THE HUMAN PARTY

a brief history and a framework for moving foward

We are alone, alone with our dignity and our rage.
Rage and dignity are our bridges, our languages.
We must listen to each other then, learn to know each other.
So that our courage and rage grow and become hope.
So that our dignity takes root again and births another world.
- Subcomandante Marcos

Chiapas, Mexico -- Like so many other compañeros, compañeras, activists, journalists, writers, the curious, and celebrities, I made the pilgrimage from San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas to visit the Zapatistas.  In the autonomous municipality of Oventic, an hour of winding roads outside of San Cristóbal, the Zapatistas have set up what essentially amounts to a welcoming center for students, activists, and other curious folk intent on learning what the movement is doing and where it is going.  I went there with the goal of broadening my understanding of Zapatismo and to see what, if anything, could be applied to the struggle for dignity in my own community.  
 
First and foremost, I learned that defending the revolution is a continuous job. Although I had hoped to be welcomed with open arms, I was kept at a distance (for understandable reasons).  However, through conversations with the Junta of the Good Government and the Committee on Explanation and Information, I came away with a fuller understanding of how Zapatismo has positioned itself to build bridges internationally while, more importantly, firmly maintaining the demands that prompted the rebellion in the first place.
 
The Transformative Process
To understand the current direction of Zapatismo, it is important to review their history and how they became a participatory liberation army.  According to Subcomandante Marcos, the prolific masked military commander of the EZLN (Zapatista Army of National Liberation), several revolutionary Maoist intellectuals moved to the mountains of Chiapas in the early 1980s to start a revolution in the strictest Marxist-Leninist sense, communicating to the indigenous peasants that as peasants, they were the vanguard proletariats.  As they communicated their ideas of the workers' revolution and the abolition of land as private property, the Mayan descendents replied that for them, land has never been private, but rather the heart and soul of the community and that in the end, dignity and respect are more important than power.
 
Rather than driving the two groups apart, this meeting of two seemingly opposite ideologies prompted a process of transformation within both communities. While living in the community, the urban intellectuals were forced to reimagine their revolution, learn to live in the forest and the mountains, and learn a new set of social relations. The indigenous communities learned to accept (and eventually encourage) female participation, and now women are included in Zapatista government, can marry by choice, and are community and military leaders. Respecting land and gender, the weaving of the Marxist dialectic and hundreds of years of communal indigenous tradition and collective decision-making birthed what we know as Zapatismo. It was organizing grounded in commitment rather than anger and desperation.  It was the first manifestation of a world that included many different worlds, worlds that may be different but are still compatible.
 
Free Trade
From their inception, the Zapatistas and similar organizations were engaged in peaceful struggle to wring concessions (land, housing, agricultural assistance) from the state and federal government.  This all changed during negotiations surrounding the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that occurred between Mexican President Carlos Salinas and US Presidents Bush Sr. and Clinton.  The 1910 Mexican Revolution and the Constitution of 1917 promised agrarian reform and protection of communal land (called ejidos) that the architects of NAFTA saw as obstacles to “free” trade. Ignore for a moment the fact that the United States continues to selectively adhere to the demands of NAFTA (particularly regarding agricultural subsides); the indigenous are not specifically protected by the Mexican Constitution and the removal of the few land and agricultural protections that had previously existed essentially relegated them to the sidelines of their already marginalized position in the quest for profits in resource-rich Chiapas.

In 1992, in accordance with the demands of the soon-to-be-implemented NAFTA, Mexico repealed Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution, which had protected communal land rights.  This was a direct attack on the Zapatista way of life, and a signal that international capitalism would accept no alternatives. The removal of such an important safety net in a world of multinational corporations prompted the Zapatistas to make the rounds of indigenous villages in Los Altos de Chiapas to take a referendum.  The result was decisive. The Zapatistas declared war.
 
There are two important lessons to draw from here, on both global and local levels.  The first is that when democracy is mocked so blatantly by ignoring significant sectors of society in economic decisions that will have far-reaching consequences, it would be naive not to expect some backlash from the population.  Second, never before have we seen a revolutionary army so willingly submit itself to the decisions of the civilian population.  The practice of community involvement is important on every level from, grassroots organizing to state governance, and unfortunately it is often overlooked.  The Zapatistas’ continued adherence to the policy of community involvement in the face of government pressure and incentives to give up the struggle teaches us to plan well, act decisively, and involve all. This creates a path toward the realization of our goals.
 
The Sounds of War
On January 1, 1994, the day that NAFTA was to be implemented, the Zapatistas announced their presence taking five cities in Chiapas by armed force.  They declared war with the stated intention of marching on Mexico City, not to assume power, but to demand recognition of the most overlooked members of Mexican society and a return to the truly democratic ideals fought for in the Mexican Revolution by the heroes Emiliano Zapata and Pancho Villa.  By declaring war, they sought to tear open a hole in the fabric of power wrapped over the country, a hole that would create a space for democratic debate and alternatives.  They moved beyond a posture of opposition focused on taking power to a stance of resistance and creating new organizing and infrastructure from below.
 
The Zapatistas were quickly driven back into the hills and forests and surely would have faced complete destruction had it not been for the rapid mobilization of, in Subcomandante Marcos’ words, “civil society.”  From all over Mexico and the world, activists and human rights workers flocked to Chiapas to ensure that the Mexican Army was not committing human rights abuses.  President Carlos Salinas declared a cease-fire on January 12th that has been upheld by the Zapatistas for the last 15 years, even though they have faced military and paramilitary violence and pressure numerous times, including a massacre of 45 -- mostly women in children -- in the town of Acteal in 1997.  
 
Autonomy and Internationalism
Moving away from the history lesson, let’s talk about the mobilization of international solidarity following the 1994 uprising and what it means for us today.  In the immediate aftermath of the uprising, as mentioned before, Chiapas became the darling of the North American, and international, left.  The Zapatistas showed that the most marginalized of society can stand up and make reasonable demands while not seeking state power.  Much of the credit has to go to Subcomandante Marcos for framing demands in universal terms, declaring that everyone who considers themselves to be outsiders has a place within Zapatismo and within the struggle for dignity.  In his communiqués and interviews Marcos importantly emphasizes that he leads by following and that the movement itself has taught him much more than any verbose leader can impart upon his or her followers.  The inclusiveness on both local and global levels fundamentally separated the Zapatistas from other revolutions, such as Peru’s Shining Path, that terrorized the civilian population from both sides.  
 
To continue on the path of internationalism, the Zapatistas convened a number of encuentros, international gatherings of activists, to share ideas, struggles, and formulate a step forward in the age of globalization.  Convened in Zapatista territory in the mountains of Chiapas, the encuentros explicitly ignored the military blockade, asserting the right to movement and association within true democracy.
 
It can be argued that the encuentros were the necessary precedent for the international conferences such as the World Social Forum and the US Social Forum.  The lesson drawn is that both local and international actions are needed when capital and business are no longer handicapped by borders.  Naomi Klein posits that the anti-globalization movements that manifested themselves so visibly in Seattle in 1999 and Quebec City in 2002 drew on the network building of Zapatismo and brought together disparate organizations with radically different goals to create a united front, if only momentarily.
 
How does one maintain a non-violent revolution under a military blockade and forced isolation?  How does the revolution remain relevant even when it seems not to be advancing?  These are questions that Zapatismo has struggled with since the cease-fire in 1994 and subsequent negotiations (mostly unproductive, since the government has the advantage of time - it can choose to perpetually do nothing) with the Mexican government.  In response, Zapatismo has evolved to replace the traditional route of reaction born of desperation with action grounded in commitment. Thus, to question number one, the Zapatistas moved to increase indigenous autonomy (promised by the government but never officially implemented) and to question two, include other organizations to create a strong international network.
 
In terms of autonomy, in 2003 the EZLN removed itself as the primary governing body in the territory and handed responsibility over to the civilian wing, divided into five municipalities encompassing roughly 30 communities.  Supervising education, health, and resolving any community disputes, the Juntas of the Good Government (Juntas del Buen Gobierno) rely on traditional organizational structures of the Chiapan indigenous, most importantly that of communal decision-making but now including female community members.  Additionally, they have also moved to create artisan and agricultural cooperatives (collective work breeds collective action) that bring much-needed resources into the economically marginalized communities.  
 
The communities elect the members of the good government and the positions are non-paying.  The privilege of governing is open to everyone in the community, thus creating a collective dynamic diametrically opposed to the oligarchic systems of "representative" democracy seen throughout the world.  With the help of international solidarity, the autonomous communities pride themselves on the steps that they have taken to improve health and education, issues often neglected by the “bad” government.  As Grace Lee Boggs points out, the struggle is not only for those who have been fighting but for future generations as well: “the Zapatistas have developed a new generation that has grown up with alternative, autonomous education and health programs and has begun to hold delegated positions in the autonomous municipalities.”
 
Where do we go from here?
Although it would be nearly impossible to create fully autonomous communities in the United States where they are needed most (I think of decaying industrial cities with few job opportunities and increasingly irrelevant and outdated educational systems), there are still lessons that can be drawn from this.  We do have the means to create our own opportunities within the United States.  Be it in the form of community agriculture for subsistence or local farmers markets or through worker controlled production such as the factory occupation movement in Argentina, there are alternatives that would allow us to be agents of change in our own communities.  As mentioned before, the compañeros and compañeras in Oventic told me that although Zapatistas cannot travel to influence struggles around the world, they hope that their example can be taken up and improved by communities fighting for self-determination anywhere marginalization and inequality exists.  
 
Beyond providing examples of how to organize an alternative to neoliberalism, the Zapatistas have created an international network of community organizations.  In 2006, following the Sixth Declaration of the Lacondon Jungle, the EZLN launched La Otra Campaña (The Other Campaign) as a parallel alternative to the presidential campaigns in Mexico.  The Zapatistas toured parts of Mexico meeting with organizations around the country to discuss common goals for a truly democratic Mexico.  Thus a network of like-minded organizations came together under the umbrella of La Otra Campaña.  Groups came from around the world to join the caravan around Mexico and discuss a world within which many different worlds exist.  
 
The most recent manifestation was in December, 2008 and January, 2009 with the World Festival of Dignified Rage (December 2008-January 2009) with the theme “Another World, Another Path: Below and to the Left.”  Similar to previous encuentros, the festival provided a space for international network building and the sharing of practices and ideas to create a more humane and community-driven movement.  It emphasizes that anger is justified, but that paths other than armed rebellion can be taken to achieve community change as long as they are formed from actions grounded in commitment.  Although the Zapatistas themselves have not yet put down arms, many voices working together can create a new reality for the marginalized around the world.  
 
The structure of cooperation encompassing many different visions and many different worlds breeds creativity out of rage and can move us toward creating a more just world within our own communities.  Although it is well demonstrated that infighting can destroy movements on either side of the spectrum, a network such as La Otra Campaña can overcome differences by focusing on the commonality of the troubles that we all face.  Subcomandante Marcos points out that the revolution will be one “which is the result of the struggle on different social fronts, with many methods, within different social forums, with different degrees of commitment and participation.  And its results will be, not a party, organization or alliance of victorious organizations with its specific social proposal, but a chance for democratic space in order to resolve the confrontation among diverse political proposals.”  
 
The Zapatistas have demonstrated that dignity trumps desire for power and that the alternatives we seek are possible with reasonable and just demands.  The international support for the Zapatistas comes directly out of the simplicity of their demands: work, land, shelter, food, health, education, independence, freedom, democracy, justice and peace.  What do we want to see in our communities and our cities?  The lesson learned is that we can be ambitious while not demanding much beyond the rights that should be enjoyed by all residents (not solely citizens) in a true participatory democracy.  Recognizing that our struggle (in whatever form it takes) will not be instantly successful, we can move forward building an alternative from below that will open democratic space in our own communities in which dignity and respect can flourish.