Neozapatismo

The indigenous components of Zapatismo involve both concepts and practices.

Concerning concepts, Dylan Eldredge Fitzwater points especially to the Tzotzil concepts of ichbail ta muk’ and lekil kuxlejal. Concerning ichbail ta muk’, Fitzwater renders this literally as ‘to bring one another to largeness or greatness’ and states that it ‘implies the coming together of a big collective heart’ (p. 36). He notes that this is sometimes rendered ‘simply as ‘democracy’ (p. 36), but prefers himself to translate it variously as ‘to develop a collective heart’ (p. 43), ‘autonomous democratic governance’ (p. 45) and ‘a democracy of mutual respect’ (p. 66). Fitzwater observes how this ‘collective heart is made through concrete practices of self-organization’ (p. 52). He further notes that ichbail ta muk’ in turn leads to, or even creates, lekil kuxlejal, which Fitzwater renders literally as ‘the life that is good for everyone’, while noting that ‘it is usually translated as autonomy or dignified life’ (p. 36). Thus Fitzwater concludes: ‘For the Zapatistas, dignity, autonomy, and democracy for each people, as well as the creation of this people as a collectivity, arises through the growth of the heart, through bringing one another into one collective heart, through ichbail ta muk’.’

Regarding practices, the Zapatistas resurrected and revitalized certain traditional indigenous practices that had fallen into abeyance or disuse, in some cases, such as in the case of communal assemblies, making these more democratic by extending participation to women (and not just men, as had been the practice previously). Moreover, the Zapatistas not only expanded participation to include women but also extended this traditional communitarian practice of assemblies geographically, beyond just the individual community (i.e. local) level to the municipal or even regional / zonal level. These communal assemblies as well as being instruments of democratic decision-making are also a concrete manifestation of the generally-existing social relations - typified by collectivity, communality, and mutual respect and agreement - that prevail within Zapatista indigenous communities. Another key practice is a’mtel, which is work that is democratically determined, apportioned, assigned, administered and carried out. Indeed, Fitzwater (p. 159) stresses that ‘The practice of a’mtel is at the heart of Zapatismo.’

Zapatismo also incorporates several principles taken over from certain of Chiapas’ indigenous peoples. Perhaps the most prominent of these are: preguntando caminamos (‘asking we walk’), and mandar obedeciendo (‘command by obeying’). Concerning the latter, there are seven principles of ‘command by obeying’: (1) serve and not be served, (2) represent and not supersede, (3) build and not destroy, (4) obey and not command, (5) propose and not impose, (6) convince and not defeat, and (7) come down and not go up.[16] It is important to note that each Zapatista community while subscribing to the 7 principles of governing by obeying nonetheless has the right to democratically determine its own form of governance, and there is a significant amount of variety in the conceptualization of what constitutes democracy and the forms this takes at the local level.

Zapatismo draws on traditional indigenous and conceptualizations of, and approaches to, governance. Community members are charged with the task of serving the community by fulfilling certain charges. As such then there is no so-called ‘professional’ political class that is distinct from community members; there is no separation of autonomous government from indigenous community. Community members take turns carrying out their charges, working in service to the community, and thereby experience governing and being an active participant in direct democracy. They are not paid for this service, but are provided with food by community members or their fields are tilled on their behalf by them as recompense for undertaking this service to the community. In this way, the charge is carried out on behalf of the community and the community reciprocates, which exemplifies the truly communal and collective nature of the autonomous Zapatista communities.

Emiliano Zapata, the man after which Neozapatismo is named, was a strong Agrarianist in Mexico. He personally led rebels against the Mexican government in order to redistribute plantation land to farm workers. Zapata began by protesting the seizure of land by wealthy plantation owners, but his protest did not achieve its desired goal, so he turned more violent means. The cause of redistribution was Zapata's true life's goal, and he frequently continues to symbolize the Agrarianist cause in Mexico even today.[17]

The Zapatista Army of National Liberation have made similar Agrarian demands such as land reform mandated by the 1917 Constitution of Mexico. For example, The Revolutionary Agrarian Law, which is longest and most detailed of the ten Revolutionary Laws that the EZLN issued along with its Declaration of Law when it commenced its uprising, opens by stating: "Poor peasants in Mexico continue to demand that the land be for those who work it. The EZLN reclaims the Mexican countryside’s just struggle for land and freedom, following in the footsteps of Emiliano Zapata and opposing the reforms to Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution."[18]

Crucially, Subcommander Marcos argues that the Zapatistas' Revolutionary Agrarian Law that was imposed following the land takeovers conducted by the EZLN and those indigenous peoples supportive of the movement in the wake of the January 1994 uprising, brought about “ … fundamental changes in the lives of Zapatista indigenous communities … ", adding:

…When the land became property of the peasants … when the land passed into the hands of those who work it … [This was] the starting point for advances in government, health, education, housing, nutrition, women’s participation, trade, culture, communication, and information …[it was] was recovering the means of production, in this case, the land, animals, and machines that were in the hands of large property owners.”[19]

In the eyes of Marcos and the Zapatistas, their quest for autonomy — in their negotiations with the government the EZLN did not demand independence from Mexico, but rather autonomy, and (among other things) that the natural resources extracted from Chiapas benefit more directly the people of Chiapas — began with, and was only made possible through, reclaiming land and distributing it to "those who work it".

Neozapatismo often relies of left-wing economic theories. The most well-known concept of Neozapatismo is its opposition to capitalist globalization. On the signing of the famed globalization promoting NAFTA treaty the Zapatista rebels revolted, believing the signing of the treaty to have a negative economic effect on the Indigenous peoples of Mexico. The signing of NAFTA also resulted in the removal of Article 27, Section VII, from the Mexican Constitution, which had guaranteed land reparations to indigenous groups throughout Mexico.[20]

The economics of the Zapatista occupied Chiapas is based on collectivism using the cooperative model with syndicalist aspects. The means of production are cooperatively owned by the public and there are no supervisors or owners of the property. All economic activity is local and self-sufficient, but products may be sold to the international market for fundraising purposes. The most famous examples of this model are the Zapatista coffee cooperatives that bring in the most income for the Zapatista movement.[21] Recently, the Zapatistas have been steadfast in resisting the violence of neoliberalism by practicing horizontal autonomy and mutual aid.[22] Zapatista communities continue to build and maintain their own anti-systemic health, education, and sustainable agro-ecological systems.

Zapatista cooperatives are governed by the general assembly of the workers which is the supreme body of the cooperatives, it is convened at least once a year and elects a new administrative council every 3 years. Through their operation, the workers don’t depend on the local or global market. Through the collective organization and the cooperation with the solidarity networks at their disposal, the workers receive one price for their product or service that can cover the cost of work while also bringing workers a dignified income, which increases over the years. Workers may gain access to common structures and technical support. For as long as the cooperatives develop and improve their functions, they contribute some amount of their income to the autonomous programs of education, health, and to other social structures. Furthermore, the movements that participate in the fundraising solidarity networks of disposal return some amount of their incomes to the Zapatista communities.

The Zapatistas’ political stance is anti-capitalist in general and anti-Neoliberalism in particular, and much of their discourse reflects this position. That having been said, certain writings and presentations by Subcomandante Marcos in particular convey Neozapatismo’s anti-capitalist message to a greater extent and in more detail than others. Examples of these include the following communiqués: “The Story of Durito and Neoliberalism” (April 1994); “Durito II: Neoliberalism Seen from La Lacandona” (March 1995); “Durito III: The Story of Neoliberalism and the Labor Movement” (April 1995); “Durito IV: Neoliberalism and the Party-State System” (June 1995); “Durito VI: Neoliberalism, Chaotic Theory of Economic Chaos” (July 1995); and “Durito IX: Neoliberalism, History as a Tale . . . Badly Told” (April 1996).[23]

There are also Marcos’ communiqués “The (Impossible) Geometry of Power” (2005) and “The Pedestrians of History” (2006), and his presentations at the December 2007 “First International Colloquium In Memoriam Andrés Aubry: Planet Earth, Antisystemic Movements”.[24] Other notable Zapatista anti-capitalist texts include “The Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle” (2005), and those collected in the book Critical Thought in the Face of the Capitalist Hydra (Durham, NC: PaperBoat, 2016).

However, of all the Zapatistas’ anti-capitalist texts, perhaps the one that has received the most attention is Subcomandante Marcos’ essay titled "The Fourth World War Has Begun" (1997), in which he claims that neoliberalism and globalization constitute the "Fourth World War".[25] In this essay, Marcos compares and contrasts what he calls the Third World War (the Cold War) with what he terms the "Fourth World War", which he says is a new type of war that we find ourselves in now: "If the Third World War saw the confrontation of capitalism and socialism on various terrains and with varying degrees of intensity, the fourth will be played out between large financial centers, on a global scale, and at a tremendous and constant intensity." He goes on to say that economic globalization has created devastation. These views are not shared by all Zapatistas but have influenced Neozapatismo and Neozapatista thinking.

Zapatista communities are organized in an anarchistic manner. All decisions are made by a decentralized direct democracy in an autonomous manner. The original goal for this organization was for all the indigenous groups in Mexico to have autonomous government; today in the Zapatista territory the Mexican government has no control.[26] The councils in which the community may meet and vote on local issues in the Zapatista Chiapas are called the Councils of Good Government. In a Direct Democracy any issue may be voted on, any issue may be brought up to be voted on, and all decisions are passed by a majority vote. There are no restrictions on who may govern or who may vote. Since December 1994, the Zapatistas had been gradually forming several autonomous municipalities, called Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities (MAREZ). In these municipalities, an assembly of local representatives forms the Juntas de Buen Gobierno or Councils of Good Government (JBGs).[27]

The Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities are run in various communities,[27] the general assemblies meet for a week to decide on various aspects concerning the community. The assemblies are open to everyone, without a formal bureaucracy. The decisions made by the communities are then passed to elected delegates whose job is to pass the information to a board of delegates. The delegates can be revoked and also serve on a rotation basis. In this way, it is expected that the largest number of people may express their points of view.

Any military "commanders" within the movement have no actual power, they may not force anyone to do anything. Military leaders only serve as revolutionary vanguards, to educate those unaware of the movement and to fight for the movement. Some "commanders" are simply spokespeople for the movement, some of the more famed spokespeople like Marcos, are only characters whose public statements are controlled and decided by the leading activists' consensus. If any soldiers of the Zapatista movement act in a brutal or unjust manner, the Zapatistas allow others to act against that soldier. No member of Zapatista forces has any real power over another.

Neozapatismo is a heavily Feminist philosophy. Women are viewed as equals to men and some women such as Comandante Ramona and Subcomandante Elisa were leaders in the Zapatista movement. In the 1990s, one-third of the insurgents were women and half of the Zapatista support base was women.

Even though feminism is seen as a result of Westernization, indigenous Mayan women have struggled to “draw on and navigate Western ideologies while preserving and attempting to reclaim some indigenous traditions...which have been eroded with the imposition of dominant western culture and ideology."[28] Indigenous feminism is invested in women's struggles, indigenous people, and look to their heritage for solutions while using some western ideas for achieving feminism.

Zapatista women are invested in the collective struggle of Neozapatismo, and of women in general. Ana Maria, one of the movement leaders, said in an interview that women "participated in the first of January(Zapatista Uprising)... the women’s struggle is the struggle of everybody. In EZLN, we do not fight for our own interests but struggle against every situation that exists in Mexico; against all the injustice, all the marginalization, all the poverty, and all the exploitation that Mexican women suffer. Our struggle in EZLN is not for women in Chiapas but for all the Mexicans.[29]

The effects of Western Capitalism makes flexibility in gender and labor roles more difficult than the indigenous cultures traditional labor. “Indigenous women’s entry into the money economy has been analyzed as making their domestic and subsistence work evermore dispensable to the reproduction of the labor force and thus reducing women’s power within the family. Indigenous men have been forced by the need to help provide for the family in the globalized capitalist economic system that favors paid economic labor while depending on female subordination and unpaid subsistence labor. These ideals are internalized by many workers and imported back into the communities.”[28] This capitalistic infiltration harmed Gender role, they were becoming more and more restrictive and polarized with the growing imposition of external factors on indigenous communities. Ever since the arrival of the Europeans and their clear distinction in the views of feminine home makers and masculine laborers.

Indigenous feminism also created more collaboration and contact between indigenous and mestiza women in the informal sector. After the emergence of the Zapatistas, more collaboration started to take place, and six months after the EZLN uprising, the first Chiapas State Women’s Convention was held. Six months after that, the National Women’s Convention was held in Querétaro; it included over three hundred women from fourteen different states.[28] In August 1997, the first National Gathering of Indigenous Women took place in the state of Oaxaca, it was organized by indigenous women and was attended by over 400 women. One of the most prevalent issues discussed in the conventions, was the relations between mestiza women and indigenous women. Oftentimes it became the situation where the mestiza women tended to “help” and the indigenous women were the one being “helped.”

The Zapatistas movement was the first time a guerrilla movement held women’s liberation as part of the goal for the uprising. Major Ana Maria[30]—who was not only the woman who lead the EZLN capture of San Cristobal de las Casas during the uprising, but also one of the women who helped create the Women’s Revolutionary Law,[31] ‘A general law was made, but there was no women’s law. And so we protested and said that there has to be a women’s law when we make our demands. We also want the government to recognize us as women. The right to have equality, equality of men and women.’ The Women’s Revolutionary Law came about through a woman named Susana and Comandanta Ramona[32] traveling to dozens of communities and to ask the opinions of thousands of women. The Women’s Revolutionary Law was released along with the rest of the Zapatista demands aimed at the government during their public uprising on New Years Day of 1994.

On the day of the uprising, the EZLN announced the Women’s Revolutionary Law with the other Revolutionary Laws. The Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee created and approved of these laws which were developed through with consultation of indigenous women.[27] The Women’s Revolutionary Law strived to change “traditional patriarchal domination” and it addressed many of the grievances that Chiapas women had.[33] These laws coincided with the EZLN’s attempt to “shift power away from the center to marginalized sectors."[34] The follow are the ten laws that comprised the Women’s Revolutionary Law.

1. Women have the right to participate in the revolutionary struggle in the place and at the level that their capacity and will dictates without any discrimination based on race, creed, color, or political affiliation.
2. Women have the right to work and to receive a just salary.
3. Women have the right to decide on the number of children they have and take care of.
4. Women have the right to participate in community affairs and hold leadership positions if they are freely and democratically elected.
5. Women have the right to primary care in terms of their health and nutrition.
6. Women have the right to education.
7. Women have the right to choose who they are with (i.e. choose their romantic/sexual partners) and should not be obligated to marry by force.
8. No woman should be beaten or physically mistreated by either family members or strangers. Rape and attempted rape should be severely punished.
9. Women can hold leadership positions in the organization and hold military rank in the revolutionary armed forces.
10. Women have all the rights and obligations set out by the revolutionary laws and regulations.[35]

Zapatismo focuses heavily on Postcolonialism specifically postcolonial gaze. First referred to by Edward Said as "orientalism", the term "post-colonial gaze" is used to explain how colonial powers treated the people of colonized countries.[36] Placing the colonized in a position of the "other" helped to shape and establish the colonial's identity as being the powerful conqueror, and acted as a constant reminder of this idea of subjectivity.

The theory of postcolonial gaze studies the impacts of colonization on formerly colonized peoples and how these peoples overcome past colonial discrimination and marginalization by colonialists and their descendants.[37] In Mexico, postcolonial gaze is being fostered predominantly in areas of large indigenous populations and prejudice, like Chiapas. The Zapatistas not only raised many arguments about the consequences of capitalist globalization; they also questioned the long-standing ideas created by Spanish colonialism.