Chiapas Support Committee

Governors offer AMLO support for the Maya Train project

 

By: Alma E. Muñoz

Palenque, Chiapas

President-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador received support from the governors of the southeast states for executing the Maya Train [1] project in the region, thus detonating its development. With this work, which will begin in Chiapas and Tabasco with a budget of 16 billion pesos in 2019, the next government will stimulate tourism, create jobs and even try to stop migration.

“With this project we are going to respond to the economic and social needs that the inhabitants of the southeast have. We are going to confront the paradox that the states of the southeast are rich in economic and cultural potential, (but) their peoples are poor,” the next head of the federal Executive explained.

After a private meeting with the governors of Chiapas, Manuel Velasco; of Quintana Roo, Carlos Joaquín González; of Tabasco, Arturo Núñez, and of Campeche, Alejandro Moreno, at a Palenque archaeological zone hotel, the latter pointed out that this opens a new opportunity for the Maya World.

“It is a great project that arrives in time, in form and at a moment, and we will have to assume our responsibility to decidedly start on December 1 with the formal commitment of supporting this work,” Moreno emphasized.

All those who are here, he maintained, “have reaffirmed our commitment to seeing it as an integral project of the government of the Republic and the five states” of the region –the state of Yucatán is in addition to those states mentioned, whose governor, Rolando Zapata, sent a representative to this Sunday’s meeting.

At the end of the meeting, which the governors-elect of Chiapas, Rutilio Escandón, and of Tabasco, Adán Augusto López, also attended, as well as members of the next cabinet, López Obrador ratified that the work will have both public and private investment –national and foreign– of between 120 and 150 billion pesos, and will be finished in no more than four years.

He thanked the governors for their support of this project that, he asserted, is one of nation.

He stressed that they have practically resolved everything related to the right of way, because for half of the 1,500 kilometer trajectory they will use the Palenque-Valladolid road, which the Secretariat of Communications administers; the electric lines, in charge of the Federal Electricity Commission, and the highway network.

He said that along the route, the next government will implement a reforestation program, with the planting of 50,000 hectares of fruit and timber trees [1], which will give jobs to 20,000 campesinos, ejido members and small communal farmers next year.

He also announced that there would be fiscal facilities for investors, and that regional transportation will have the lowest price.

The president-elect said that the outgoing governors of Chiapas and Tabasco would elaborate the basis of the bidding to initiate the works at the start of the next government, and that it will be the responsibility of their successors to inaugurate the train. He emphasized that he will personally supervise the work, so that it is not delayed.

Rogelio Jiménez Pons, next director of the National Fund for Promoting Tourism, explained that the train, which will be for both passengers and freight, is a project on which they have worked since two years ago.

The project is considering 17 stations for the route: Palenque, Tenosique, Escárcega, Calakmul, Xpujil, Bacalar, Felipe Carrillo Puerto, Tulum, Playa del Carmen, Puerto Morelos, Cancún, Valladolid, Chichén Itzá, Izamal, Mérida, Maxcanú and Campeche.

In one month, López Obrador will again meet with the governors of the southeast, in Campeche.

On the other hand, the president-elect also met with the coordinators of the program for planting of one million hectares in Chiapas, who he asked not to allow pressuring on behalf of group interests that seek to benefit from the project.

“We are not going to allow threats, that has to change. We don’t want intermediaries in the delivery of resources; we want the support to arrive directly to the people,” he said.

[1] https://chiapas-support.org/2018/08/21/amlo-announces-an-expansion-of-the-maya-train-project/

———————————————————

Originally Published in Spanish by La Jornada

Monday, September 10, 2018

https://www.jornada.com.mx/2018/09/10/politica/005n1pol

Re-Published with English interpretation by the Chiapas Support Committee

 

 

 

The Last Honeybun in the Mountains of Southeastern Mexico

 

By: Sup Galeano

(The story presented at the close of “CompARTE for Life and Freedom 2018,” in Morelia, Caracol “Whirlwind of our Words,” mountains of the Mexican Southeast.)

It may have been a string of random events, without any apparent relation between them, that brought about this tragedy.

It may have been merely a coincidence, a bit of bad luck, as if destiny decided to feed rumors of its existence by dropping pieces of a jigsaw puzzle onto the now-cracked open heads of humans and machines.

Or maybe the Storm itself (yes, that storm that Zapatismo insists on calling attention to and, like most things we say, no one else seems to notice) revealed a spoiler, a hint of what is coming. It was as if the incoherent software on which reality apparently runs suddenly flashed an urgent warning, an unexpected alert, a signal so subtle that it was only noticed by the most experienced lookouts, those who focus on examining horizons so distant that they don’t even appear as factors in the frenetic statistics of the global system. After all, statistics function to show tendencies deeper than the drama of the day-to-day. What’s one murdered woman? A number: one more statistic, one less woman. Statistically speaking, you’d need more, many more of these “gendered” murders to even suggest evidence of a tendency—which would be that of the system’s runaway gallop toward the abyss, skidding through blood, mud, ash, shit, and destruction. What’s on the horizon? War. What’s down the beaten path? War. In the capitalist system, war is the starting point, the ending point, and everything in between.

But maybe I’m just talking madness. After all, this is a story, and one has to be careful not to veer into biased reflections, dangerous ideas, morbid thoughts, idle musings, or provocations.

Those who had to suffer through watching a movie with the late SupMarcos can tell you that it was intolerable. The truth is he was intolerable in various respects, but for now I’m talking about watching movies. Any time a firearm appeared onscreen he’d hit pause and launch into a long and pointless discussion about trajectory, distance, force, firepower, and the various shorter or longer geometric curves a projectile could take en route to its “objective.” During that pause he didn’t care how the plot was going to play out, or if other viewers were anxious to know if the hero (or the heroine, musn’t forget gender equity) would be saved; he’d just delve into his hopelessly erudite explanations: “that one is a M-16 rifle, NATO 5.56-caliber—named as such to differentiate between munitions manufactured in countries belonging to NATO versus those of the Warsaw Pact, etc. etc.” The rest of the movie-watchers never knew what to do: if they showed interest, he might go on even longer; if they looked disengaged, he might think he hadn’t been sufficiently clear and thus expound further, always eventually ending up, of course, at the Cold War. At that point SupMarcos would always feel obliged to explain that the term “cold war” was an oxymoron, the system’s way to hide the death and destruction that characterized that period. From there he would delve into the “fourth world war” and on and on until the popcorn got cold and turned into mush with hot sauce.

Huh, looks like I’m doing the same thing now. The thing is that if SupMarcos came to watch a movie, you knew you’d have to watch it twice: once to suffer through the interruptions, and a second time to understand the plot. That’s why I always insist that a story is a story and not a political discussion, although “political discussion” is also used by Defensa Zapatista as a cover for the “gender violence” she inflicts on the stoic Pedrito who, without his knowledge or intention, has become the nemesis of the girl and her indefinable cat-dog.

What was I saying? Oh, right, I was telling you why I was going to tell you what I’m going to tell you.

It was in the wee hours of that fateful night that I confirmed what I had long feared to be true: the honeybuns were all gone. All of them. Even the strategic reserve—meant to withstand the predictable zombie apocalypse, an alien invasion, or a falling meteorite—was null.

How did this happen? Well, that’s just the thing, just like in Greek tragedies and Mexican corridos, everything’s okay…until it’s not.

Doña Juanita, holed up in the CIDECI kitchen in San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico, had gone on strike: no tamales, no pork, no tacos or street food, no carb-rich, fat-laden or cholesterol-ridden milkshakes. And, heaven help us, no honeybuns. Now she was dead set on serving all healthy food: in other words, vegetables, vegetables, and more vegetables. She would have no discussion about it—she claimed it was part of resistance and rebellion: down with junk food and fast food.

When I found out, I sent an emissary to convince Doña Juanita to make an exception: to say that I understood her point of view, but that I had read a book about the nutritional value of honeybuns. Then I tried another tactic: that if she would make honeybuns, we’d keep it between the two of us—I wouldn’t tell anyone. The emissary came back looking totally defeated: he hadn’t even been able to talk to Doña Juanita. She and her compañeros had fortified their position in the kitchen and were singing, “We shall not be moved, and if there’s any doubt just try it out! We shall not be moved![i] I asked my emissary what he had done in the face of this. He said that the chorus was really catchy, so he had grabbed a guitar and started singing along. Me on the other hand, I don’t just roll over on issues that fall under the rubric of “gender.” After all, Doña Juanita is a woman and there are some things women just don’t understand.

At that point I resorted to the ee-zee-ele-en’s super-secret weapon: our compañero Jacinto Canek. Far, far from these mountains but deep in others, our compañero Jacinto Canek knows all about things pertaining to the kitchen. He works wonders with just a few pots and pans. But he has a special gift with regard to bread. It is said that people travel from all over the world to try his bread. As a demonstration of “another globalization,” his baking has delighted the palate of people across the five continents.

“The secret is that you have to put a lot of huevos[ii] into it,” Jacinto Canek confessed to me one day while we waited, me rather impatiently, for some honey buns to come out of the oven. He meant into the bread, but I said, “like with everything, Don Jacinto, like with everything.” I had faith that our compañero Jacinto Canek, as a matter of gender solidarity, would honor his nom de guerre[iii] and offer a solution to the very serious crisis at hand.

A mission of such transcendental importance required drastic measures. In order to ward off the criticism I could already see coming from the feminists, I sent Insurgenta Erika to the distant lands where Jacinto Canek protected his culinary secrets at all costs.

I told her she was on a very important mission, that she had to find Jacinto Canek and tell him about the legend of the first gods, the ones who gave birth to the world and created honey buns so that humans would have some idea of what paradise was. But then the fucking capitalist system showed up with its Bimbo-Marinela, Tia Rosa, Wonder Bread and all that, corrupting the sacred delicacies of the gods. Those who make artisanal bread are effectively the guardians of memory, protecting the Holy Grail that provided for communication between humans and gods.

Insurgenta Erika of course asked me what on earth a “Holy Grail” was. I told her it was something very important—sacred, in fact—and that the entire future of humanity depended on it. Erika scoffed, saying, “Oh, please, you for sure made that up, Sup: you’re just trying to get your hands on some honey buns.”

I put on my “I’m-so-offended” face and sent her off with a firm warning.

After what I imagine was an exhausting journey, Insurgenta Erika came back with a huge bag of homemade bread. I applauded, I couldn’t avoid it. I have to admit that my beautiful eyes teared up with gratitude. I didn’t even return Erika’s greeting, but grabbed the bag from her and emptied its context onto the table. Nothing. There were croissants, cupcakes, muffins, elephant ears, cinnamon rolls, long johns, cornbread, donuts, everything. But no honey buns, not a single one.

The horror.

I collapsed into my chair, bitterness filling my mouth.

Just then Insurgenta Erika took another bag out of her backpack, a smaller one. And there it was, all wrapped up in plastic and paper: a honeybun!

“He only managed to make this one,” Erika explained. “He couldn’t make more because he was about to go dancing with his wife. He said he didn’t know when he’d get around to making more.”

Erika left. With extreme care, as if it were fine crystal, I placed the honeybun on the table. With the Storm, the Hydra, and the All-Inclusive-Apocalypse on my mind, I assumed a formal posture and declared:

Here lies the last honeybun in Southeastern Mexico.”

I didn’t know if I should eat it or put it on an altar, with a homage to what it represented: the end of an era, destiny’s non-appealable mandate, the anger of unknown gods, a glimpse of disdain from a desired eye, the collateral damage of the capitalist war.

I looked at it—oh, yes, I looked at it with undisguised lust. My fingers brushed lightly over its sugared curves, the circular cleft that gave rise to the single bosom of the unisex being, the voluptuous figure that not only spoke but shouted: “I am a honeybun, not just any honeybun, but the only honeybun.”

I was busy with that, and pondering whether the cooperative store would have that well-known cola with which I could honor this last honeybun, when, as if to complicate what was already a tragedy, Defensa Zapatista and the cat-dog appeared at the door. I stood up as quickly as I could, using my body to try to shield the obscure object of my desire as I stammered incoherently:

 “Uh, no, there is no honeybun on the table. No, I’m not hiding it. Of course there’s nothing behind me. Wow, it’s hot, and the mosquitos are out in force: I think it’s going to rain. Do you think it’s going to rain?”

I think Defensa suspected something because she walked right up and around me and saw the honeybun. She looked at me sternly and declared:

“You have to share, Sup.”

 The cat-dog barked or meowed or who knows what, but I suppose in agreement with Defensa Zapatista.

Out of the blue, apparently convoked by the very word “honeybun,” another little girl appeared, reaching over the table to try to grab the honeybun with one little hand while holding on to her teddy bear with the other. I pulled her away from the table and, in true SupMarcos fashion, asked her:

Who are you? I don’t know you.”

My name is Esperanza [Hope] and my last name is ‘Zapatista’ and this is my little bear and we’re hungry.”

Upon hearing the little girl’s name, I once again appreciated the continuous paradoxes of these lands.

Esperanza Zapatista backed away after various attempts at what new theoretical frameworks would call “accumulation by dispossession of honeybuns,” a still-developing phase of capitalism.

Defensa and the cat-dog looked at me with over 500 years of demands in their eyes, awaiting the impossible: that I share with them the last honeybun in the Mexican Southeast.

“I can’t,” I defended myself awkwardly, “there’s only one. If there were two or more we could divvy them up, but there’s only one, enough for one person, and that one person, well, he can’t share one honeybun.”

I emphasized the masculine pronoun to purposely leave out Defensa Zapatista, Esperanza, and the cat-dog—I mean, we don’t even know if it’s a dog or cat, much less if it’s male or female.

In accordance with the fifth law of the dialectic (note: the first law of the dialectic is “Everything is related to everything else”; the second law is “To share is one thing; don’t fuck with me is quite another”; the third is “Fuck matter and the universe”, and the sixth is, “There’s no problem too big to be turned around”)…

Anyway, I was telling them that the fifth law of the dialectic states that “There’s no problem so big that it can’t get worse”, and as if to ratify it right there on the spot, Esperanza Zapatista reappeared, now accompanied by two little Zapatista boys: one had on a cowboy hat that was bigger than he was and introduced himself as Pablito; the other had on a hat resembling that of Don Ramon on “El Chavo del Ocho[iv], which also looked kind of like a wool helmet, and introduced himself as Amado [literally “beloved”], The Amado Zapatista.” (I wanted to swat him for trying to take over my role.)

Seeing that I was outnumbered, I evaluated my options:

I could, for instance, take the “finders-keepers, losers-weepers” approach, that is, grab the honeybun and flee, or in military terminology, execute a “strategic retreat.” But I had to discard this option: the Zapatista kid-commando had me surrounded.

I could plow through them, IMF-style (they’ve trampled both progressive and not-progressive governments), but I’d run the risk of stumbling and dropping the Holy Grail. That would give the cat-dog the advantage—its ability to scarf down whatever falls is demonstrated in another story that I’ll tell you another time.

So I opted for the current demagoguery in fashion and addressed myself to the kid-commando:

“Look, analyze the current historical conjuncture—the correlation of forces is not on your side. This is no time for radicalism; it is a moment of gradual transition. You should wait, for example, until there are more honeybuns, at which point, yes, of course you can have some. But right now you need to wait patiently. If there is a little girl named ‘Defensa Zapatista’ [Zapatista Defense] and another named ‘Esperanza Zapatista,’ [Zapatista Hope] well then maybe there’s another little girl named ‘Paciencia Zapatista’ [Zapatista Patience]. So go look for her, and when you find her, give her a political talking-to and then we’ll see.”

 “There isn’t,” Defensa Zapatista responded, adding maliciously, “but there is a little girl named ‘Calamidad,’ so that would make her full name ‘Calamidad Zapatista’ [Zapatista Calamity]. You want us to bring her?”

A shiver ran down my succulent body. I realized with desperation that my arguments weren’t working.

I imagined the potential final cataclysm: a multitude of little Zapatista girls and boys surrounding my hut, the former General Command of the ee-zee-el-en, yelling insults in various Mayan languages. I could imagine Defensa Zapatista giving the order, “Bring the kindling”, Esperanza wielding a lighter (who knows where she got that) while her teddy bear, I swear it, transformed before my very eyes into “Chucky.” The cat-dog would be barking and meowing, Pedrito would be dancing with the education promotora, Pablito singing the “The Girl with the Red Bow” and Amado harmonizing (yeah I know, the guys are always off in outer space). The kindling would begin to catch, the first flames licking the walls and forming a circle of fire within the circle of kids, and there I’d be, heroically clutching my honeybun, willing to die rather than give up “my treasure” [English in the original] to this irreverent mob barely a couple feet tall.

It was pointless to try to divide and conquer them; the honeybun united them and I could not give it up.

I could have hurled it out to them and used the ensuing confusion to seek refuge. But I had my doubts that they would pounce on the honeybun—they would probably follow their tradition of sharing any little bit they had, just like the late SupMarcos’ kid-gang used to do after robbing the “Nana Zapatista” store in [the Zapatista community of] La Realidad.

Forget it, it was my honeybun: we were united by destiny. Ancient verses ran through my mind: “In the beginning, the gods created the honeybun and they saw that it was good. Then they created the Sup so that he could delight in the honeybun and scarf it down without sharing.” Ergo, the honeybun was my property by divine right and these disrespectful little midgets were trying to steal it from me, thus committing the gravest of sins: challenging private property rights over the honeybun, which is, as everybody knows because that’s what the history books say, the foundation of civilization, order, and progress.

The future of the world was at stake. If I shared the honeybun, humanity would return to the stone age, a world without internet, social media, films, streaming series’, and, horror of horrors, without pecan praline ice cream.

I realized then that within my beautiful and shapely body lay the last opportunity of humankind.

If I shared the honeybun, terrible things could happen. For example, women could rebel. Not one, not just a couple, but all of them: millions of Zapatista Defensas, Esperanzas, and Calamidades, rising up all over the planet.

The apocalypse. The destruction of the world as we know it. The end of time. The final catastrophe. I shivered.

Then I committed a mistake that I will always regret. I blurted out, completely unnecessarily:

“Plus, it’s the last one.”

“The last one!” Defensa Zapatista repeated with alarm. She fell silent, thinking, and another shiver ran down my voluptuous body. There is nothing more terrifying than a little girl deep in thought. Suddenly she broke the silence:

“Okay fine, then what we’ll do is play a game and whoever wins gets the honeybun.”

I wanted to object that I had no reason to play anything and gamble my honeybun because it was already mine, ALL MINE, my treasure, the fruit of my labor…(okay, the labor technically was Jacinto Canek’s, but in his place and out of gender solidarity, it fell to me). As I was preparing my legal defense, Defensa Zapatista added:

“In honor of the cat-dog [gato-perro] here, the game we’re going to play is ‘gato’ [tic-tac-toe]. Whoever wins gets the honeybun.”

Upon hearing this I paused the brilliant juridical-gastronomical defense I was developing in my head and asked:

Gato? That game with the x’s and o’s where whoever makes a horizontal, vertical, or diagonal line wins?

“That’s the one,” the little girl replied, and drew the tic-tac-toe pattern in her notebook. It was a game I remembered from my childhood, and which I knew from playing had no winner.

For those of you of the “digital generation,” I’ll save you the trouble of looking it up on Wikipedia: “Tic-tac-toe (also known as noughts and crosses or Xs and Os) is a paper-and-pencil game for two players, X and O, who take turns marking the spaces in a 3×3 grid. The player who succeeds in placing three of their marks in a horizontal, vertical, or diagonal row wins the game.”

I calculated quickly in my head and ventured:

“What if there’s a tie?”

Defensa Zapatista looked at the cat-dog. The cat-dog looked back at her. Esperanza looked at both of them. Pablito and Amado looked at the honeybun. After a moment the cat-dog bark-meowed. Defensa Zapatista paused, asking it, “Are you sure?”

The cat-dog snorted as if to say, “How could you doubt me?”

The little girl turned to me and said: “If there’s a tie, the person originally in possession of the honeybun keeps it.”

“Me, that is,” I said to make sure there were no juridical tricks in this agreement.

Correct,” Defensa Zapatista said without concern.

Deal,” I said, savoring my anticipated double triumph: the gender victory and the honeybun that wasn’t just any honeybun, but the last honeybun in the mountains of the Mexican Southeast.

So who goes first?” I asked the little girl as I took out a blank page and my black indelible ink pen.

“Oh I’m not playing. I call for a trial by combat and declare the cat-dog my champion. He will fight in my place,” declared Cersei [v], I mean Defensa Zapatista.

Fine,” I answered confidently. In the end, that arrangement would relieve me of all the gender-based critiques that would have plagued me for having beaten a little girl, and the cat-dog, well, it was just that, a cat-dog, so there was nothing to worry about.

In a single leap, the little animal landed on the table, disdainfully pushing the paper aside and, with what I’m almost sure was a mocking smile, extended its claws to draw on the surface of the table, lightning-fast, the battlefield:

Don’t get me wrong—I don’t care about the scratches on the table, I mean, it’s already covered with tobacco burns and ink stains, but it seemed to me a little unprofessional on behalf of the cat-dog. Nevertheless, I pulled out my pocket knife and switched open its blade with an evil gleam in my eye.

The entire universe seemed to rest on the metal blade, as if its future movement or lack thereof depended on what played out on this wooden table: heads or tails, life or death, shadow or light, honeybun or chaos.

Oh, fine, I’m exaggerating, but the cat-dog and I exchanged the same looks that have for centuries passed between opposing sides when they know that in this battle not only one’s life but the whole future is at stake.

The cat-dog gestured with its hand, well, its paw, as if to cede to me the first move. At least that’s how I interpreted it.

Firmly, emulating Kasparov,[vi] I drew my first circle in the center. I know of course that the center takes us absolutely nowhere, but I thought in this case a tie would be a victory because the honeybun would remain with its legitimate owner—my stomach.

SupGaleano’s move:

The cat-dog, as if trying to get the whole Sixth on his side, played below and to the left:

I wanted to keep the cat-dog’s suffering minimal, so I played the center again, but from below—you know, the progressive trend these days:

The cat-dog, as was to be expected and without hesitation, played the above center, as if to say that the center from above always neutralizes the center from below:

I attacked from the left flank, wanting to catch the cat-dog off-guard, but it blocked me again:

Finally, and seeing the tie shaping up, I tried for the diagonal route from above to below, left to right, you know, social democracy in decay style:

Another block from the cat-dog:

I filled in the above right spot, a mere technicality since the tie was imminent and my triumph uncontestable:

I was ready to stow the honeybun safely away in my possession when Defensa Zapatista exclaimed:

“Hey, wait a minute. The cat-dog still has one more turn.”

 “But the diagram is full,” I said in protest.

The cat-dog smiled slyly and, with its sharpest claws, did something totally unexpected: as if drawing a new world, it added an extension to the diagram:

Slowly, with morbid pleasure, it scratched an “x” in the new space and, I swear it, the wooden table creaked in mourning as the cat-dog drew the diagonal line of triumph:

“We won!” Defensa Zapatista yelled and grabbed the honeybun as the little animal jumped up and down in circles.

They both ran out the door, with Defensa Zapatista holding the honeybun in the air as if it were a universal flag.

Before following them, Esperanza Zapatista, honoring her paradoxical name, came over to me and patted me on the back:

“Don’t worry, Sup. Later I’ll tell you how that honeybun the cat-dog won from you tasted.”

She left too, and with her my last hope.

As I watched them run off into the distance, I thought that this is precisely the problem with Zapatismo: believe me, if its dreams and aspirations don’t fit in this world, it imagines another…and surprises everyone with its attempts to bring it into being.

And it’s not just Zapatismo.

Across the whole planet are born and grown rebellions that refuse to accept the limits of diagrams, rules, laws, and norms.

There are not just two genders, nor seven colors, nor four cardinal points on the compass, nor one world.

Just like Defensa Zapatista, the cat-dog, and the gang made up of by Pedrito, Pablito, Amado, and us [nosotros, nosotras, nosotroas], we only have one objective: to take care of Esperanza Zapatista.

And if it can’t be done in this world, well then we’ll have to make another, one where many worlds fit.

With that thought in mind, I sighed and said to the mirror: “You should have just shared.”

-*-

The end.

From the caracol Whirlwind of our Words, mountains of the Mexican Southeast, Planet Earth.

SupGaleano.

August 9, 2018

15th anniversary of the Zapatista caracoles and the Juntas de Buen Gobierno [Good Government Councils]

NOTES:

[i] The African-American spiritual “I shall not be moved” was translated into Spanish as “No nos moverán” in the 1930s during the Chicano movement and has since become a protest song in its own right, “We shall not be moved”. The lyrics sung here come from a 1996 take on “No nos moverán” by Mexican punk bank Vantroi, in a song that references the Zapatistas.

[ii] Literally “eggs,” but used as slang for “balls.”

[iii] Jacinto Canek was an 18th century Mayan Revolutionary who fought against the Spanish in the Yucatan Peninsula.

[iv] Popular, widely syndicated Mexican sitcom.

[v] Cersei Lannister, the fictional character and unscrupulous queen of the series of fantasy novels by George R. R. Martin, A Song of Ice and Fire, adapted for TV as Game of Thrones.

[vi] Garry Kasparov, Russian chess grandmaster widely considered to be the best chess player in the world.

En español: http://enlacezapatista.ezln.org.mx/2018/08/26/la-ultima-mantecada-en-las-montanas-del-sureste-mexicano/

 

 

Neoindigenism versus the autonomies of indigenous peoples

Indigenous Triqui boys basketball team wins international tournaments. Photo: Chicago Tribune.

By: Gilberto López y Rivas

If anthropology, as a science, was born with the original sin of being strictly linked to colonialism, and to the efforts to impose capitalist relations in the global ambit, anthropological discipline in Mexico arises from its fundamental link with indigenism. Indigenism has its origins in the years after the revolutionary armed movement from 1910 to 1917, when the Mexican school of anthropology, headed by Manuel Gamio, began to elaborate the conceptual contexts that would give content to State policy for the indigenous peoples.

Starting with the first Inter-American Indigenist Congress that took place in Patzcuaro, Michoacán, in April 1940, indigenism, particularly integrationist, is extended to the Latin American level starting with its influence in countries like Peru, Ecuador, Guatemala and Bolivia, with the creation of national indigenist institutes, whose function was to devise and put governmental indigenist action into practice. Strictly speaking, indigenism tries to erase ethnic-cultural diversities and to incorporate indigenous peoples into the labor market, in the countryside and in the city.

Specifically, one of the victories of the indigenous movement headed by the Zapatista National Liberation Army (Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional, EZLN) and the National Indigenous Congress (Congreso Nacional Indígena, CNI) has been to identify in the national debate the paternalistic, authoritarian and alienating nature of indigenism.

Antagonistic to the self-governments of peoples and communities, indigenism is developed from contradictory and complementary policies from state apparatuses and dominant national and regional groups that –according to needs and economic and political conjunctures– affirm an assimilationist integration policy of the states’ ethnicities differentiated from the “Mexican” nationality, or they establish a segregationist differentiation, both policies being deniers of indigenous cultures and peoples.

The verification of this thesis in the indigenous movement and the betrayal of the San Andrés Accords provoke a rupture with the Mexican State that gives way to autonomic processes of historic depth, like the Zapatista Rebel Municipalities-Good Government Juntas, and very different experiences in Oaxaca, Guerrero, Michoacán, Jalisco and Chihuahua, among other states. It was considered with all reason that the funerals for indigenism had taken place in the San Andrés dialogue. The recognition of free determination through autonomy breaks with the umbilical cord of indigenism and with the corporate policies of the State party’s regimen that for many years subjected the original peoples politically and ideologically.

Anthropologists have contributed to the theoretical and practical development of these policies, ever since Gamio defined anthropology as “the science of good government,” initiating an organic relationship between anthropologists and the Mexican State whose rupture begins with the 1968 student-popular movement, which created the conditions for critical anthropological currents to show themselves and denounce the ethnocidal processes contained in indigenism, defined by the beloved Rodolfo Stavenhagen as an “apparatus of bureaucratic and political control of the indigenous peoples on the part of state authorities… (And a) form of recreating hierarchic, authoritarian, state systems of clientelism.” [1]

The development of indigenism has passed through different phases and its ideologies adapt and persist in time; howeer, its specificity is that it’s about a creole-mestizo State policy towards indigenous peoples and, consequently, in all its variants, has been authoritarian and hierarchical in nature and constitutes a theoretical-practical system that is imposed on the peoples from bureaucratic apparatuses, as an objectively oppressive, manipulative and dissolving force. Indigenism is characterized by the use of the rhetoric of respect for indigenous languages and customs, with a practice of destruction of the ethnic structures of the Indian peoples.

With the coming National Institute of the Indigenous Peoples (Instituto Nacional de los Pueblos Indígenas, INPI) and its 132 “regional co-ordinations,” now, “in charge of members of the ethnicities themselves,” the old ghosts of indigenism return as forms of mediation of the State’s welfare assistance, imposed from above and from outside. These co-ordinations will divide the peoples and could hardly support the autonomous struggles against the re-colonization of their territories on the part of capitalist oil, mining, wind, water and tourist corporations, given that they hierarchically depend on a government agency.

What position would the brand new INPI take if mobilizations take place against the new government’s announced megaprojects? Will the voices of the indigenous peoples be heard or will State neoindigenism be imposed?

[1] Clientelism involves the giving of gifts (money, food supplies, productive projects or social programs) in exchange for something. The gifts may come from a government agency or a political party, but require something in return: political parties expect votes and attendance at rallies in return; government agencies of the State party in power also expect something in return.

———————————————————–

Originally Published in Spanish by La Jornada

Friday, August 24, 2018

https://www.jornada.com.mx/2018/08/24/opinion/021a2pol

Re-Published with English interpretation by the Chiapas Support Committee

 

 

CNI and CIG Convoke 2nd National Assembly

CONVOCATION OF THE SECOND NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNING COUNCIL (CIG) AND THE PEOPLES OF THE NATIONAL INDIGENOUS CONGRESS (CNI)

National Indigenous Congress

CONVOCATION

Given that:

First: The initiative of the National Indigenous Congress (CNI) to form the Indigenous Governing Council (CIG) and put forward its spokeswoman, Marichuy, as Mexican presidential candidate has reached yet another phase. The first phase was marked by the decision of the Fifth National Indigenous Congress, on its twentieth anniversary in October of 2016, to hold a referendum on that initiative with all of its peoples and communities. The second phase consisted of carrying out that internal CNI referendum, between October and December of 2016, on the formation of the CIG and the designation of its spokeswoman. The third phase culminated in the Constitutive Assembly of the CIG and the naming, by consensus of that assembly, of María de Jesús Patricio Martínez as CIG spokeswoman in May of 2017. The fourth phase was made up of the signature-gathering effort for our spokeswoman Marichuy, a process that we concluded this year. Our process of resistance, rebellion, and organization, however, continues.

Second: Our path continues. In contrast to previous phases, there are now far more original peoples walking together with us, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, there are more people, groups, collectives, and organizations seeking solutions by and for ourselves, solutions that we know will never come from above.

Third: Each day marks an increase in the capitalist war against mother earth, against our peoples and against all those below, while from above—from the capitalists and their overseers who poorly govern Mexico and the world—we receive only lies, exploitation, dispossession, disrespect, and repression.

Fourth: During the CIG’s Third Internal Work Session, held August 26, 2018, we agreed to convoke a second assembly of the CIG and the peoples of the CNI to be held in October of this year.


WE CONVOKE THE DELEGATES AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE ORIGINARY PEOPLES OF THE CNI TO THE SECOND NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNING COUNCIL AND THE PEOPLES OF THE NATIONAL INDIGENOUS CONGRESS

To be held October 11-14, 2018 at CIDECI-UniTierra in San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas, according to the following program:

October 11: Arrival and delegate registration for the CNI peoples and CIG council members.

October 12:

8am-9am: Breakfast

9:30am-10am: Inauguration

10am-2pm: Small group sessions. Balance and evaluation of the last phase of struggle, of the current situation in Mexico and around the world, and of the referendum, carried out in cooperation with the Civil Association “The Hour for the Peoples to Flourish Has Come”, among the CIG Support Networks, the National and International Sixth, and all those who decided to support the CIG’s proposal.

2pm-3pm: Lunch

3pm-8pm: Two-part plenary: 1) Balance and evaluation of the next steps in our struggle as the CNI and the CIG, alongside the CIG Support Networks, the National and International Sixth, and all those who decided to support the CIG’s proposal.

8pm-9pm: Dinner

October 13:

8am-9am: Breakfast

9am-11am: Commission and Working Group Reports to the Full Assembly

11am-2pm: Small group work sessions on the CIG’s 9 work areas and the strengthening of the CNI.

2pm-3pm: Lunch

3pm-4pm: Small group report backs and conclusions

4pm-8pm: Plenary on the CIG’s 9 work areas and the strengthening of the CNI

8pm-9pm: Dinner

October 14

8am-9am: Breakfast

10am-1pm: Final Assembly Plenary: Agreements and Resolutions

1pm-1:30pm: Closing

1:30pm-2:30pm: Lunch

We ask all delegations to immediately confirm their attendance via the email:
concejoindigenadegobierno@gmail.com

Only CNI delegates and CIG council members will be able to participate in the October 12 and 13 sessions. Those who have been specifically invited by the CIG/CNI Coordination Commission may also attend as observers.

The October 14 plenary session will be open to invitees of the CIG/CNI Coordination Commission, the former members of the Civil Association “The Hour for the Peoples to Flourish Has Come”, and to members of the CIG Support Networks and the National and International Sixth to participate as observers.

Sincerely,

CIG/CNI Coordination Commission
September 6, 2018
For the Full Reconstitution of Our Peoples | Never Again a Mexico Without Us

En españolhttp://enlacezapatista.ezln.org.mx/2018/09/06/convocatoria-a-la-segunda-asamblea-nacional-entre-el-concejo-indigena-de-gobierno-y-los-pueblos-que-integran-el-congreso-nacional-indigena-11-al-14-de-octubre-cideci-unitierra/

 

Who is Alfonso Romo?

ALFONSO ROMO

By: Luis Hernández Navarro

It’s not just a smile for the photo. No. The gesture of satisfaction that is seen on the face of Alfonso Romo in Agromod is genuine. It’s the sign of the winner. He is in Tapachula, Chiapas, at his business attired in an aseptic white lab coat, surrounded by his workers, as smiley as he is, just behind where the future president of Mexico is.

Agromod, the food technology company owned by the future head of the Office of the Presidency where the photograph was taken, is one key piece of his emporium. The presence of Andrés Manuel López Obrador there was not accidental, but rather part of the “field work” of the president-elect to re-forest one million hectares, an initiative that coincides with the view of development for the region that Romo has. According to him, forest investment in the southeast “is the cheapest way for Mexico to bring wealth to the countryside.” They are not just words. The magnate has invested in biotechnology and agribusiness in Chiapas since 1992. In 1996 he confessed that his project in that state “is the one that I like the most of all my businesses.”

But it’s not only Chiapas. The countryside is the countryside of Alfonso Romo. A “Regiomontano” [1] at heart, born in Mexico City, he felt a vocation for the rural world. He studied to be an agronomist at the Monterrey Technological Institute, “to modify Article 27.” In 1996, he told Expansion Magazine that this constitutional article “has been the most nefarious one that we have had in this country.” According to him: “while constitutional article 27 was in effect, 45 percent of the population did not see benefit from their lands for 60 years because the law didn’t permit it.”

His understanding of the campesino and indigenous world is very peculiar. “Mexican campesinos –he said– are not accustomed to fighting 10 hours a day.” He wants to see the indigenous peoples “morally responsible,” but he doesn’t tolerate “dishonors to the country, abortions, the lack of morals in the free right to life.” He asserts that: “there are tribes” in the Lacandón Jungle. And he wants “to help the indigenous be good Mexicans.”

His incursion into the world of agribusiness has been a kind of wheel of fortune. Sometimes it’s up; sometimes it’s down, but always mounted on it. In 1987 he acquired Cigarrera La Moderna, to sell it 10 years later, to British American Tobacco. He founded Seminis, which managed to control 22 percent of the international seeds market. But, in the midst of a scandalous lawsuit with his father-in-law, Antonio Garza Lagüera, he had to hand it over to Monsanto, to cover part of a million-dollar debt. He reached to controlling 22 percent of the international seed market.

His investments in the tobacco industry did not cause him moral doubts. According to him, “the tobacco campaigns have been very exaggerated […] It’s not possible that there is more publicity against tobacco than against drugs, homosexuality or pornography.”

Alfonso Romo admires John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, “the grand triumvirate that changed the world.” At the same time, he appreciates Porfirio Díaz, who he considers a great visionary, and Francisco I. Madero, his great grandfather’s brother. He did business with the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and maintained that: “if Pinochet was being prosecuted, President Salvador Allende, who was also a murderer, should also be tried” (https://bit.ly/2OtDYn6). He is a counselor at the Atlantic Institute of Government, directed by the former Spanish president José María Aznar, together with Ernesto Zedillo and Mario Vargas Llosa.

He has successfully combined politics and business at the highest level. He opines that Carlos Salinas “was a great reformer and a great statist.” Ernesto Zedillo is –it seems to him– an honest man, moral and consistent in his economic program. He supported Vicente Fox with everything since 1997. He impelled the formation of the Citizen Option (Opción Ciudadana) political platform. In 2011 he approached López Obrador.

The coordinator of the nation project and future chief of staff has announced that AMLO’s government plan will be centrist, will defend free trade, will seek to convert Mexico into a private investment paradise and will convert all of Chiapas, Oaxaca and Guerrero into special economic zones.

Two figures close to him will occupy key positions in the next administration. One is Víctor Villalobos, the lord of the GMOs, announced as Secretary of Agriculture. The other is Tatiana Clouthier, efficient spokeswoman for the presidential campaign, director of the Monterrey Metropolitan University’s high school, Romo’s education business, designated as assistant Secretary of Governance (Mexico’s Interior Ministry). [2]

Ironies of politics, the conservative impresario Alfonso Romo, enemy of abortion and of social property in the countryside, will be the second most powerful man in a government that won the elections with the vote of those who reject the structural reforms, defend the right of women to decide about their bodies and vindicate the ejido and the indigenous community.

[1] Regiomontano is a resident of Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico.

[2] Clouthier declined the position.

———————————————————–

Originally Published in Spanish by La Jornada

Tuesday, August 14, 2018

http://www.jornada.com.mx/2018/08/14/opinion/015a2pol

Re-Published with English interpretation by the Chiapas Support Committee

 

The next imperialism

In the upper left corner it reads: “A revolutionary greeting from the Mexican southeast.”

By: Raúl Zibechi

Towards the end of this century China will be the new hegemon, replacing the United States as the world leader, the only question being whether there will be nuclear war during the process. It’s curious that a good part of the world’s left observes with sympathy or neutrality this ascent that tends to convert China into a new form of imperialism.

The ways in which China has been rising on the global stage are different than those that the United States maintained at a similar stage, particularly in the first years of the 20th Century, when it intervened militarily in its nearby zones or backyard, particularly in the Caribbean, Mexico and Central America. To the contrary, China is becoming a superpower without violence or wars, which marks a notable difference. According to the repeated statements of its leaders, it will continue on the path of peace.

In second place, the history of China is very different than that of previous hegemonic powers, the United States, England, the Netherlands and Venice. The country of the dragon suffered invasions of colonial powers during the 14th Century and from Japan and in the 20th Century, which speaks of a society that suffered the ravages of colonialism and imperialism.

In contrast, since 1823 when the Monroe Doctrine proclaimed that Latin America was the “sphere of influence” of the United States, the ascendant power carried out 50 military interventions in the region, half of them in the first part of the 20th Century. The objective was to overthrow governments that Washington considered enemies and to prevent personalities or parties opposed to its interests from coming to power.

The third question is that in its history China was never an imperialist power and was limited to defending itself more than to conquering territories. It was a relatively fragile empire with grave internal problems, which it had to come face to face with to resolve without the ability to project itself abroad.

Nevertheless, we must address other reasons that point in an opposite sense.

The first is that China has been converted into a great power present in all corners of the planet, into a great exporter of capital with powerful state and private monopolies, oriented on behalf of the State. Although a financial oligarchy still does not exist in China, like in the Western countries, which represents the domination of financial capital over productive capital, a strong tendency in that direction is noted, since Chinese capitalism is guided by the same logic as global capitalism.

However, the tendency towards the predominance of financial capital and to protect large investments abroad through forms of diplomatic intervention, register beyond the declared will of its rulers. The peaceful rise of China through initiatives like the Silk Road and the Made in China 2025 plan to become a global technology leader, are clashing with Washington’s response that has declared a trade war.

The Asian country is forced to enter into that war, in the same way that it must enter into the global financial sector to internationalize its currency, since it must play by the current rules. Throughout this long process of ascent, China is modifying its profile, constructing more powerful armed forces with the ability to intervene around the world, as the rapid construction of a fleet of aircraft carriers and fifth generation fighter planes demonstrates.

The second is that Chinese culture is profoundly conservative, with a very strong patriarchal bias. It is constructing a large State over this base to control its population, which will come to install up to 600 million surveillance cameras in order to form part of what William I. Robinson calls the “global police State.”

https://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=234385

Chinese digitalized capitalism needs to surpass the United States in the industrial revolution underway, “based on robotics, 3D printing, the Internet of objects, artificial intelligence, machine learning, bio and nanotechnology, quantum computing and in cloud, new forms of energy storage and autonomous vehicles.” China is now the main pro-globalization force, which sharpens the tendencies towards the global police State.

Finally, I believe that it is essential to analyze the relationship of Chinese political culture to the anti-systemic movements of the world. The three dates that movements celebrate all over the world (March 8, May 1 and June 28), were born through popular struggles in the United States and in European countries, which ought to make us reflect.

I don’t pretend to insinuate that revolutionary traditions don’t exist in China. The cultural revolution that Mao Tse Tung arranged is a good example. But those traditions are not playing a hegemonic role in the movements. We are before a turn of history that requires us to seek references, deepening the struggles.

———————————————-

Originally Published in Spanish by La Jornada

Friday, August 3, 2018

http://www.jornada.com.mx/2018/08/03/opinion/018a1pol

Re-Published with English interpretation by the Chiapas Support Committee

EZLN: 300: Part 3: A Challenge, Real Autonomy, An Answer, Multiple Proposals, and a Few Anecdotes about the Number 300

300.

Third and last Part:

A Challenge, Real Autonomy, An Answer, Multiple Proposals, and a Few Anecdotes about the Number 300

Art from the Zapatista communities.

So what’s next?

We’ll have to swim against the current, but that’s nothing new for us Zapatistas.

We want to reiterate—and we have consulted this with the Zapatista communities—that we oppose any and every overseer. We’re not just talking about those who insist they will administrate properly and repress correctly—as in the current proposal to combat corruption and improve security via impunity—but also those whose intentions for hegemony and imposed homogeneity lie just below their vanguardist dreams.

We will not exchange our history, our pain, our rage, and our struggle for a “progressive” conformity that is currently closing ranks behind its leader. We don’t forget, even when everybody else does, that we are Zapatistas.

With regard to our autonomy and the discussion that’s going on about whether it will be recognized or not, we make the following distinction: there is official autonomy, and there is real autonomy. Official autonomy is recognized by law, and this is its logic: “If you have an autonomous system and I legally recognize it, then your autonomy begins to depend on my law and not on your actual autonomous practices. When election season rolls around, you’ll have to support us, voting and promoting the vote for our party, because if another party takes office they’ll undo that law that protects you.” In that logic, we become political party peons, just as has happened to social movements all over the world. The actual function and defense of autonomy ceases to matter; the only thing that matters is what is recognized by the law. The struggle for freedom is in effect transformed into a struggle for the legal recognition of struggle.

-*-

We talked to our “bosses,” that is, the communities that determine our path, our route, and our destiny. We see what is coming through their perspective. We asked them: “if we take this position (what we believe is necessary), what will happen?”

And this is how we answered ourselves: “we’ll be alone and isolated in our position. People will say that we’re irrelevant—that we have placed ourselves outside the great revolution, the supposed fourth transformation, this new religion or whatever you want to call it—and we’ll have to swim against the current yet again.”

But being alone and isolated is nothing new for us. Then we asked ourselves: are we afraid to be alone in what we believe? Are we afraid to hold fast to our convictions and to struggle for them? Are we afraid that the people who previously supported us will turn against us? Are we afraid to refuse to give up, give in, or sell out? We asked ourselves each of these questions and we came to the conclusion that what we were asking was if we were afraid to be Zapatistas.

We aren’t afraid to be Zapatistas and that’s exactly what we are going to continue to be. That was what we asked ourselves, and that was our answer.

We think that, alongside all of you (the support networks), and with everything against us—because we know that throughout this process you didn’t have the support of the media or the masses, nor could you count on pay or popularity (we know you had to use your own money to carry out your work)—we organized ourselves around a collective of original peoples and a small, brown woman, the color of the earth, to denounce a predatory system and defend our conviction and our struggle.
We’re looking for other people who aren’t afraid. That’s why we want to ask you (the support networks), are you afraid? You decide. If you’re afraid, we’ll look somewhere else.

-*-

We think that we should continue to walk closely with the original peoples.

Maybe some of you as support networks still think that what you’re doing is supporting the original peoples. As time goes by you’re going to see that it’s just the opposite: they will support you through their experience and their forms of organization. That is, you will learn, because if anyone is an expert in surviving a storm it’s the original peoples. They’ve had everything thrown at them and here they still are—here we still are.

But we also think, and compañer@s we want to make this very clear: that won’t be enough. We will have to incorporate into our horizon of struggle all of our own realities and the pain and rage they hold. We will have to move toward a new phase of this process: the construction of a Council that includes the struggles of all of the oppressed, marginalized, disappeared, and murdered, the struggles of political prisoners, of women who have been attacked and harassed, of children who have been prostituted, of all the calendars and geographies that delineate a map that is impossible within the laws of probability and illegible to polls and votes: the contemporary map of rebellion and resistance across the planet.

If we—all of us together—are going to challenge the laws of probability that say there is little to no chance that we will succeed, if we are going to challenge the polls and the millions of votes and the world-in-numbers that Power pulls out to try to demoralize us and make us give up, then we have to make the Council [Indigenous Governing Council, CIG] bigger. At this point this is just a thought that we want to share with you—that we think it is important to build a Council that neither absorbs nor annuls differences, but rather gives each of us the chance to be with others [otros, otras, otroas] who share the same struggle. This is why we think the Council should not be limited by a geography imposed by borders and flags, but should aim to become international.

What we are proposing is that the Indigenous Governing Council cease to be only indigenous and only national in scope.

To that end, as Zapatistas we put forward the following proposals, in addition to the ones already suggested during this gathering, to be consulted with all of your home collectives and organizations:

  1. To reaffirm our support for the National Indigenous Congress and the Indigenous Governing Council.
  2. To create and maintain open and transparent forms of communication among all of us who have come together on this path of the Indigenous Governing Council and its spokeswoman.
  3. To begin or continue our analysis and evaluation of the reality in which we live, and to share with each other these analyses and evaluations as well as our subsequent proposals for coordinated action.
  4. Without ceasing our support for the original peoples, we propose to double down on the work of the CIG Support Networks in order to open our collective heart to all of the rebellions and resistances that emerge and persevere wherever we might be, in the countryside or the city, without regard for borders.
  5. To begin or continue the struggle to grow both the demands and dimensions of the Indigenous Governing Council with the goal of extending it beyond original peoples to include workers of the countryside and city and all of those who have been discarded or marginalized but who have their own history and struggle, that is, their own identity.
  6. To begin or continue the analysis and discussion toward the creation of a Coordination or Federation of Networks which avoids any kind of centralized or vertical command and which spares no effort in building solidarity, support, and sisterhood/brotherhood among its participants.
  7. Finally, to hold in December of this year an international gathering of networks—we propose that for now we call ourselves the Network of Resistance and Rebellion (and then the name of each collective), but it could be whatever we decide to name ourselves. At that point we will have had the chance to hear, analyze, and evaluate what the National Indigenous Congress and the Indigenous Governing Council decide and propose during their meeting in October, and we will also have the results of the consultation process to be undertaken as a result this meeting we are in right now. We would like to offer one of the Zapatista Caracoles as a location for that upcoming meeting, if you are all in agreement.

Our proposal, then, is not only for the original peoples, but for all those [todoas, todas, todos] who resist and rebel in each and every corner of the world, and who challenge every rule, law, mold, dictate, number, and percentage imposed on us.

-*-

First anecdote: During the first days of 1994, the intelligence services of the Mexican army estimated that the self-designated “ee-zee-el-en” consisted of “only” 300 transgressors of the law. Second anecdote: That same year, as Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León and Esteban Moctezuma Barragán plotted the betrayal and ambush to be carried out against us in February of 1995, the Nexos group (dedicated at that time to singing the praises of Salinas de Gortari and Zedillo), exclaimed, out of growing frustration and in so many words by Héctor Aguilar Camín, “Why don’t we just obliterate them? There are only 300 of them!”

Third anecdote: Information from the registration table at the Gathering of Support Networks for the CIG and its spokeswoman, held at the Zapatista Caracol “Whirlwind of our Words” August 3-5, 2018: “attendees: 300”.

Fourth anecdote: Profits of the 300 most powerful corporations on the planet: we have no idea, but it could be 300, or any other number, followed by a shitload of zeros, and ending with “millions of dollars”.

Fifth anecdote: “encouraging” quantities and percentages:

The quantitative difference between 300 and 30,113,483 (the number of votes López Obrador the candidate received according to the INE): thirty million, one hundred and thirteen thousand, one hundred and eighty-three.
 300 is 0.00099623% of those more than 30 million votes. 
300 is 0.00052993% of the total votes cast (56,611,027)
300 is 0.00033583% of the total number of registered voters (89,332,032)
. 300 is 0.00022626% of the total Mexican population (132,593,000, minus the 7 women who, on average, are murdered daily. Over the past decade, a girl, young woman, adult woman, or elderly woman has been murdered, on average, every 4 hours)
. 300 is 0.00003012% of the population of the American Continent (996,000,000 in 2017)
The probability of destroying the capitalist system is 0.000003929141%, which is the percentage of the world population (7,635,255,247 at 7:54pm on August 20, 2018), represented by the number 300 (that is, of course, if those supposed 300 people don’t give up, give in, or sell out).

Oh I know, not even the tortoise beating Achilles would be consolation.

What about a caracol?

La Bruja Escarlata?

The cat-dog?

All right, enough of that. What keeps us Zapatistas awake is not the challenge presented by this infinitesimal probability of triumph, but the question of what the world that follows, the one that begins to emerge from the still smoking ashes of this system, will be like.

What will be its ways?

Will its colors speak?

What will its theme song be? (Huh? “The Girl with the Red Bow?” No way).

What will be the lineup of Defensa Zapatista’s (finally) full team? Can Esperanza Zapatista’s teddy bear join the lineup and team up with Pedrito? Will they let Pablito wear his cowboy hat and Amado Zapatista, his crocheted helmet? Why doesn’t the damned referee blow his whistle on the Cat-dog who is so obviously offside? 
Above all, and most importantly, how will that new world dance?
 This is why, when we Zapatistas are asked, “What’s next?” Well…how can I explain it? We don’t answer on the spot; it takes us a bit. The truth is, you’ll see, that dancing a new world is less problematic than imagining it.
 Sixth anecdote: Oh, you thought the thing about “300” was because of the film by that title and the Battle of Thermopylae, and you were ready to get dressed up like Leonidas or Gorgo (to each their own) and start shouting “This is Sparta!” while decimating the “immortal” troops of the Persian King Xerxes? Man, haven’t I been saying? Those Zapatistas, always watching another movie; or, worse yet, watching and analyzing reality! What can you do…

-*-

That’s all…for now.
From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast,

Subcomandante Insurgente Moisés.                     Subcomandante Insurgente Galeano.
Mexico

August 2018

En españolhttp://enlacezapatista.ezln.org.mx/2018/08/22/300-tercera-y-ultima-parte-un-desafio-una-autonomia-real-una-respuesta-varias-propuestas-y-algunas-anecdotas-sobre-el-numero-300-subcomandante-insurgente-moises-supgaleano/

 

 

Permit for hydroelectric project in the Lacandon Jungle denied

SEMARNAT DENIES PERMIT for HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT in the LACANDÓN JUNGLE

The Las Nubes Cascades are a tourist attraction close to where they wanted to build the dam.

By: Isaín Mandujano

TUXTLA GUTIÉRREZ, Chiapas (apro)

 The Secretariat (Ministry) of Environment and Natural Resources (Semarnat) denied the Generación Enersi SA de CV company authorization to construct a hydroelectric dam in a region of the Lacandón Jungle.

 After several weeks of discussion, last Monday, August 20 the federal agency decided to reject the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the hydroelectric project on the Santo Domingo and Lacantún Rivers, between the communities of Las Nubes and Loma Bonita, in the border municipality of Maravilla Tenejapa.

In a press conference, Ricardo Hernández Sánchez, state Secretary of Environment and Natural History, detailed that last June 20 the Generación Enersi SA de CV Company sent Semarnat the project’s regional EIR for its corresponding evaluation and decision.

He said the project consisted of the construction and operation of a hydroelectric power plant, with a total capacity of 110 MW, for which it would use the flow of the Santo Domingo and Lacantún Rivers, principally in the municipalities of Las Margaritas and Maravilla Tenejapa, in the Lacandón Jungle Region.

After several weeks of analysis, last Monday Semarnat’s General Directorate of Environmental Impact and Risk (DGIRA) decided to deny the project’s authorization: “since it contradicts what is stipulated in different legal regulations, among which are the National Waters Reserve Decrees, signed by President Enrique Peña Nieto on June 6, 2018, the Program of Ecological Ordering of the State of Chiapas and the Management Program of the Lagunas de Montebello National Park.”

The red roofs are the ECOLODGE LAS NUBES

According to the state official, the project was also notoriously unviable from a technical and environmental point of view, as corroborated by the negative opinions -emitted during the environmental impact assessment procedure- of the National Water Commission (Conagua), the Mexican Institute of Water Technology (IMTA), National Commission of Natural Protected Areas (Conanp), la National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (Conabio), the Chiapas Ministry of Environment and Natural History (Semahn), the State Water Institute (Inesa) and the Maravilla Tenejapa municipal council.

With this resolution, he said, the federal government reiterates its commitment to the conservation of the Lacandón Jungle, the protection of the ecological basin for the preservation of biodiversity and the coordination with the different levels of government so that legality and the state of law prevail.

The region’s indigenous communities had started an information day among the inhabitants to protest against that hydroelectric dam that, they emphasized, was going to disrupt life in the zone.

————————————————————-

Originally Published in Spanish by Proceso.com

Thursday, August 23, 2018

https://www.proceso.com.mx/548162/semarnat-niega-permiso-a-proyecto-hidroelectrico-en-la-selva-lacandona

Re-Published with English interpretation by the Chiapas Support Committee

EZLN: 300, Part II: A Continent as a Backyard

EZLN: 300, Part II: A Continent as a Backyard, a Country as a Cemetery, Unique Thought as a Government Program, and a Small, Very Small, Ever So Small Rebellion Subcomandante Insurgente Moisés, Sup Galeano

Subcomandantes Moisés and Galeano (smoking pipe).

From our analysis of the world we move to the continental level.

If we look above…

We see the examples of Ecuador, Brazil and Argentina, where supposedly progressive governments have not only been removed from power but prosecuted, and the governments that have taken their place are ones that have been trained as good overseers—obedient to capital, that is—ready to take on a realignment of the world plantation (though, to be fair, even in their cynicism they’re still pretty clumsy). Take Temer in Brazil, Macri in Argentina, and that guy in Ecuador who was supposed to be good because he was chosen by the now-persecuted Correa (a man of the “citizen’s revolution,” “a leftist” according to the progressive intelligentsia who backed him) but who, it turns out, is actually on the right: Lenin Moreno (yeah, paradoxically his name is Lenin).

Under the watchful eye of the State that has become the policeman of the region—Colombia—threats are issued, destabilization efforts are undertaken and plans are made for provocations that would justify “peace force” invasions. In all of South America, we see a return to the brutal times of the Colonies, now characterized by a “new” extractivism—really just the same ancestral plunder of natural resources, categorized as “raw materials”—but endorsed and promoted among the progressive governments of the region as “Left extractivism”. This is supposed to be something like a Leftist capitalism or a capitalist Left, or who knows what it’s supposed to be because it destroys and dispossesses just the same, only it’s for a “good cause” (??). Any criticism or movement that opposes the destruction of the original peoples’ territories is written off as having been “promoted by Empire” or “backed by the right-wing”, among other equivalents to being “a conspiracy by the mafia of Power.” In sum, the “backyard” of Capital extends across the continent all the way to Cape Horn.

But if we look below…

We see resistances and rebellions, first and foremost among the original (Native) peoples. It would be unfair to try to name them all since there’s always a risk of leaving some out, but their identities are clear in their struggles. There where the machine encounters resistance to its predatory advance, rebellion dresses in colors so old they’re new again and speaks “strange” languages. Displacement, also disguised as the leasing of lands, tries to impose its commodity logic on those who refer to the Earth as “Mother.” Groups, collectives, and organizations that, while perhaps not themselves composed of original peoples, share the same effort and the same destiny, that is to say, the same heart accompany these resistances. That is why they suffer insults, persecution, imprisonment and, not infrequently, death.

As far as the machine is concerned, the original peoples are things—incapable of thinking, feeling, and deciding—so it’s no great leap in its automated logic to think that it is these other groups who “lead,” “manipulate” and “misguide” those “things” (the original peoples) who refuse to embrace the idea that everything is a commodity—everything, including their history, language and culture. For the system, the destiny of the original peoples is in museums, in specialized studies in the field of anthropology, in craft markets and in the image of a hand extended to beg. It must be quite exasperating for the machine’s lawyers and theoreticians to encounter a kind of illiteracy that doesn’t understand the words “consumption,” “profit”, “progress,” “order,” “modernity,” “conformity,” “commercialization,” “giving up” and “giving in.” To bring these illiterate, backward people up to speed with civilization, the system employs prison bars, bullets, disappearances, and aid programs that sow division and conflict. Sure there are those who sell out and turn their own people over to the executioner, but there are communities that remain firm in their rebellion because they know that they were born to live and that the promises of “progress” obscure the worst kind of death: that of oblivion.

Let’s continue on to Central America (where, in Nicaragua, Shakespeare’s texts are being rewritten and the Macbeth couple, Daniel and Rosario, is asking themselves, “Who would have thought that the old man (Sandino) had so much blood in him?” as they try in vain to wipe their hands on a black and red flag). Central America is beginning to be transformed from a forgotten territory (after being ruthlessly plundered) into a big problem for big capital because it is a significant source of and a “trampoline” for migrants. This means that Mexico, and in particular the Mexican Southeast, is going to be assigned the role of providing a wall. We decided to include Mexico in Central America because its history calls it to Latin America and, even on standard world maps, Central America is the arm outstretched between those united in pain and rage. But the various governments and the political class that this country has suffered under and will continue to endure are so captivated by other nations abroad that they admire, imitate, serve and seek to procure “the annexation of our American peoples to the turbulent and brutal North which despises them” (José Martí, “Letter to Manuel Mercado”, May 18, 1895).

When Donald Trump says he wants to build the wall, everyone thinks of the Río Bravo, but capital is thinking about the Suchiate, the Usumacinta and the Hondo. In reality, the wall will be in Mexico in order to stop migrants coming from Central America, and this, perhaps, can help us understand why Donald Trump came out on July 1st to greet Juanito Trump, who had just won the elections in Mexico.

A wall only makes sense as opposition to something. All walls are erected against that “something”—whether that be zombies, extraterrestrials, criminals, the undocumented, migrants, “sans papiers,” illegals, stowaways, aliens. Walls are like a simile for the closed doors and windows of a house, designed to protect the inhabitants from the outsider, the foreigner, the Alien whose difference carries the promise of a final apocalypse. One of the roots of the term “ethnic group” refers to “foreigners.” In capital’s grand plan, the wall against Latin America will take the shape of the impossible cornucopia and will go by the name of “Mexico”.

As we’ve already said, the first stage of Trump’s wall will be built in the Southeastern region of Mexico. The “National” Migration Institute will continue acting as a subordinate officer to the US Border Patrol. Guatemala and Belize are the last stop before entering US customs, and this makes the Mexican Southeast one of the top priorities for conquest and administration. This is why the new “geopolitical” plans call for the creation of a “cushion” or a “shock absorber,” a filter to drastically reduce migration. This offer is a placebo to alleviate capital’s nightmare: a horde of zombies (that is, migrants) at the foot of its walls, threatening its ways of life and scrawling on the indifferent surface of iron and concrete “graffiti” that reads:
“Your wellbeing is built on my misfortune.”

-*-

 In this country also known as the “Mexican Republic,” the recent national elections managed to hide reality… for a moment: economic crisis, social decomposition (with its long train of femicides), and the consolidation (despite supposed “mortal blows” to narco-trafficking) of parallel States (or those interwoven with the Nation-State) of so-called “organized crime.” The murders, kidnappings and disappearances of women of all ages moved into the background, although only briefly. And, the same is true of poverty and unemployment. But as enthusiasm over the election results wanes, reality rears its head once again, saying, “Here I am, you forgot my vote… and my scythe.”

We won’t say much about the horror that has turned Mexico into a cemetery and a limbo, the “nowhere” of forced disappearances. Even minimal attention to the media would give you a good enough idea, but a deeper description, analysis and evaluation can be found in the presentations by Jacobo Dayán, Mónica Meltis, Irene Tello Arista, Daniela Rea, Marcela Turati, Ximena Antillón, Mariana Mora, Edith Escareño, Mauricio González González, and John Gibler at the roundtable in April of this year at CIDECI-San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas: “To Watch, To Listen, To Speak: No Thinking Allowed?” as well as in their writings, chronicles, columns and reporting. Even so, reading or hearing about these daily horrors is quite different than living them every day.

Big capital doesn’t care about disappearances, kidnappings, and femicides. What it cares about is its OWN security and that of its OWN programs. The only corruption that bothers it is corruption that affects its profit margins. That’s why what is proposed to big capital is: “I’m going to be a good overseer. I’ll keep the peons calm and happy, and you’ll be able to once again enjoy the security that past governments were too stingy to provide. You’ll be able to get your hands on whatever you want and I’ll skim nothing off the top.”

The Nation-State is getting in the way of the system, and increasingly the system is going to assign it the only function for which any State is created: the violent enforcement of the relationship between dominators and dominated. The development plans of new governments all over the world are none other than declarations of private wars in the territories where those development plans are to be executed. If those plans were described plainly, without so much hot air, it would be said that they are proposals to create wastelands and deserts and, at the same time, alibis that evade responsibility for that destruction: “We annihilated you, but it was for the good of all.”

-*-

I was wrong. We had predicted that there would be electoral fraud (and there was, but in another sense). We predicted that López Obrador was going to win but that the system was going to cheat him out of his victory, and we were thinking about what options the system would have following that fraud. According to our analysis, those above weren’t worried about a scandal because they’ve already survived the ones over the Casa Blanca, Ayotzinapa, the Estafa Maestra, and the many state government corruption scandals, so if people had made a fuss about fraud, Peña Nieto wouldn’t have batted an eye. We thought the dilemma the system faced was a choice between Meade and Anaya, a choice between which of them was farther to the right, which was more suited to their plans, which would be a better overseer.

The chances were slim that the then-candidate who was to be defrauded would wage a radical and sustained resistance, so there was no danger to the system,. But protests did seem inevitable. This is our apology to you all—thinking that was what was going to happen, we delayed the convocation for the Gathering of Support Networks. We thought there would be protests and blockades and all that and that if we had put out the invitation you may have gotten stuck somewhere along the way. That’s why the convocation was delayed, our apologies. We Zapatistas [nosotras, nosotros, nosotroas] always prepare for the worst. If it happens, we’re ready. If it doesn’t, well, we were ready anyway.

What we think and see now is that we weren’t wrong, that among the four candidates, they system chose the one who promised to be most effective: López Obrador. The signs of love that López Obrador is showing big capital (the plantation owner) are, among other things, promises to hand over indigenous peoples’ territories. The projects for the Mexican Southeast—in the Isthmus, in Chiapas, Tabasco, Yucatán, and Campeche, just to name a few—are in reality projects of dispossession.

The main thing concerning an outgoing administration is not its popularity, but rather its impunity. Thus the governmental “vote” is directed towards that person that guarantees that impunity. The new overseer should promise (and prove) that it won’t criminalize the last overseer; they must give their pledge that exile or prison for the outgoing government is not necessary to prove the legitimacy of the incoming one.

But don’t think that for that reason the new government will be like any other previous overseer; this one brings with him a “new” unique thought.

There is a kind of new religion in the works. It’s as if the religion of the market were no longer sufficient. This new religion has appeared everywhere that rightwing governments have come to power; it’s like a new set of morals imposed with recourse to a numerical argument [the number of votes received] that attacks science, art, and social struggle.

Within this framework, struggles are not understood to be about particular demands, but rather are thought to be either good struggles or bad struggles. To put it into more familiar terms: there are good struggles and then there are struggles that are just tools of the “mafia of power;” there’s good art and then there’s art that serves the “mafia of power”; there is “correct” science and then there is science that functions as a tool for the “mafia of power.” Everything that is not guided by the new and newly normalized unique thought is a tool of the enemy. And faith, at least this new faith that is being cultivated, needs an exceptional individual on one hand and on the other, a mass of followers.

This has happened elsewhere in other moments of world history, and now it’s going to happen here. That’s why when any of us express critiques or alternative points of view, the responses to these are not actual arguments, but rather accusations that we are either rude or envious.

We don’t doubt that there are people who honestly think that the change promised, in addition to coming at little expense (one only had to mark a ballot), would be a real change. It should be disturbing to them then that all the same names of the same criminals as before are popping up across the scene taking shape above, even if now they have take on different party initials.

The rightwing vocation of the new government is undeniable. Their “intellectual” and social surroundings shamelessly reveal their authoritarian tendencies. The same script that we pointed to 13 years ago, in 2005, is being followed to the letter of the law. He who was sleazy when defeated is sleazy when victorious. To say that the incoming government is leftist or progressive is just a lie. Back in 2005 we used the simile of the serpent’s egg. There is a film by that name, directed by Ingmar Bergman, and there’s a part in that film where a doctor (played by the way by the Kung Fu actor, David Carradine) explains that what was happening in Germany at the time—in the initial stages of fascism—could be seen as one would see a serpent’s egg: if you hold it up against the light, you can see what’s inside. We were seeing then—by holding the situation up to the light—what is happening now.

You all know that the efforts of the Movement for National Regeneration (MORENA) and of López Obrador and his team since July 1st have been attempts to ingratiate themselves with the dominant class and big capital. There are no indications that this is a progressive government—none. And nobody can claim that MORENA or López Obrador have lied about their intentions. The principal projects of this government (the million hectares of the Lacandón Jungle, the “Maya Train,” and the Isthmus Corridor that they want to build, among others) will destroy the territories of the original peoples. In addition, this administration’s sincere empathy with Donald Trump’s government has now been confessed publicly. And finally, the future administration’s honeymoon with corporate executives and financial capital is perfectly apparent when one analyzes who received key cabinet posts as well as what they consider to be their plans for a “Fourth Transformation.”

We think that it is clear that the consent and blessing López Obrador received from Power and Money upon his “triumph” goes far beyond mere recognition. Big capital is truly enthused by the opportunities for conquest presented by López Obrador’s government.

We have some hard data and a lot of gossip (which can’t be proved) about what happened in the recent electoral process. We aren’t going to reveal any of that information because it could lead to conclusions that there was fraud and the last thing we want to do is sour the euphoria of the “30 million.”

What nobody wants to acknowledge is that the media “jumped the gun”, exactly as happened in previous elections, specifically the elections of Calderón and Peña Nieto. It was not the officially assigned institutions that declared the winner, but rather it was the media. When the Preliminary Electoral Results Program (PREP) was barely beginning to make calculations, Televisa and TvAzteca were already declaring the winner. Just minutes after, with less than 1% of the votes counted, Meade, Anaya, and La Calderona all ceded victory to AMLO. Just a few hours later, the Trump team sent congratulations and by the dawn of July 2nd, the apparently now mentionable Carlos Salinas de Gortari himself added his congratulations. Without even knowing the official results, the customary bowing before the king that the PRI turned into a national rite had once again begun. And what, might you ask, was the National Electoral Institute [INE] up to? Doing the very job for which it was created of course: being the henchman of “electoral democracy.” The institutions responsible for the entire process took on the role of playing follow-the-leader to the media’s avalanche.

If all this hadn’t been in favor of their leader, the progressive intelligentsia who would have denounced the whole thing as a “media coup d’état.” Now they proclaim, with no shame whatsoever, that “however it happened, it happened,” and “we won, it doesn’t matter how.” Yet everything seems to point to a negotiated victory, agreed upon far from the ballot box and the electoral calendar. But nobody cares about that now—the much-heralded voter has decreed: “Habemus (We have) an Overseer, on with business!”

This new unique thought will replace reason with quantitative arguments: “30 million people can’t be wrong.” That was the line used by that priest, (what’s-his-name, Solalinde? sorry, I never pronounce it right and SubMoy is always correcting me), and which is now repeated frequently: “How can you oppose 30 million voters? You barely have 300 people and on top of that you’re dirty, ugly, evil and rude.” But he must be talking about you guys (the support networks), because me, I’m just rude.

It is through this new faith (in which we insist that no one has counted the only vote that matters, that of reality) that a new collective imaginary will be imposed in which quantitative arguments are prioritized over analysis and the arguments of reason.

Thus history is rewritten and transformed into a new official history, where all social and political movements of the past culminate in the presidential victory of López Obrador. We’ve already seen this same argument when it was said that the movement of ’68 was merely the beginning of “the end of history,” 50 years later. We’ve read that Manual Bartlett and other criminals of the same ilk have been purified by their proximity to this election’s victor. We’ve read that Alfonso Romo is an “honest” businessman whose only interest is to love his neighbor.

We’ve read that those who yesterday were part of the PRI, PAN, PRD, Verde Ecologista (Green Ecologist Party), or who made their name in show business, are now the illustrious leaders of the Fourth Transformation. We even read that the Zapatista uprising of 1994 was the prelude to the “citizen” uprising of 2018! Meanwhile, the new leader has already called for the development of theoretical frameworks explaining his rise to Power. We’re not far from the point where historians sympathetic to the new leader will start rewriting the history books.

We should warn you of the coming avalanche, the tsunami on the horizon, of frivolous and shoddy analyses, new secular religions, and minor (very minor) prophets, because all of that now has a platform. There will be all sorts of Kool-Aid to drink, and since we’re talking about a neo-religion, there will be an unbelievable belief for every taste, so that everyone can take communion.

A whole range of new boy scouts will appear, those little explorer boys ready to do good. Though you should always be careful to ask, good for whom?

The “citizen representatives” will promote citizenship: they will claim that what the “autochthonous” (yes, that’s what they call us) want is to be like is the very people who dispossess us: to be “equal” to them, even if only with regard to the fleeting temporality of the ballot box; or to be “free,” free to sign our rights away to the mine/hotel/railroad, free to sign the “employment” contract, free to sign the installment plan, free to sign the petition of “unwavering support for our president,” and free to sign the request form seeking “government aid.”

There will be a predictable boom in administrative activity, but instead of receiving resources you will get a sympathetic ear. And that will feel important even if you never see any money as a result. See, the “over-the-counter” model of administration will be decentralized: now you won’t have to go to a building, get in line, and then realize, after a long wait, that you’re missing that one slip. Now the counter will come to you: “just ask and we’ll be there; your voucher will come in the form of a promise.”

If there are some people out there who don’t have anything, it’s likely they still have hope. The new swindlers in power will take up hope-management, administrating its dosage and converting it into a fantasy that offers comfort but no solutions.

They will recycle the arguments of a certain sector of the movement that says it isn’t possible to change the system, that what one must do is administrate it properly or file down its sharp edges so that it isn’t so rough on people. They will argue that we can make our rulers into good overseers, we can even create a kindler, gentler capitalism, and that we can change the system from within.

Okay, so we can already make out what’s inside the shell: we know that it demands the surrender of reason and critical thought; it exalts nationalism built on a “benevolent” authoritarianism; it persecutes the different; its legitimacy is based on the noise of its own cheerleaders; it can be characterized by a secular neo-religion, it imposes unanimity, it shuts down criticism, and as a new national slogan, it imposes “No Thinking Allowed.” In sum: behind the shell lies the hegemony and homogeneity that undergird all fascisms that refuse to recognize themselves as such.

-*-

Are the concepts they present ones that allow us to understand (and act): Terms such as “citizenship,” “young people,” “women,” “progress,” “development,” “modernity,” “electoral democracy” (as a synonym for democracy)?

The term “citizen” is of no use in order to understand what is happening now: a “citizen” can be Carlos Slim or the peasant kicked off their land by the new Mexico City airport; it is Ricardo Salinas Pliego and the person living in the street after the September 2017 earthquake. It can be Alfonso Romo, as well as the members of the Tzeltal community that will be evicted from their lands so that a train with tourists taking “selfies” can pass through.

Another useless concept: “young people.” “Young people” includes Peña Nieto’s daughters as well as the students and workers who have been murdered.

And another: “women.” “Women” includes Aramburuzavala, Gonda, Sánchez Cordero, González Blanco, Ortiz Mena, Merkel and May, as well as the women slain in Ciudad Juarez, those raped in whatever corner of the world, those who are beaten, exploited, persecuted, imprisoned, and disappeared.

Any concept that eliminates or doesn’t help us to understand the class division between dominator and dominated is a sham and serves only to allow that division to live on within and between us. This transversality as they call it between capital and labor is of no use to us whatsoever, it explains nothing and only leads us to a perverse cohabitation between exploiter and exploited that, at least for a moment, makes it look as if they are the same, though that is clearly not the case.

Then there is also the attempt to return to the system from before, an impossible leap backwards into the “Welfare State,” including Keynes’ “Welfare State,” to the old PRI (which is why, as someone joked, the first transformation was the PNR; the second was the PRM; the third was the PRI, and now the fourth is PRIMOR)

And then comes the old discussion about reform and revolution: the “debates” between the “radicals” who struggle for revolution and the “liberals” who were in favor of gradual change, reforms that gradually evolve until they bring us into the reign of happiness. These discussions used to happen in cafés. The “public plazas” of today are social media and you can follow this autoerotic exercise via the “trendsetters” or whatever they’re called. We think that it’s not even necessary to discuss this topic because reform is no longer possible—what capitalism has destroyed is not salvageable; there can’t be a good capitalism (we think that possibility has never existed), and it must be destroyed entirely. Paraphrasing the Zapatista women in the Gathering of Women in Struggle: it isn’t enough to light the system on fire; you have make sure it burns until only ashes are left.

We’ll talk more about all that on another occasion. For now we just want to point out that social counter-revolution is possible. Not only is it possible, but it will constantly haunt us because those above will try to annihilate any struggle external to their planned process of domestication. They will try to raze everything outside their plan, and violently so. Note that by raze we don’t just mean marginalization or slander, but also military, paramilitary, and police attacks. For anyone who challenges these new rules, which are really the old rules, there will be no amnesty, no pardon, no absolution, no embraces, and no photo opps; there will only be death and destruction.

The struggle against corruption (which is nothing other than the struggle for a well-administered domination) not only does not include the struggle for freedom and justice but is in fact against it. The alibi of the struggle against corruption is the fight for a state apparatus able to act more efficiently in what is basically the only function retained by the Nation-Sate: repression. And soon not even that.

The government will cease to be the thieving overseer who keeps a few heifers and young bulls for himself. The new overseer won’t steal: he’ll deliver the profits to the boss in full. See, they want to return the Nation-State—in this case Mexico—to its true function. So when they talk about the need for security, they are talking about security for capital, the imposition and perfection of a new police state: “I’m going to do things well because I’m going to keep watch over everything.” The security demanded by “citizenization” is in fact the restructuring of a police system, a modernized and professionalized wall that knows how to distinguish between “the good guys” and “the bad guys.”

In Mexico City they will professionalize the police. Crime rates will fall and there will be “lovely” police officers who help old people cross the street, search for lost pets and make sure that traffic circulates in a friendly manner for the most important actors on the street: vehicles. On the periphery, the complicity between those who should prevent crime and those who commit it will continue. But, to make up for this situation, they will promote “extreme tourism”: Mexico City will host “tours” and “safaris” so that tourists can get a glimpse of those rare creatures that lurk in the shadows, so they can take a “selfie” with the young person who has been detained/beaten/killed, his blood mixing with the colors of his tattoos, dulling the shine of his piercings and studs and staining the green-purple-blue-red-orange of his hair. Who was he? Who cares? Anything in a “selfie” that isn’t “me” is just background anyway, an anecdote, an intense emotion that serves to boost one’s presence on Facebook, Instagram, in chats, or in autobiographies. Over the loudspeaker of the bullet-proof vehicle, the friendly tourist guide warns: “we remind you that the consumption of tacos, sandwiches, and other street food is on your own dime and at your own risk; the company is not responsible for indigestion, gastritis, or stomach infections. For anyone who stepped off the bus, here’s some antibacterial gel for you.”

The new government promises to recuperate its monopoly on the use of force (which had been wrested from it by “organized crime). But now this use of force will be available not only to the traditional police and military, but also to the new vigilantes: to the “brown shirts,” or the purple ones; to those who become the parishioners of this new secular religion; to the masses that will attack the social movements who refuse to be domesticated. The recycled “red battalions” (except now they’re purple, because of the Fourth Transformation) will have to undertake the “cleanup” of all those who are dirty, ugly, evil, and rude, as well as anyone else who resists order, progress, and development.

-*-

Let’s go down another level then, to see how our communities (alongside other organizations, groups, and collectives) are resisting. Here with us today is part of the EZLN’s collective authority, 90 comandantas and comandantes. There are more but these are the ones who are accompanying us today in order to honor your visit (that of the support networks).

We continue to walk with two feet: rebellion and resistance, the “no” and the “yes”, the “no” to the system and the “yes” to our autonomy, which means that we have to construct our own path toward life. Our path is based in some of the roots of the original (or indigenous) communities: the collective, mutual support and solidarity, care for the earth, the cultivation of the arts and sciences, and constant vigilance against the accumulation of wealth. These roots, along with the arts and sciences, guide us. This is our way, but we think that for other histories and identities, it may be different. That is why we say that Zapatismo can’t be exported, not even throughout the state of Chiapas. Rather, each calendar and geography must follow its own logic.

The results of the path we have walked are visible to anyone who wants to see, analyze, and critique them. Although, of course, our rebellion is small, so very small, that you might need a microscope, or better yet, an inverted periscope in order to see it.

And it isn’t a very encouraging exercise: our possibilities of triumph are absolutely minimal.

We don’t have anywhere close to 30 million people.

Maybe there are only 300 of us.

-*-

(To be continued…)

En español: http://enlacezapatista.ezln.org.mx/2018/08/21/300-segunda-parte-un-continente-como-patio-trasero-un-pais-como-cementerio-un-pensamiento-unico-como-programa-de-gobierno-y-una-pequena-muy-pequena-pequenisima-rebeldia-subcomandante-insurgent/

 

 

 

 

EZLN: 300, Part I: A Plantation, a World, a War, a Few Probabilities Subcomandante Insurgente Moisés, SupGaleano

Art from the Zapatista communities.

Words of the EZLN’s Sixth Commission at the Gathering of Support Networks for the Indigenous Governing Council (CIG) and its spokeswoman

(Expanded version)

Given time restrictions, we were unable to present these thoughts in full during the gathering. We promised you the full version, and we include the full transcription here, including the parts that were not read at the gathering. You’re welcome. Don’t mention it.

300

Part I:

A Plantation, a World, a War, Few Probabilities

August 2018.

Subcomandante Insurgente Galeano:

Good morning, thank you for coming, for accepting our invitation and for sharing your words with us.

We are going to begin by explaining our way of doing analysis and evaluation.

We start by analyzing what is happening in the world, then move to what is happening at the continental level, then to what is happening in this country, then to a regional and finally to a local level. From there, we develop an initiative and begin to move back up from a local level to a regional level, then to the national, the continental, and finally the global level.

We think that capitalism is the dominant system at the global level. In order to explain this system both to ourselves and to others, we use the image of a plantation. I’m going to ask Subcomandante Insurgente Moisés to explain this part.

-*-

Subcomandante Insurgente Moisés:

Compañeros and compañeras: we interviewed our own compañeros and compañeras who are our great-grandfathers and great-grandmothers, some of whom are still alive. The following is what they told us and what they helped us understand: how the rich, the capitalists, want to turn the whole world into their plantation.

There’s the plantation owner, or the landowner, who owns thousands of hectares of land. When he’s not around, he has his overseer watch over the plantation, and that overseer in turn has a foreman who’s the one who actually goes in person to force the people to work the land. The overseer, on orders of the boss, also has to name a supervisor who keeps watch over the plantation house itself. Our great-grandparents told us that there are different kinds of plantations: cattle ranches, coffee plantations, sugarcane plantations, as well as corn and bean plantations. These various areas of production are combined so that a 10,000-hectare plantation has cattle, sugarcane, beans, corn, everything. And the people who work on the plantation—who we call slaves or peons—live and suffer their whole lives there.

The overseer supplements his income by stealing some of what is produced on the plantation from the boss. That’s in addition to what the boss (the plantation owner) pays him. So for example, if 10 heifers and 4 young bulls are born on the plantation, the overseer doesn’t report them all, but tells the boss 5 heifers and 2 bulls were born. If the boss finds out he’ll fire the overseer and name another, but all of the overseers steal something. It’s part of the generalized corruption.

Our great-grandparents say that when the boss wasn’t around and the overseer wanted to go somewhere too, he’d name someone else to take his place while he was gone—always someone as much an asshole as himself. In other words, he’d pick a friend to cover his job until he got back to take it over again.

We see that that’s still the situation today: the real boss is off somewhere else, and the overseer in charge of what we used to call the country (but which we just call ‘the peoples’ now because we see there isn’t really a country anymore) is Peña Nieto. The state governors are the foremen and the municipal presidents are the supervisors. This is how the system of domination is structured.

We also see that it is the overseer, the foreman, and the supervisor who are in charge of controlling the people. Our great-grandparents say that every plantation had a store—the company store they call it—where the people working on the plantation accumulated debt. So those exploited people—slaves or peons we call them—would get used to buying their salt, soap, and whatever they needed from the company store. They didn’t use money; rather, the boss stocked there the things they needed—salt, soap, machetes, saws, axes—and the people would buy them not with money but with their own labor.

Our great-grandparents told us that women as well as men spent their entire lives that way—the boss would provide them with just enough to eat today so that they had to continue working for him tomorrow.

We know what our great-grandparents say is true because when we rose up in 1994 and took over the plantations in order to kick out the exploiters, we found those overseers as well as the people who lived there as slaves or peons and who were accustomed to getting supplies from the company store. And those people told us that they didn’t know what to do because once the boss was gone, where would they get their salt and soap? They asked us who the new boss would be so they could go find him because how else would they get ahold of soap and salt and things like that.

We told them: you are free! Work the land, it is yours! You can work the land like you did under the boss who exploited you but now that work is for you, for your family. But they resisted, saying no, this is the boss’s land.

That’s where we learned that there are people so deeply embedded in their slavery that they don’t know what to do with their own freedom; they only know how to obey.

This situation I’m telling you about is from over 100 years ago, because our great-grandparents—one of them would be about 125, 126 years old now, as it’s been more than a year since we interviewed that compañero—are the ones who told us these stories.

The way we see it is that this situation is the same today. They want to turn the whole world into a plantation. But now it’s the multinational corporations that says, “I’m going to my plantation—the Mexican one,” or, depending on their whim at the moment, “I’m headed to my other plantation—the Guatemalan one, or the Honduran one” and so on.

Then they organize their plantation production according to capitalism’s needs. Just like our great-grandparents said, some plantations would have everything—coffee, cattle, corn, beans—and other plantations would have just sugarcane or some other crop. That’s how the plantation owners organized and organize us.

And there isn’t a good boss; all of them are bad. Our great-grandparents tell us that a few of them were good, as they put it, but when we really analyze and think about it, when we see it clearly, by “good” they mean those bosses who didn’t physically abuse them, didn’t whip them. But there was no saving them from being exploited; that was a given. But yes, it’s true, on some plantations, in addition to being worked to exhaustion, if you didn’t do what they wanted you were whipped.

We think that all of this that happened to our great-grandparents is going to happen to us, now not only in the countryside but also in the city. Because the capitalism of today is different than the capitalism of 100 years ago, or 200 years ago; the forms of exploitation are different and exploitation occurs in the city as well as the countryside. That exploitation might look different today but it’s exploitation all the same. It’s the same cage, but they paint it a different color every now and then so it looks like something new.

Today too there are people who don’t want their freedom, but merely seek to obey. They’re only looking for a different boss, a different overseer, who isn’t such an asshole—that is, who exploits them all the same but is nice to them.

In other words, we haven’t lost sight of what’s coming, and we see that it’s already starting.

What interests us is this: are there others out there who see, think, and evaluate in the same way what’s coming?

And what are those sisters and brothers going to do? Will they be satisfied with a new overseer or boss or do they want freedom?

That’s the part that I wanted to explain to you because it comes from what we think, all the compañeros and compañeras of the Zapatista Army for National Liberation.

-*-

Subcomandante Insurgente Galeano:

What we see at the global level is a predatory economy. The capitalist system is advancing by conquering territories, destroying everything it can. At the same time, there is a glorification of consumption to the extent that it seems that capitalism is no longer even worried about who is going to produce—that’s what machines are for. But there are no machines that consume commodities.

In reality, this great exaltation of consumption hides the brutal exploitation and bloody dispossession of humanity which isn’t immediate visible in modern commodity production.

The highly automated machine that, seemingly without human participation, manufactures computers or mobile phones is built not on scientific and technological advances but on the plunder of natural resources (thus the necessity for the destruction/depopulation and reconstruction/reordering of territories) and on the inhumane enslavement of thousands of tiny, small, and medium-sized units of exploitation of human labor.

The market (that gigantic warehouse of commodities) contributes to the illusion of consumption: commodities appear to the consumer as “unconnected” to human labor (that is, to its exploitation) and one of the “practical” consequences of this illusion is to give the (always individualized) consumer the option of “rebelling” by choosing one market over another, one product over another, or by boycotting a particular type of consumption. You don’t want to eat junk food? No problem, organic items are also available, at a higher price. You don’t want to consume certain brands of cola because they are unhealthy? No problem, we have bottled water sold by the same company. You don’t want to buy from the big supermarket chains? No problem, the same corporate conglomerate supplies your neighborhood corner store. And so on.

Global society is being organized to give priority to consumption, among other things. The system functions with this contradiction (among others): it wants to rid itself of the labor force because its “use” brings with it various problems (for example: it tends to organize, protest, strike, sabotage production, and join forces with other workers); but at the same time the system needs that “special” commodity to consume other commodities.

Regardless of how hard the system tries to “automate” itself, labor exploitation is fundamental to the system. It doesn’t matter to what extent consumption is generated on the periphery of the production process, or how effectively the lengthening of the chain of production simulates its unmooring from human labor: without its most essential commodity (the labor force), capitalism is impossible. A capitalist world where consumption prevails and exploitation doesn’t exist is good for science fiction, social media ruminations, and the lazy dreams of the admirers of the suicidal aristocratic left.

It’s not the existence of work that defines capitalism, but the characterization of the capacity to work as a commodity to be bought and sold on the labor market. That means there are those who buy and those who sell, and above all, those who have only the option of selling themselves.

The possibility to purchase labor power is provided for by private ownership of the means of production, circulation, and consumption. Private ownership of the means of production forms the nucleus of the system. Built upon this class division (the owner of private property and the dispossessed), and hiding it as such, are a whole range of juridical and media simulations, as well as other dominant evidentiary forms: citizenship and juridical equality; the penal and police system; electoral democracy and entertainment (increasingly difficult to differentiate); neo-religions and the supposed neutrality of technology; social sciences and the arts; free access to the market and to consumption; and a whole spectrum of nonsense (with some versions more developed than others) of things like “change begins within oneself”, “you are the architect of your own destiny”, “when life gives you lemons, make lemonade”, “don’t give fish to the hungry, teach them to fish” (“and sell them fishing poles”), and, highly fashionable today, efforts to “humanize” capitalism by making it good, rational, and objective, that is, “capitalism light.”

But the machine wants profits and it is insatiable. There is no limit to its gluttony, and its eagerness for profit has neither ethics nor rationality. If it needs to kill, it kills. If it needs to destroy, it destroys; even if it has to kill and destroy the whole world.

The system advances in its re-conquest of the world without concern for what is destroyed, preserved, or made superfluous; anything is disposable as long as the maximum profit is obtained at maximum speed. The machine is returning to the methods of its origins—that’s why we recommend you read The Primitive Accumulation of Capital —which is to conquer new territory via violence and war.

It is as if capitalism left pending part of its global conquest during neoliberalism and now is trying to finish the job. As it develops, the system “discovers” new commodities that exist in the territories of the original peoples: water, land, air, biodiversity, everything that hasn’t already been damaged or ruined lies in the original peoples’ territories and that is where the system is headed. When the system seeks (and conquers) new markets, these aren’t just consumption markets—for buying and selling commodities—but also and above all, the system seeks and attempts to conquer territories and populations in order to extract from them whatever can be extracted, without regard for the wasteland left in its wake.

When a mining company invades the territory of Native (original) peoples—often with the alibi of offering “work opportunities” to the “autochthonous population” (yes, that’s what they call us), they aren’t just offering people wages to buy a new high-end cell phone: they are also discarding a part of this population and annihilating (in all senses of the word) the territory in which that population functions. The “development” and “progress” offered by the system in reality disguises what is truly its own development and progress and, more importantly, hides the fact that that progress and development are obtained via the death and destruction of populations and territories. That is how so-called “civilization” is founded: what the Native (original) peoples need is to “get out of poverty,” that is, they need a wage. So they are offered “employment,” that is, companies that will hire (exploit) the “aborigines” (yes, that’s what they call us).

To “civilize” a Native community is to convert its population into a salaried work force, that is, one with purchasing power. That’s why all the state programs claim to “incorporate the marginalized population into civilization.” As a consequence, the original peoples don’t demand respect for their ways of organizing their time and life, but rather “assistance” in order to “find markets for their products” and “to obtain employment;” in sum, the optimization of poverty.

And by the way, when we say “Native (original) peoples” we are referring not only to the poorly named “indigenous” but also to all of those peoples who originally cared for the territories that are now subjected to wars of conquest—the Kurdish people for example—and who are themselves subjected by force to the so-called Nation-States.

The so-called “Nation form” of the State is born with the ascent of capitalism as the dominant system. Capital needed protection and assistance for its growth, and the State assumed—in addition to its essential role (that of repression)—the role of guarantor of that growth. It was said of course that this was necessary to avoid barbarism, to “rationalize” social relations and “govern” for all, “mediating” between dominators and dominated.

“Freedom” became the freedom to buy and sell (oneself) on the market. “Equality” became the task of consolidating a homogenizing dominion; and “fraternity,” well, we are all brothers and sisters—boss and worker, plantation owner and peon, victim and executioner.

Later it was said that the Nation-State should “regulate” the system, taming its excesses and making it “more equitable.” Crises were the product of defects in the machine, and the State (and the government in particular) were the always alert and efficient mechanics, ready to repair imperfections. Of course it turned out that the State (and the government in particular) were part of the problem, not the solution.

But today the fundamental elements of that Nation State (police, army, language, currency, juridical system, territory, government, population, borders, internal market, cultural identity, etc.) are in crisis: the police don’t prevent crime, they commit it; the army doesn’t’ defend the population, it represses it; the “national languages” are invaded and modified (that is, conquered) by the dominant language of exchange; national currencies are valued in accordance with the currencies that maintain hegemony in the global market; national judicial systems are subordinate to international law; territories expand and contract (and fragment) in accordance with the new world war; the national governments cede their most fundamental decisions to the dictates of financial capital; borders vary in porosity (open to capital and commodity traffic; closed to people); the national populations “mix” with those from other States; and so on.

At the same time that new “continents” are “discovered” (that is, new markets from which to extract commodities and in which to generate consumption), capitalism encounters a complex crisis (complex in content, extent, and depth) that it itself produced via its predatory tendencies.

It’s a combination of crises:

One is the environmental crisis that is hitting every part of the world and which is a product of capitalist development: industrialization, consumption, and nature’s plunder have an environmental impact that alters what we know as “planet Earth.” The meteorite called “capitalism” has already hit and radically modified the surface and innards of the third planet of the solar system.

Another is migration. The impoverishment and destruction of entire territories obligates people to migrate in search of life. The war of conquest which is an essential part of the system itself no longer occupies territories and their populations, but rather classifies those populations as “surplus”, “ruins”, or “rubble”, destined to perish or emigrate to “civilization” which, we must not forget, is built on the very destruction of those “other” civilizations. If people neither produce nor consume, then they’re merely surplus, scraps. The so-called “migration phenomenon” is produced and fed by the system.

One more point, and one on which we coincide with various analysts around the world, is the exhaustion of the resources that make the “the machine” move: fossil fuels. What are referred to as the final “peaks” of oil and carbon reserves, for example, are very close. These energy sources are finite and limited; their renewal will take millions of years. Their predictable and imminent exhaustion means that those territories that hold reserves—however limited—of energy sources are strategic sites. The development of “alternative” energy sources is advancing too slowly for the simple reason that they are not profitable—that is, investment in them does not pay off quickly enough.

These three elements of this complex crisis place in question the continuation of existence on the planet.

Is this the terminal crisis of capitalism? Not by a long shot. The system has demonstrated that it is capable of overcoming its own contradictions, and even functioning with and within them.

Thus, in the face of this crisis that capitalism itself provokes, which leads to migration and natural catastrophes, approximating the limit of fossil fuel reserves (in this case oil and coal), it would seem that the system is testing out a kind of internal retreat, something like an anti-globalization, in order to defend itself, and it is using the political right as guarantor of that retreat.

This apparent contradiction within the system is like a spring pulling back so it can later expand. In truth, the system is preparing for war. Another war. A total war: everywhere, all the time, and through all means.

Capitalism is building legal walls, cultural walls and material walls in order to defend itself against the migration that it itself provoked, attempting once again to map the world’s resources and catastrophes, so that the former can be administrated for ongoing capitalist functioning and the latter don’t significantly affect the centers of Power.

These walls will keep proliferating, we think, until they create a kind of archipelago “above” where the owners—those who possess wealth—secure themselves on a series of protected “islands” while the rest of us are on the outside. Imagine something like an archipelago with islands for the bosses and different islands—plantations really—for specific kinds of labor. And then, far off in the distance, the lost islands for those considered disposable. And on the open sea, there are millions of barges wandering from one island to another, looking for a place to dock.

Sound like Zapatista science fiction? Google “Aquarius Ship” and you will see the distance between what we describe and current realty. The Aquarius was denied port in multiple European nations. Why? Because of its lethal cargo: hundreds of migrants from countries “liberated” by the West through wars of occupation and countries governed by tyrants with the blessing of the West.

“The West,” the self-designated symbol of civilization, goes out, destroys, depopulates, and then retreats and closes its doors, leaving big capital to continue on with its business: manufacturing and selling weapons of destruction, and then manufacturing and selling the machines for reconstruction.

In many locations it is the political right that is supporting this retreat. That is, they are the ones proving to be “effective” overseers who can control the peons and assure profit for the plantation owner…although there are a few [uno, una, unoa] who steal some of the heifers and young bulls, and whip excessively their peon population.

For the surplus populations: they must consume or be annihilated. They are, as we say, disposable. They don’t even count as “collateral damage” in this war.

This isn’t something that is changing; it has already changed.

Here we use the simile of the Native peoples because for a long time, in the previous stage of capitalist development, the Native peoples were forgotten. Before we used the example of the indigenous infants who were called “the unborn” because they came into the world and left it without anyone ever noticing. Those “unborn” lived here in these areas, in these very mountains for example, which at that time didn’t interest anyone. The plantations occupied the good lands (the “flatlands” we call them), and the large landowners that expelled the indigenous into the mountains. Now it turns out that these mountains are full of riches, commodities that capital now wants and so there is nowhere for the Native peoples to go.

They must struggle and defend these territories—to the death if necessary—because there is no other choice. There will be no boat that comes to pick them up when they are forced to navigate unprotected through the world’s oceans and territories.

A new war of conquest is underway in the Native peoples’ territories, and the flag under which the invading army marches is sometimes that of the institutional left.

This change in the machine’s functioning with regard to the countryside or “rural areas”—perceptible with even a superficial analysis—is also present in the cities or “urban areas.” The big cities have been reorganized or are in that process; they are in the midst or wake of a merciless war against their own marginalized inhabitants. Each city contains many cities, but one central one: that of capital. The walls that surround that city are made up of laws, urbanization plans, police, and shock troops.

The entire world is fragmenting; walls are proliferating; the machine advances in its new war of occupation; hundreds of thousands of people discover that the new home promised them by modernity is a barge on the high seas, the shoulder of a highway, or an overcrowded detention center for the “undocumented.” Millions of women learn that the world is a gigantic hunting club where they are the prey; children become literate as sexual and labor commodities; and nature hands over the bill with a long list of debts and a balance in the red, accumulated by capitalism in its brief history as dominant system.

Of course, we haven’t talked about the women who struggle, the others [loas otroas] from below (for whom—in contrast to the glamour of the half-open closets above—suffer disrespect, persecution, and death), those who go home to poor neighborhoods at night and spend the day working in the capital city, migrants who remember that that wall has not been there since the beginning of time, the families of the disappeared, murdered, and imprisoned who neither forget nor forgive, the rural communities who find they were deceived, the identities who discover they are different and replace shame with pride, and all [todoas] the disposable people who understand that their destiny does not have to be slavery, oblivion, or brutal death.

Because there is another crisis, largely unperceived, consisting of the emergence and proliferation of rebellion, of organized human groups who challenge not only Power but also its perverse and inhuman logic. With diverse identities, diverse histories that is, this eruption appears to be a systemic anomaly—it does not figure into the law of probability. Its possibilities of maintaining itself or growing are minimal, almost impossible. That is why they do not count in the calculations of those above.

The machine is not worried about those rebellions. There aren’t very many, barely 300 of them.

-*-

This vision of the world, our vision, is surely incomplete, and very likely erroneous. But that’s how we see the system at a global level. And based on this evaluation, what follows will be what we see at the continental, national, regional, and local levels.

(to be continued…)

En español: http://enlacezapatista.ezln.org.mx/2018/08/20/300-primera-parte-una-finca-un-mundo-una-guerra-pocas-probabilidades-subcomandante-insurgente-moises-supgaleano/