMT


:thumbup: great comeback :lol:

that said i would say i mainly agree with your post, but perhaps i see them in a slightly better light

[Asoka89]

Yes me too I fight in the mountains with masks and guns and not in the cities and when I take power we have a deformed workers state from the beggining , because of the way the revolution has happened.
Come on man I don't mean that I wouln't support the Zapatistas if the Mexican army attacked but I don't think this is the way to change society.

What if this way is studied in unversities, does it make it good? History has proved that successfull guerilla movements lead to deformed workers states while most of the are unsuccessfull and cost the lives of thousands of militants which fight isolated in the jungle instead of agitating in the cities or create some sort of a movement.




How am I giving the IMT a ba name.
First of all I m only a sympathizer of the IMT , second of all I don't think that a lot of people in the IMT disagree with my position as it is the correct position;)

Because you don't know what your taling about, because they aren't fighting for state power, they aren't even fighting a convientiation guerilla war, this has nothing to do with focoism

[pox]

Exactly.

I'm just gonna sit here and wait for the rest of this lot to slate me now. Problem with the left is too much debate. If Hitler had said that he'd have shot everyone that disagreed. Doesn't make him right by a long shot, and it shouldn't denigrate debate.

But honestly, while we debate, they're wiping out entire races!

ah, a common mind.. say more things...

[Incendiarism]

I'm neutral on the zapatistas, because I think they're good but they definitely don't have much support these days from what I've seen. Also, a funny thing I've noticed is that a lot of liberals I know seem to adore them.

[#FF0000]

I'm pretty much with FreeFocus on this one. I enjoy Marcos' writing, and I tell the stories of Durito to the kids I babysit all the time. But I have to question their tactics, since they don't seem to be accomplishing much.

But, hey, what do I know about organizing an open revolt against the State.


I'm neutral on the zapatistas, because I think they're good but they definitely don't have much support these days from what I've seen.

Maybe not abroad. I was under the impression that they had a fair bit of support in some places in Mexico (Oaxaca, for instance), but I might be wrong.

They definitely should step things up, though. Last I heard, they're just getting more reclusive, and not doing much to connect with other groups in Mexico. Ahh I wish I could find what Robin Hoodie posted about recent Zapatista activity but I can't find it. The gist of it, though, is that they're just in bad shape all around.


I'm basing it on a very sound theory that when he went into the jungle to teach the indigineous population about Marxism, he quickly realised how pointless that was, dumped his books and went for the cult of personality, daft pipe and ski mask option while really saying nothing.

That's interesting since Marcos is only the spokesperson for the EZLN, and isn't, as I understand it, a leader at all. He's just the guy they send out to talk to the cameras.

Also, just because a bunch of people outside the EZLN worship Marcos doesn't mean there exists a personality cult within the EZLN, which I guess you're insinuating, since I don't see how a bunch of people who will never even see Chiapas idolizing the guy has anything to do with Marcos or the EZLN.

And one more thing. How exactly do you know what Subcomandante Marcos was planning or thinking when he first got involved in Chiapas and the EZLN? I'd like to know.


Ergo, middle class white boy goes travelling, buys stripey hat and suddenly is personality cult.

All that left-cred you're getting from those stunningly clever middle-class-white-kid jokes aren't going to matter much if you just make baseless statements all the time. I'm pretty sure you can do better than that.

[OI OI OI]

Because you don't know what your taling about, because they aren't fighting for state power, they aren't even fighting a convientiation guerilla war, this has nothing to do with focoism

They are fighting against "neo-liberalism" :lol:
they have a mix of zapatismo and confusion and they are hierarchical as all army units
Therefore if they "win" the war they waged against capitalism they will inevitably create a deformed "workers" state. That's what happens when we fight guerilla wars:)

Also the fact that they cant even fight a regular guerilla war shows how bankrupt these tactics are.

WE SHOULD NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES AS THE PAST AND FIGHT GUERILLA WARS IN WHICH THOUSANTS OF MILITANTS LOSE THEIR LIVES FOR NOTHING!

LEFTISTS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT AND THIS IS VERY CRUCIAL FOR A SUCCESSFULL OVERTHROW OF CAPITALISM!

yes fetishize Che as much as you want but when you actualy become a concious marxist you will discard all the petty bourgeois Che bulshit.

[JimmyJazz]

Also, a funny thing I've noticed is that a lot of liberals I know seem to adore them.

Me too. Tom Hayden and Naomi Klein are really into them. Anarchists like them too. Basically, anyone who has some awareness of the harmfulness of global capitalism and free trade, but is still affected by the propoganda which has tried to scare everyone of what horrible things would happen if the people actually took power, likes the Zapatistas--because they don't even aim to seize state power.

RedHal, you are right, he's pretty Spanish, but I guess I was thinking of the movement, which is extremely indigenous.

[Comrade B]

I highly respect Marcos and the Zapatistas.

[FreeFocus]

Me too. Tom Hayden and Naomi Klein are really into them. Anarchists like them too. Basically, anyone who has some awareness of the harmfulness of global capitalism and free trade, but is still affected by the propoganda which has tried to scare everyone of what horrible things would happen if the people actually took power, likes the Zapatistas--because they don't even aim to seize state power.

RedHal, you are right, he's pretty Spanish, but I guess I was thinking of the movement, which is extremely indigenous.

As an anarchist I strongly resent the bolded portion. Had the Zapatistas been more successful (I don't know what accounts for their general failure - not confronting state forces enough? Not enough military capability? Not enough bridge-building and solidarity?), that would have been people power, because they're strengthening communities, building agriculture, supporting indigenous culture, promoting horizontalism and true feminism. A few politicians seizing state power (and thereby the forces of violence that accompany it) does not translate into the people seizing power, and in fact, leads to the exact opposite: when put in positions of power over others, these elites have privileges not available to "normal" people, and if they're not immediately recallable (even if a mechanism for this was provided in a "state socialist" system, who's going to enforce this? the politicians control the means of violence, they don't have to abide by anything), they get drunk with power and begin using power for their own ends.

It does seem, though, that the Zapatistas have failed miserably in some respects. I agree with their general aims and I respect much of what they're doing (cooperative farming, feminist principles, etc) but I don't know much about their actual strategy and why it's failed.

[JimmyJazz]

A few politicians seizing state power (and thereby the forces of violence that accompany it) does not translate into the people seizing power

Certainly not, nor would I advocate that kind of situation. I don't think anyone here would advocate a "benign dictatorship" model, at least not explicitly.

I am only speaking from my personal experience. I started out an anarchist, and remained one for a good 8 or 9 months, precisely for the reasons I gave: I was convinced by the case against capitalism, but also fearful that getting rid of captialists would somehow inevitably lead to a ruling clique. I now see the latter belief as not only silly, but also largely the result of deliberate propaganda. Perhaps ruling cliques have taken power as a result of some "socialist" revolutions, but this is not inevitable--it's more a result of revolutions trying to defend themselves tooth and nail against internal opposition that is massively aided by Western imperialism. And I also think you have to exercise judgment in who you level the "new ruling class"-style charges at. One could easily say that Chavez is too authoritarian because he is opposed by some labor groups in Venezuela. A closer analysis makes it clear that these labor groups are the reactionaries, not Chavez.

I understand that other people might be anarchists for better reasons than I was, but all I can go on are the reasons I had. Deep down I knew that anarchists could never take on and defeat the organized machinery of a capitalist state; and even deeper down, I thought this was a good thing, because in truth I was fearful of a socialist revolution.

[Goose]

And one more thing. How exactly do you know what Subcomandante Marcos was planning or thinking when he first got involved in Chiapas and the EZLN? I'd like to know.





Largely from his own writings. I'm gonna have to paraphrase rather than quote as it's late and I can't be arsed finding the right book and then rooting through 800 pages for the quote, but it goes along the lines of: "So I popped off into the jungle with lots of Marx in my bag. After a km a bag is heavy, after 2 it's silly, and after 3 you dump your books."

Actually a very commendable stand point, but it does rather reek of 'what I did on my summer holidays.'

[FreeFocus]

While Marcos' endeavor may have been elitist perhaps in the beginning (I believe he genuinely cared, however), at least he did real-world stuff and at least he's cared enough to stay.

[Asoka89]

They are fighting against "neo-liberalism" :lol:
they have a mix of zapatismo and confusion and they are hierarchical as all army units
Therefore if they "win" the war they waged against capitalism they will inevitably create a deformed "workers" state. That's what happens when we fight guerilla wars:)

Also the fact that they cant even fight a regular guerilla war shows how bankrupt these tactics are.

WE SHOULD NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES AS THE PAST AND FIGHT GUERILLA WARS IN WHICH THOUSANTS OF MILITANTS LOSE THEIR LIVES FOR NOTHING!

LEFTISTS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT AND THIS IS VERY CRUCIAL FOR A SUCCESSFULL OVERTHROW OF CAPITALISM!

yes fetishize Che as much as you want but when you actualy become a ve concious marxist you will discard all the petty bourgeois Che bulshit.

You really give trotkyists a bad name, I just attacked focoism and your talking about a fetishism of Che? You haven't given a logical critique of the Zapatistas struggle yet, you seem to equate them with the FARC

[BIG BROTHER]

oi oi oi , no offense but you seem to know nothing about EZLN and you would do a better job if you didn't post anything on this thread.

by the way once either on a documental or in a interview I read or saw that Marcos at the beguning was a Maoist but after seeing and interacting with the people of chiapas he changed his views.

Otherwise, I see the Zapatistas kinda like armed protesters, they aren't planning to take over the Mexican state, they themselves have said that they want to build a leftist society that comes from the bottom, so idk you could clasify them as reformists i guess.

never the less they represent rebellion against the capitalist system in mexico, and the way their comunities are organized seems pretty anarquist like to me.

[Red_Dialectics]

I support them. Even though they are not very Marxist or anything, at least they're doing SOMETHING. They haven't committed any massive atrocities as far as I know, and they're doing a lot of good for the people of Chiapas. And Marcos is pretty badass :cool:

[Colonello Buendia]

Marcos is a good leader and has achieved the goal of creating a socialistic economy but there's alot reactionary feeling in mexico, specially in attitudes regarding to the curch and homosexuality.of course they have problems but I think that they're brave to fight it out especially when badly armed and poorly supported. tell you what, slag him off when and only when you've experienced what he has. you try fighting a revolutionary war in a small area of jungle with few weapons, few medical supplies and under attack from a yank backed army.

[Forward Union]

I once called marcos a fat bastard well within his earshot. Enough to warrent someone writing a letter of apology on my behalf!

But actually, I do have a fair amount of respect for him. Although it's very important we draw a line between his personal efforts, and the zapatista movement in general, of which he is a small part.

He's the spokesperson and subcomandante of the Army, hardly "the head honcho" by any institutional means. The Zapatista movement has been de-militarised. All the organs of management are now civillian, and the army is subject to he will of the peoples councils.

[Forward Union]

They are fighting against "neo-liberalism" :lol:
they have a mix of zapatismo and confusion and they are hierarchical as all army units
Therefore if they "win" the war they waged against capitalism they will inevitably create a deformed "workers" state. That's what happens when we fight guerilla wars:)

But you do realise that the Zapatistas have explicitly defined Neo-liberalism as the most extreme form of Capitalism. And in the 6th declaration, explained that there were most definetly anti-capitalists aswell.

Even Anarchists have supported and created Hierachical armies, so I am not sure what this point is sugesting about their politics.


Also the fact that they cant even fight a regular guerilla war shows how bankrupt these tactics are.

Actually you should be quite appreciative of the reasons they're not fighting a gurillia war. They are trying to build a class concious movement across all of Mexico instead. They recognise that they themsevles, as mayan peasants, are not representative of the entire Mexican working class, and cannot rise up on their behalf. La Otra Campana is an attempt by the Zapatistas to link all workers struggles into one confederation in prepairation for war in 2010.

This is precisely because they do not want state power, but for all these local struggles to become soverign democratic bodies that govern mexico horizontally.


yes fetishize Che as much as you want but when you actualy become a concious marxist you will discard all the petty bourgeois Che bulshit.

What's Che got to do with anything?

[Holden Caulfield]

I once called marcos a fat bastard well within his earshot. Enough to warrent someone writing a letter of apology on my behalf!

But actually, I do have a fair amount of respect for him. Although it's very important we draw a line between his personal efforts, and the zapatista movement in general, of which he is a small part.

He's the spokesperson and subcomandante of the Army, hardly "the head honcho" by any institutional means. The Zapatista movement has been de-militarised. All the organs of management are now civillian, and the army is subject to he will of the peoples councils.

i've been watching this thread to see what you would say, and i think that it was worth it, :lol:

[Colonello Buendia]

I'd agree with Robin Hoodie

[Forward Union]

I know i snuck in late but I would like a debate on this...

[Louis Pio]

I consider Marcos and EZLN to be reformists with guns. And very poor at that too since they have alienated themselves from the mexican workingclass alltogether. There's more debate on them at this board than there is in Mexico since most there don't really bother with them since they have nothing to say.

[#FF0000]

I'm curious as to what people who insist the EZLN are "reformists with guns" want them to do. Start a revolution without the majority of the Mexican working class?

[Louis Pio]

I don't really think EZLN can do much, it's their own political line that got them cornered. They had a chance during the big political crisis regarding the elections but their own secterianism and politics stood in the way of that.

And how are they not reformists? Even supporters talk about how their goal isn't to "take power", which I suppose is another wording for not wanting to take power away from the capitalists and big business. One could also call them "lobbyists with guns" I suppose...

[Faux Real]

He's just a representative of the indigenous Zapatista communes, nothing more. All nice people.

[RadioRaheem84]

You gotta love the middle class white boy that majors in philosophy and think he has something to tell indegenous natives. Heck, was not Che Guevarra another whitey who did the same in Cuba, Bolivia, and Africa?

Marcos is cool. He is a bit strange, but otherwise a decent cat.

[Zurdito]

You gotta love the middle class white boy that majors in philosophy and think he has something to tell indegenous natives.

but surely a philosophy major does have something to tell them. unless they are all pilosophy majors too...

[Forward Union]

I don't really think EZLN can do much, it's their own political line that got them cornered. They had a chance during the big political crisis regarding the elections but their own secterianism and politics stood in the way of that.

And how are they not reformists? Even supporters talk about how their goal isn't to "take power", which I suppose is another wording for not wanting to take power away from the capitalists and big business. One could also call them "lobbyists with guns" I suppose...

No they (The EZLN) don't want to take power. They want the working class to have power instead. This is why Anarchists tend to sympathise with them.

Reforms won have been progresive and I have no objection to the winning of decent reforms, I don't objectto pay rises and shorter hours for example. I simply don't think they do the job. And niether do the Zapatistas.

Marcos is a distinguished human being whom i have much respect for.

[Goose]

You gotta love the middle class white boy that majors in philosophy and think he has something to tell indegenous natives.

You're not allowed to say that mate. Can't wait for the rain of fire to descend on you though. Lordy.

[Jesus Christ!]

i'd like to see some of you commit your lives to what he has been doing for the indigenous people for over 15 years.

That's the whole point. We are the people who have the privilege to sit around and argue about how other people should do things better while really accomplishing nothing ourselves that could ever touch what the people we criticize have done.

[BIG BROTHER]

I don't see criticism itself as a bad thing, as long as we can learn something from it. Of course in the end EZLN deserves respect for the struggle they wage even if we don't agree with it or if we think they are wrong, etc.

But at the same time we should criticize them so we can learn and if we are ever stuck in a similar position do better.

[Forward Union]

I don't see criticism itself as a bad thing, as long as we can learn something from it. Of course in the end EZLN deserves respect for the struggle they wage even if we don't agree with it or if we think they are wrong, etc.

But at the same time we should criticize them so we can learn and if we are ever stuck in a similar position do better.

Most of the ultra-left criticisms of the Zapatistas focus on misunderstandings and selective quoting. And a general ignorance of the situation in the region and the concessions this has forced the EZLN to make.

But as I have made clear, the Zapatistas are probably going to be gone by the end of next year.