Civil Society s Challenge to the State: A Case Study of the Zapatistas and their Global Significance

Transcription

1 Journal of Development and Social Transformation Civil Society s Challenge to the State: A Case Study of the Zapatistas and their Global Significance Deborah A. Greebon Public Administration, The Maxwell School of Syracuse University In 1994 the indigenous Zapatistas of southern Mexico emerged as a unique example of resistance to state repression and the impacts of corporate globalization and neoliberal policy. Neo-Zapatismo now encompasses a global network of millions of supporters, as well as a core group of hundreds of autonomous communities in resistance that challenge state power without aspirations to overthrow it. This paper explores the global significance of the Zapatista resistance by identifying key ideological themes of the movement, showing how those themes are responses to the perceived and experienced failures of neoliberalism, and analyzing the movement s contributions and shortcomings. Additionally, I make strategic recommendations for the Zapatistas future and posit lessons that can be learned from the movement. Introduction Recent years have seen an explosive growth of civil society around the world, including the rise of influential non-state actors, many of them nongovernmental organizations. As civil society has grown and taken on an increasingly transnational element, the global framework of governance by nation-states has come into question. Aware of many states inability to meet the needs of disadvantaged or minority citizens, especially in the highly inequitable societies of many developing countries, scholars and activists have sought to develop new conceptualizations of bottom-up governance. Many consider state politics as antithetical to this end in some cases even the primary barrier to local participation in social life and the growth of democracy. Civil society actors have stepped up to fill in that gap, but because most exist within the confines of state regulation and fierce competition for funding, few have been able to offer a new vision of governance. In the south of Mexico, the autonomous communities aligned with the Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN), or Zapatista Army for National Liberation, have developed a new form of radical bottom-up governance in the context of resistance and self-development. While their example is significant as a fascinating and informative case study, their survival also has implications that reach far beyond Mexican politics. The Zapatistas, as they call themselves, represent the capacity of grassroots social movements to confront dominant global forces. Their success tests resistance to historical injustice, state power, and the hegemony of corporate globalization, thus their continued existence has global importance. A wide array of individuals, groups, and movements stand to benefit from a thorough analysis of the group s truly distinctive modus operandi their postmodern approach to revolution, ideological bridge-building, and innovative tactics. The goals of this paper are to explore the global significance of the Zapatistas by identifying key ideological themes of the movement, showing how these themes are responses to the perceived and experienced failures of regional political changes, and analyzing the movement s contributions and shortcomings in light of this changing context. This paper is divided into three major sections. First, I provide a brief history of the Zapatista movement focusing on ideological and tactical elements rather than a descriptive timeline of events, as space constraints do not permit suitable treatment of the movement s complex historical narrative. 1 I also analyze the movement s approach from the perspectives of other actors, such as the Mexican government and non- Zapatista indigenous communities. The second section embeds the movement in the greater context of major political shifts in Latin America, specifically neoliberal policy and multiculturalism. Then, I examine the global significance of the Zapatista movement by presenting some of the scholarly debates surrounding their approach. Finally, I make strategic recommendations for the future of the movement and posit lessons that can be learned. A History of the Zapatista Movement The Uprising The EZLN announced their presence to the world in 1994 when they occupied government buildings in the state of Chiapas in southern Mexico. As an armed group of several thousand indigenous peasants, the Zapatistas confronted the Mexican state demanding cultural and political rights, education, and land. They threatened violent action if their demands weren t met. The reaction of the Mexican military was swift and Volume 5, November

2 Zapatistas and their Global Significance decisive, the Zapatistas retreated into the jungle ten days after their initial uprising, and, in the following months, thousands of troops were sent into Chiapas. The indigenous army (EZLN) realized it could not survive long using violent tactics, being grossly outnumbered and poorly armed. Aware of the need for a different strategy, as well as the deficiencies of previous revolutions that concentrated power in the hands of the military, the EZLN sought guidance by actively reaching out to sympathizers in civil society 2 above all, indigenous civilian supporters in Chiapas. This act met with such resounding support that it became the hall1 of the movement. Through dialogue (an approach they describe with the slogan we learn as we go ), the Zapatistas adopted a policy of leading by obeying, in other words, those in power must be subject to the authority of those they serve. Thus the term Zapatista grew to include not only the army (EZLN), but its indigenous supporters in Chiapas as well, who non-violently retook land in 38 municipalities 3 (Hayden, 2005), creating thousands of autonomous communities that grew to include more than 500,000 people (Flood, 1999). In the process of building a system of direct democracy and creating a political space where everyone could participate, the movement was dramatically transformed from a marginal group of revolutionaries to a radical social movement (Flood, 1999). Since then, the EZLN has been non-violent and weary of traditional political power that corrupted former revolutionary movements. They have rejected the goal of overthrowing the government, concentrating instead on listening to the voice of civil society the perspective of civilians who voluntarily choose to associate themselves with the movement. Toward this end, the Zapatistas have galvanized civil society through local recruitment and mobilization of international support. They have given up violence to wage a different kind of war, using the Internet to disseminate information about their situation, rally activists around the world, channel international donations to communities in Chiapas, and proclaim a new vision of hope. Burbach (1994) described the Zapatista movement as the first post-modern revolution. Moving beyond older strategies for so-called revolution, the Zapatistas have developed a new pluralistic vision of transformative change based on a post-modern conception of equality where diverse perspectives coexist (Pelaez, n.d.). Zapatista ideology manifests unique connections (between tradition and modernity, the mundane and the transcendent, the local and the global) which revel in paradox. Nash (1997) eloquently describes the origins of their post-modern dichotomy of thought and purpose: Their vision of progress still contains the communal values that are found in mythopoetic traditions that survive from the preconquest period. Accustomed to cultural diversity, they have learned to live with it, not attempting to eradicate or dominate the others in their midst. Far from being primordial remnants of a past, the behaviors and beliefs of the groups engaged in the struggle have been enacted continually in everyday life since the conquest the communitarian values and institutions might provide a model for pluriethnic and pluripolitical institutions as we enter the third millennium. (p. 272) While there is much to be learned from Zapatista ideology, its complexity is at the same time auspicious and disadvantageous. It creates a space for rich deliberation, but its elaborate aims defy easy categorization and resist concise description. At one level, Zapatista demands remain the same as on the day of their uprising: they seek land, as well as political and cultural rights for indigenous groups. But the Zapatista vision has evolved into something much broader as well. Their aspirations exist on three levels locally, nationally, and globally. At the community level, the Zapatistas protest disempowerment from social disintegration, loss of indigenous culture, and lack of local control. They advocate, instead, for local empowerment of their own autonomous communities, which govern themselves through a communal blend of participatory and delegate democracy. At the national level, the Zapatistas see elites controlling politics and resources for their own interests. In response, they advocate for resistance against historical domination, exploitation, and lack of political representation (EZLN Indigenous Clandestine Revolutionary Committee General Command [EZLN CCRI], 1994) through strategies that have evolved into a policy of nonengagement with the state (EZLN CCRI, 2005). At a global level, they challenge impersonal forces that have widened the gap between rich and poor and between the powerful and the disenfranchised. These forces include neoliberalism, corporate globalization, and unrestricted free trade. The Zapatistas take a cosmopolitan approach to citizenship by allying themselves with all disadvantaged people and advocating for the valuation of people over profit (EZLN CCRI, 2005). Each of these three levels of influence is described in greater detail below. Local Autonomy The Zapatistas main tactic of resistance has been the development of hundreds of autonomous communities that cover over a third of the political territory of Chiapas (Hayden, 2005). Community members are several hundred thousand landless indigenous peasants 72 Volume 5, November 2008

3 Journal of Development and Social Transformation from the Chiapas highlands (Bob, 2001). These communities in resistance have put autonomy into practice by resisting government interventions, refusing government programs and services, and building their own infrastructure, including clinics, pharmacies, and hundreds of schools. Baker (2002) has noted that rather than taking up formal avenues where they would be admitted only as losers, they have chosen to opt out of the national system to create their own (as cited by Chandler, 2004, New Global Agency section, para. 8). For example, they finance their communal infrastructure development through donations from global civil society. Benefiting from fair trade 1eting and an elaborate system of cooperatives, income from the production of coffee and traditional textiles and handicrafts aids both individual workers and the collective whole. This capitalism with socialist goals (Earle & Simonelli, 2005, p. 21) directs communal earnings toward diversifying production and building food security (Starr & Adams, 2003) to help build a model of self-sustainability. Fiercely dedicated to self-development, the Zapatistas have created their own system of participatory governance in an effort to embody the transformation they advocate. The EZLN s commanding body (of which there are also regional sub-bodies) is the Indigenous Clandestine Revolutionary Committee General Command (CCRICG), composed of delegates from the communities. However, while this group directs day-to-day operations, all major political decisions are made by community assemblies (consultas) where intense discussions in each community (are) as central to the process as the vote itself (Flood, 1999, The Consulta section, para. 1). These discussions also guide the evolution of the system of Zapatista governance which has developed over time. Most recently in 2003, they re-organized to consolidate their influence by developing juntas de buen gobierno (good government committees). These committees are regional councils which take the functions of administering justice, taxation, healthcare, education, housing, land, work, food, commerce, information and culture, and local movement from the EZLN (Hobson, 2005, para. 12). The Zapatistas 1ed this change by replacing the name of their five administrative centers, previously called aguascalientes,4 with the designation caracoles.5 Perhaps the most unique aspect of Zapatista governance is its rhetoric about civil service. Their brand of autonomy is synonymous not with power, but with empowerment through self-sacrifice. Members are willing to take on hardships without the promise of personal gain, underscoring their doctrine that elected officials should be, above all, servants to those they represent. Believing money to be a corrupting influence, civil servants elected to a junta work full-time Volume 5, November 2008 without pay. Personal income must be gained through other avenues, such a picking and grinding coffee or making and selling handicrafts.6 The Zapatistas restrict power by limiting term length and permitting immediate recall of any individual who does not carry out his or her duties (Flood, 2001). Figure 1 Oventic mural. Photo taken in the Zapatista of Oventic by ElizabethofJenner, Marching alongside Photo taken in the community Zapatista community Oventic by Elizabeth caracoles (snails symbolic of the movement's slow and steady progress), this mural depicts indigenous Jenner, for Marching alongside caracoles (snails the Zapatistas advocating Liberty, Land, and Equality. The ski masks and redsymbolic handkerchiefsof(worn in public to conceal individual identities in a historical context of violent state repression) represent movement's slow and steady progress), this mural depicts indigenous opposition to individualism in favor of communitarian values and solidarity with marginalized groups around the globe.advocating for Liberty, Land, and Equality. The ski Zapatistas masks and red handkerchiefs (worn in public to conceal individual identities in a historical context of violent state repression) represent opposition to individualism in favor of communitarian values and solidarity with marginalized groups around the globe. The Zapatista Approach to the State Shortly after their uprising in 1994, the Zapatistas began a dialog with the Mexican government. The two parties eventually agreed to peace negotiations, but these stalled early on, and the majority of proposed topics for discussion were never broached. Those issues that were discussed resulted in the San Andrés Accords, a document approved by the Zapatistas and other indigenous communities which guaranteed indigenous rights to cultural pluralism and self-determination. Congress ultimately approved the document in 1996, but internal congressional negotiations had so altered its content that the resulting document had lost its substance according to the Zapatistas. Worse, the ruling party ignored the agreement and increased its military presence in Chiapas. The EZLN felt betrayed and said they would only consider future negotiations if the government withdrew some of the 50,000 troops stationed in Chiapas, dismantled paramilitary groups, and implemented the San Andrés Accords in full (Hayden, 2005). Thus the Zapatistas have a profound distrust of the Mexican state. In 1997 the Zapatistas agreed not to join political parties or aspire to political 73

4 Zapatistas and their Global Significance office (FZLN National Organizing Commission, 1997). 7 The EZLN stopped making demands for constitutional rights in 2001, and have since then taken an approach of complete non-engagement with the state. Zapatista communities refuse all contact with the Mexican state, including the registration of births and deaths (Flood, 2001). This policy of anti-politics is still accompanied by a desire to affect change on a national level by creating a political space for all to participate in the remaking of society. Stammers (1999) noted that they do not seek to replace one form of power with another but instead have the objective of whittling down the capacity of concentrated centers of power by creating alternative sources of influence in civil society (as cited by Chandler, 2004, p. 314). Hernández Navarro (1995) interpreted the Zapatista vision as the creation of a public sphere free of any state or 1et involvement. The hope is that such a free space, born of reclaimed land, communal agriculture, (and) resistance to privatization, will eventually create counter-powers to the state simply by existing as alternatives (Klein, 2000, para. 23). Transnational Networks The EZLN does not oppose globalization in its entirety, but rather objects to its effects on the disenfranchised poor and marginalized. The Zapatistas protest the terms on which the national system and their right to control their own economic resources are based. 8 Unrestricted U.S. access to Mexican 1ets, which elites view as a basis for Mexico s legitimacy in the global 1et (Stavenhagen, 2003), are seen by the EZLN as a decision with grave consequences for the poor. Under NAFTA, if the poor are not able to make themselves relevant to capital 1ets, they could wind up being decimated as regional trading blocs evolve. Rather than advocating protectionist policies and isolationism, as Hayden (2005) explained, it is not a question of globalization versus protectionism, it is a question of global corporatism versus global conscience (para. 50). Thus, in its view of global relations, the Zapatista protest bears a heavy ethical dimension. Attracted to the movement by its call for ethical action, groups and individuals around the world have responded by creating support networks. 9 Today the Zapatistas have working relationships with non-profit and volunteer organizations in dozens of countries. Primarily using the Internet, these networks disseminate information and solicit donations for the Zapatistas to fund infrastructure. The EZLN has demonstrated an extremely skilled use of networks to gain support through imagery, art, slogans, parables, regular communiqués, and radio, in addition to the Internet. One of the movement s leaders and its primary spokesperson, Subcommander Marcos, has been widely perceived as a communications guru. His prolific and eloquent writings, symbolic presence at conferences and regular interviews, and inspirational calls for moral action have enabled anyone with media access to participate in resistance, whether directly or vicariously. This virtual rebellion has enabled anyone, anywhere, to practice Zapatista-inspired ethics through protest. Perspectives of Related Actors After the uprising, the Mexican government responded by drastically increasing its military presence in the state of Chiapas. The military continually harassed Zapatista communities using surveillance, military installations, and checkpoints. The army employed a policy of lowintensity warfare, and even covertly funded the training of some 18 paramilitary groups in the region. Today there are still some 50,000 troops in the state of Chiapas (Swords, 2007). Since the uprising, the government has also funneled much more money into non-zapatista communities in the region, particularly into schools and infrastructure, presumably to prevent recruitment of additional members and the growth of the movement. The conflict between the Zapatistas and the government has also exacerbated tensions between indigenous communities. Ninety percent of indigenous people in Chiapas claim to be neither opponents nor supporters of the Zapatistas (Bob, 2001), but indigenous communities still face the choice of who to support. Will they join the Zapatistas in their struggle? Can they survive communally, working longer hours for less money? Will the government retaliate? Are such long-term goals even achievable? Or will they continue with life as normal and reap the benefits of increased government handouts, thereby entering the capitalist hierarchy at the bottom? The Neoliberal, Multicultural Context of Latin America As in much of the rest of the world, massive structural changes have occurred in Latin America since the 1970s. These changes are described, often pejoratively, under the label of neoliberalism, which Hale (2002) described as a set of policies driven by the logic of transnational capitalism: unfettered world 1ets pared down state responsibilities for social welfare of its citizens (and) resolution of social problems through the application of quasi1et principles revolving around the primacy of the individual (p. 486). It involves decentralization, scaled-down government, and the growth of civil society. It is also associated with an affirmation of human rights, including the right to preserve one s way of life. On the surface, these developments seem to be overwhelmingly positive, but authors are beginning to call attention to the darker side of these reforms and their consequences, particularly in 74 Volume 5, November 2008

5 Journal of Development and Social Transformation terms of changing power relations and the implications for minority and indigenous groups. According to Robinson (2006), Latin America is at the forefront of current social movements. In the past few decades, indigenous rights movements have sprung up in most Latin American countries with sizeable native populations, and many of these have resulted in significant constitutional changes that give minority groups political rights based on cultural differences. Many authors have connected this trend to neoliberal policies. Hooker (2005) summarized the reasons that authors have given for the connection between neoliberalism and multicultural policies. According to him, perhaps neoliberal reforms: 1) challenge indigenous autonomy which leads to greater mobilization, 2) push elites to promote multiculturalism in order to increase the internal and external legitimacy of the state, or 3) push elites to compromise in order to pacify more radical claims. Interestingly enough, Mexico is one country that has not altered its constitution to introduce multicultural policies and it seems likely that contention between the state and the EZLN has played some role in hindering such a change. Yashar (2005) argues that the shift to neoliberal policies in the eighties brought about a corresponding change in the basis of state citizenship suddenly the individual became the primary unit of citizenship, as opposed to the collective. Under the corporatist regime prior to the 1980s, indigenous communities had citizenship as peasants and communal landholders and were therefore granted autonomy and social rights, such as credit, healthcare, education, and subsidies. Loss of autonomy due to this regime change, says Yashar, is what has prompted mass mobilization around indigenous resistance in most Latin American countries. Indeed, the EZLN uprising was directly precipitated by President Salinas 1992 revocation of Article 27 of the Mexican constitution which stipulated the right to communal landholding (Hobson, 2005). While multiculturalism has increased the legal and political participation of indigenous groups in some countries, neoliberalism s emphasis on reducing government and opening 1ets has not addressed longstanding social inequalities. Economic disparity plays a central role in the struggle for minority rights, as most indigenous peoples in Latin America are considerably poorer than non-indigenous people (Hale, 2002). Even in countries where multicultural rights have been affirmed, very few have invested economic resources in implementation or translating these rights into legal standards to protect minorities (Yashar, 2005). Mexico has done neither it has not affirmed those rights nor sought redistributive justice based on economic disparity. When rights are not backed with economic resources, it is inevitable that inequities based on class and continued marginalization will persist. Certainly resources are being channeled into many different development projects that are funded by national and international organizations as well as the government, but these resources have not been aimed at establishing legal rights or correcting systemic injustice. Bob (2001) explains that since the 1960s, the Mexican government has been implementing an elaborate development plan by building roads, schools, and clinics, especially in rural areas and in many indigenous communities. However, because resources have been funneled through local indigenous elites, these efforts do not produce greater equity or democracy. In fact, even though Chiapas has made strides towards greater economic development overall, government development programs may have further stratified class-based differences and exacerbated corruption (Bob, 2001). Development projects often come with strings attached and may create situations of dependency that disempower communities. Hale (2002) concluded that when resource starved, without the power to influence decisions taken by the state and powerful institutions development initiatives reinforce a symbolic order that saps the energy for collective, autonomous empowerment (p. 498). It is for this reason that the Zapatistas reject government help. Instead, they utilize a large network of international solidarity groups to fund their schools and infrastructure, as they have complete control over the use of these resources. In many Latin American countries, the general population perceives that strides have been made towards indigenous equality. Now that new channels for dialogue are open, some authors fear that further dissent will be stifled or at least seem less urgent. It is this loss of exigency that, according to Hale (2005), may give rise to multiculturalism s dark side, giving the state a much greater say in the lives of indigenous groups. Affirming cultural rights involves confirmation of citizenship, replete with its implicit responsibilities to the state. Therefore, the state may be more apt to become involved in indigenous affairs, defining what is acceptable behavior and what is radical. Further, external legal protections may come with the price of internal restrictions (Hale, 2002) and indigenous groups can unwittingly forfeit their right to protest, since the state has already granted them concessions. In this way, Hale (2002), Yashar (2005), and Hooker (2005) argue that the state co-opts radical dissent with the promise of small wins (limited legal rights) that ultimately sacrifice the final goal for indigenous groups an existence free of discrimination. Each of these authors offers examples of minority groups that have become bogged down in the details and technical aspects of their legal rights. Rather than seeking the broader central goal of ending discrimination, groups will focus on isolated acts as the problem, rather than structural inequity. This cooptation is exactly the type of compromise that the Volume 5, November

6 Zapatistas and their Global Significance Zapatistas are unwilling to make. They see neoliberal multiculturalism as more threat than opportunity. Hale (2002) suggested that perhaps the only way to combat co-optation is to contest the relations of representation and the distribution of resources on which the neoliberal establishment rests (p. 498). Without questioning the dominant system of thought, marginalized groups risk being subsumed by the opposition. Perhaps reframing the issue, imagining practical and ideological alternatives, and focusing on economic and representational disparity, as well as racial discrimination, is the way to avoid co-optation. This is exactly what the Zapatistas have done. The Significance of the Zapatistas and their Future Depending on the vantage point, one could argue that the Zapatistas have been both successful in meeting their goals or that they have utterly failed. On the one hand, they have succeeded in resisting state intervention for the last 14 years, achieving autonomy in their communities in resistance on a small scale. They have succeeded in alerting others to their plight and in galvanizing civil society around a common cause, mobilizing millions of supporters around the world and building a model of deliberative democracy. The EZLN reports that there have been improvements in living conditions since the formation of the juntas de buen gobierno (EZLN CCRI, 2005), as well as increased social and civic participation of women. Their survival and growth in using legitimate transnational networks could justify their sovereignty under international law (Anaya, 1996). Yet, the Zapatistas have not made progress towards their original goal of increased political rights for indigenous groups. They have not yet changed state interests and their demands are still ignored by the government. They have millions of supporters, but they have not changed global forces on a larger scale. However, even though the Zapatistas still live in poverty, they argue that they have gained their dignity (EZLN CCRI, 2005). According to Swords (2007), the EZLN has inspired other organizations and movements around the world. In Mexico alone, dozens of other communities have declared themselves autonomous since 1995 some have joined Zapatista autonomous resistance, and others have demanded independence on their own terms. Today, the Zapatistas are one of many autonomous movements in Mexico. Neo-Zapatismo the support of Zapatista aims through the spread of their principles to other struggles for grassroots democracy and resistance is alive and well. Swords (2007) described such a situation in her discussion of a women s collective heavily influenced by Zapatista ideology and rhetoric. 10 Using strategies learned from the Zapatistas, such as job rotation, challenging hierarchies and leaders, and group discussion of issues, these women have formed an association based on participatory democracy, and guided by community values, ultimately challenging hegemonic practices of democracy. The women have rejected conditional cash transfers offered by the government because they feel that such programs control, demoralize, and target the individual rather that the group. Critiques of Zapatista Strategy Because space does not permit an analysis of neoliberalism, globalization, or any of the central tenets upon which the EZLN bases their struggle, I will focus this section of critiques on those who fundamentally agree with Zapatista goals, yet disagree with their strategy. Most academics and theorists who are familiar with the situation applaud the development of autonomous communities and watch in awe as the movement adeptly uses transnational networks despite economic marginalization. The major point of contention, however, is the Zapatista s policy of nonengagement with the state. Chandler (2004) argues that this policy is flawed for several reasons. Not only does non-engagement fail to promote accountability, it also decreases left-leaning influences on politics by removing more progressive debate from the national dialogue. This could serve the counter-productive end of leaving politics to an even smaller group of elites. Robinson (2006) also disagrees with EZLN strategy on this basis, as he views national political involvement as the only viable channel for challenging the global capitalist system. The Zapatistas, however, ignore talk of state power and political organizations favoring a model based on a transformation of civil society. Robinson (2006) argues that the key question is not about state power, but is now: How can popular forces and classes utilize state power to alter social relations (and) production relations? (p. 61). Those who desire radical change, in Robinson s view, must use the current system of global relations to re-conceptualize and create an alternative. Considerations for their Future The Zapatistas must confront these critiques if they are to remain a valid civil society actor both in Mexico and around the world. I assess the EZLN s primary points of weakness to include: the aforementioned strategy of state non-engagement (which has potential but may threaten the scope of their influence); contentions within Chiapas related to the various actors in the area and their varied interests; and the movement s violent origins and its potential consequences. It has been shown above that the Zapatistas strategic choice to refrain from involvement in national politics has been hotly debated. For this reason, the movement s value and influence lie in both its local and 76 Volume 5, November 2008

7 Journal of Development and Social Transformation global significance. Expanding local significance will require increasing the involvement of additional groups and individuals by building alliances and networking within Chiapas. However, because the movement has lost some of its initial momentum and settled into a strategy of maintenance, rather than growth, it is unlikely that many local actors outside the movement will be willing to alter the status quo; that is, unless discontent grows. The EZLN may want to consider fostering such discontent in productive ways that nudge people towards the movement. To retain global significance, the Zapatistas must increase support by strengthening transnational alliances, which will require additional funding. Toward this end, the EZLN should use fundraising principles to vamp up their outreach. To make funding attractive to civil society, the EZLN might consider opening up certain aspects of the development process to create a reciprocal relation between the movement and potential funders. For example, within the past few years, one of the caracoles has established a language learning school where international supporters can come to study Spanish or the Tzotzil indigenous language. In addition, there have been online notices of trips for international benefactors to visit Chiapas, learn about the movement, and consider establishing a philanthropic relationship. Continuing this trend towards greater openness could certainly help the Zapatistas by drawing attention and funds to the cause. Olesen (2004) views the Internet as an important vehicle not only for information exchange within the existent transnational network, but also for establishing additional connections and allowing more people to identify with the movement. An analysis of online 1eting techniques to potential supporters could be beneficial towards this end. The EZLN s continued existence is due, at least in part, to their transformation into a non-violent group. The year of their uprising (1994) was 1ed by multiple skirmishes with the military, which attracted considerable media attention. Today many people still perceive the Zapatistas as a violent rebel group, even though the movement became non-violent in Indeed, autonomous Zapatista communities use emptyhanded men and women as guards, and provide security for EZLN-sponsored international conferences with people armed only with sticks. The presence of tens of thousands of troops in Chiapas, however, demonstrates that the Mexican government still perceives them as a threat. In order to keep the Zapatistas from gaining support, land, and power, government forces presumably maintain the impression that the Zapatistas are dangerous. However, the government could also foment sympathy for the Zapatista cause, as well as the disapproval and involvement of international actors, if they are perceived as initiating violence. Both the government and the Zapatistas walk a fine line. The Zapatistas precarious approach avoiding violence while still projecting an image as a potential threat has served the movement thus far, but it also creates an environment of constant uncertainty. Any perceived aggression on the part of the Zapatistas could spark military retaliation and diminish domestic and international support. Thus the EZLN would benefit from a firm policy of non-escalation. This may be particularly important considering evidence that the government is slowly moving additional troops into the area (Swords, 2007). What Can We Learn From the Zapatistas? A Model of a Successful Social Movement Despite the aforementioned failure of the movement to achieve some of its primary aims, there is nearly unanimous agreement that Neo-Zapatismo has been uniquely successful in many ways. Few movements from the developing world attract transnational backing, so what factors have drawn literally millions to support the Zapatistas? Their uniqueness has many sources: it involves rich symbols and imagery, effective communication, a moral charge, self-sacrificing actions, and a revolutionary vanguard confronting grave injustices. But it has been the EZLN s ability to change, to give up violence, and to create a living, physical alternative to the hegemony they protest that makes the Zapatistas a model for so many other groups around the world. Neo-Zapatismo Challenges Ideas of State Citizenship Fox (2005) argued that popular movements in Latin America are still debating how to engage the state. While the importance of the state has declined in recent years due to the global capitalist consolidation of power, the nation-state is far from irrelevant. States are still the major world actors (in conjunction with corporations and large international institutions). Most individuals adhere to the tenets of Social Contract Theory, the fundamental agreement by which nations are formed, which stipulates that human beings must give up some rights to their government in exchange for social order (Cudd, 2007). A corollary to this is that, if the state does not provide for its citizens, then they should not have to consent to the government s rule. This is the premise behind most revolutionary activity. But if the state loses its legitimacy, to whom do we owe allegiance? Our community? All human beings? This speaks to the need for a re-conceptualization of citizenship. Essentially what the EZLN advocates for though they have never used these terms is a cosmopolitan idea of citizenship (Brock and Brighouse, 2005). As opposed to patriotism or nationalism, cosmopolitanism is the idea that all human beings belong to a single community which should be cultivated (Kleingeld & Volume 5, November

8 Zapatistas and their Global Significance Brown, 2006). Instead of obedience to the state based on the so-called Social Contract, cosmopolitanism advocates for equality and solidarity among all human beings. More specifically, the Zapatistas advocate for moral cosmopolitanism (solidarity with the oppressed as a moral imperative) rather than political cosmopolitanism (that envisions the establishment of some sort of international political body). Like Appiah (2006), they envision a postmodern balance of respect for universals and particulars, a balance Appiah suggests can be found through conversation, but not necessarily consensus. The Zapatistas aspire to global solidarity with local control. Emphasis on Structural Inequality Economists generally view peace and stability as prerequisites for outside investment and progress and international politics seems to equate peace with a lack of violence. Perhaps we should question the usefulness of peace-building, however, when structural inequalities are apparent. In the face of injustice, spaces for protest, perhaps even violent protest if the injustices are violent, are necessary to ensure real peace and progress. The Zapatistas have claimed that space of protesting structural inequality and are determined to keep it. Challenging Mainstream Perspectives Neoliberal policy may make it more difficult for dissenters to voice alternative opinions, especially those that challenge traditional mainstream perspectives and the opinions of those in power. However, improving the world in which we live requires that a broad range of perspectives are presented, including those that emerge from the bottom and represent the perspective of actors who have historically had little voice or opportunity. The mass mobilization sparked by the Zapatistas speaks to a global desire for change and the need for a space outside the system a public sphere, free of state involvement where ideological alternatives are fostered. 11 Inspiration The Zapatista movement advocates for a change in perspective - a focus on people above profit, of empowerment above development, and for an existence guided by values and conscience. They challenge our notion that overcoming social problems is about increasing material wealth and technological progress. Zapatista autonomous communities and the EZLN do not prescribe specific actions for others, but instead try to embody the values they advocate, the change they would like to see in the world. Perhaps it is this reason above all others why the Zapatistas have so many supporters. They suggest that optimism is not in vain, that real change requires self-sacrifice, and that the very process of living one s values is transformative. References Anaya, J. (1996). Indigenous peoples in international law. New York: Oxford University Press. Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W. W. Norton. Baker, G. (2002). Problems in the theorisation of global civil society. Political Studies, 50(5), Bob, C. (2001). Marketing rebellion: Insurgent groups, international media, and NGO support. International Politics, 38(3), Brock, G., & Brighouse, H. (2005). The political philosophy of cosmopolitanism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burbach, R. (1994). Roots of postmodern rebellion in Chiapas. New Left Review, 205, Chandler, D. (2004). Building global civil society from below? Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 33(2), Cudd, A. (2007). Contractarianism. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Online. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from plato.stanford.edu/entries/contractarianism/ Earle, D., & Simonelli, J. (2005). Uprising of hope: Sharing the Zapatista journey to alternative development. Lanham, MD: Altamira Press. Edwards, M. (2004). Civil society. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. EZLN Indigenous Clandestine Revolutionary Committee General Command. (1994). First declaration of the Lacandon jungle (communiqué). Retrieved May 1, 2008 from flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/ ezlnwa.html EZLN Indigenous Clandestine Revolutionary Committee General Command. (2005). Sixth declarations of the Lacandon jungle (communiqué). Retrieved May 1, 2008 from w w w. a n a r k i s m o. n e t / n e w s w i r e. p h p? story_id=805 Flood, A. N. (1999). The Zapatistas, anarchism, and direct democracy. Anarcho-Syndicalist Review, 27. Flood, A. N. (2001). What is it that is different about the Zapatistas? Chiapas Revealed, 1. Retrieved August 1, 2008 from revolt/mexico/pdf/revealed1.html Fox, J. (2005). Unpacking transnational citizenship. Annual Review of Political Science, 8, FZLN National Organizing Commission. (1997). Summons to the Founding Convention of the FZLN. Retrieved August 1, 2008 from flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/1997/ fzln_founding_summons_aug.html Habermas, Jürgen. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. 78 Volume 5, November 2008

9 Journal of Development and Social Transformation Hale, C. (2002). Does multiculturalism menace? Governance, cultural rights and the politics of identity in Guatemala. Journal of Latin American Studies, 34(3), Hale, C. (2005). Neoliberal multiculturalism: The remaking of cultural rights and racial dominance in Central America. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 28(1), Hayden, T. (2002). The Zapatista reader: A literary anthology. New York: Nation Books. Hayden, T. (2005). Unmasking militarism: U.S.-supported low-intensity war in Chiapas. Retrieved March 19, 2008 from articlesga4.htm Hernandez Navarro, L. (1995, December 19). Chiapas: Un año después. La Jornada, editorial page. Hobson, P. (2005, September). Are we all Zapatistas? The Socialist Standard. Retrieved April 17, 2008 from sep05/text/page13.html Hooker, J. (2005). Indigenous inclusion/black exclusion: Race, ethnicity and multicultural citizenship in Latin America. Journal of Latin American Studies, 37, Klein, N. (2000). Ya basta! The masks of Chiapas. Retrieved March 7, 2008 from Kleingeld, P., & Brown, E. (2006). Cosmopolitanism. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Online. Retrieved July 30, 2008 from plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmopolitanism Munoz Ramirez, G. (2008). The fire and the word: A history of the Zapatista movement. San Francisco: City Lights. Nash, J. (1997). The fiesta of the word: The Zapatista uprising and radical democracy in Mexico. American Anthropologist, 99(2), Olesen, T. (2004). The transnational Zapatista solidarity network: An infrastructure analysis. Global Networks, 4(1), Pelaez, M. P. (n.d.). The EZLN: 21 st century radicals. Retrieved July 31, 2008 from flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/reports/ pomo_ezln.html Robinson, W. (2006). Latin America, state power, and the challenge to global capital. Orfalea Center for Global & International Studies. Paper 42. Retrieved May 1, 2008 from repositories.cdlib.org/gis/42/ Stammers, N. (1999). Social movements and the social construction of human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 21(4), Starr, A., & Adams, J. (2003). Anti-globalization: The global fight for local autonomy. New Political Science, 25(1), Stavenhagen, R. (2003). Mexico s unfinished symphony: The Zapatista movement. In J. S. Tulchin & A. D. Selee (Eds.). Mexico s Politics and Society in Transition (p ). Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner. Swords, A. (2007). Neo-Zapatista network politics: Transforming democracy and development. Latin American Perspectives, 34(2), Yashar, D. (2005). Contesting citizenship in Latin America: The rise of indigenous movements and the postliberal challenge. New York: Cambridge University Press. Endnotes 1 Readers interested in the history of the movement will find a nearly inexhaustible amount of information available on the Internet. According to the Zapatista leader Subcomandante Marcos, the most complete history of the movement to date is Munoz Ramirez (2008). For a more concise summary, see Stavenhagen (2003). 2 The term civil society is imprecise, as its definition varies widely depending on the speaker and context. I define civil society as all voluntary collective action towards shared interests, as differentiated from state-sponsored or 1et-based associations, as well as the family (Edwards, 2004). To be sure, the dividing line between these entities is unclear, but this debate is beyond the scope of this paper. 3 Participants and indigenous supporters of the 1994 uprising retook municipalities by settling on unoccupied land. It is likely they were able to do this, despite heavy military presence, for a number of reasons. At least some, if not many, of those who settled on plots of land had previously worked for the landowners who may have lived far away with little knowledge of the day-to-day use of their property (Flood, 1999). Opponents of the movements had no way to distinguish between members of the EZLN or its sympathizers and indigenous non-zapatistas. Even if they did, international human rights observers remained in the area well into 1995, which would have made any attack risky at best. 4 Literally meaning hot waters, aguascalientes were Zapatista discussion forums. 5 In Spanish, a caracol is a snail or a spiral conch shell (which can be used as a horn). According to a conversation between myself and Zapatista civil servants in the caracol of Oventic in January 2008, the use of this word by the Zapatistas to describe administrative centers is meant to emphasize slow progress and calls for support. 6 Civil servants basic needs for food and shelter, however, are provided for by the community. 7 The Frente Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (FZLN) was a civilian sister to the EZLN, created to further Zapatista ideology. The group s leadership voted to dissolve the organization in For example, the Zapatista uprising was strategically planned for the first day of the passage of NAFTA (January 1, 1994), which the EZLN called a death sentence for indigenous groups (Hayden, 2002, p. 11). 9 It is the protest of transnational injustice and growing inequality that has attracted the majority of international supporters to mobilize en masse. The movement now encompasses a global network of millions of international supporters that include national solidarity networks, anti-globalization protesters, those who question neoliberal policies, indigenous rights groups, those who believe in self-determination, and alliances with other disadvantaged and minority groups. Volume 5, November

10 Zapatistas and their Global Significance 10 Swords (2007) described additional examples of organizations in Mexico that have mimicked Zapatista strategy. These include a prodemocracy, political education non-profit organization and a network of coffee producers. 11 Such a space has existed. In his ground-breaking work, Habermas traced the historical development (and demise) of such a public sphere, which he differentiated from the private sphere of labor and commercial exchange, as well as the governmental Sphere of Public Authority (Habermas, 1989, p. 30). Habermas argued that, as a distinct space for open dialogue the public sphere is critical to the democratic process as the principal avenue by which public opinion can become political action. It also serves as a regulatory institution against the authority of the state (p. 27). 80 Volume 5, November 2008