En;Harvey,Inclusion thru Autonomy:Zaps and Dissent,Sep-Oct '05
This message is forwarded to you by the editors of the Chiapas95 newslists. To contact the editors or to submit material for posting send to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. NACLA Report on the Americas, Sept-Oct 2005 v39 i2 p12(8) Inclusion through autonomy: Zapatistas and dissent. (REPORT: EMPIRE AND DISSENT) Neil Harvey. Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2005 North American Congress on Latin America, Inc. THE ZAPATISTA MOVEMENT IS PROBABLY ONE of the best-known examples of dissent against the neoliberal model of economic globalization. On January 1, 1994, over 3,000 indigenous people staged an armed uprising against the government of then-President Carlos Salinas de Gortari and issued a list of demands for basic social and political rights. The rebellion was timed to coincide with the start of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), an accord that reduced most tariffs on trade between the United States, Canada and Mexico. The Zapatista's principal spokesperson, Subcomandante Marcos, argued that NAFTA represented a death sentence for Mexico's indigenous people and called on all Mexicans to participate in their own ways for a more democratic, just and sovereign nation. (1) More than eleven years have passed since the Zapatistas first caught international attention. In that time, other social movements have expressed similar demands for social justice and greater participation in decision-making bodies. Meetings of the G-8, World Economic Forum and World Trade Organization have routinely been met with large-scale protests highlighting the common perception that economic globalization is occurring without the kinds of democratic constraints that are necessary for ensuring the defense of human rights and environmental protections. Although their precise demands and forms of organization may differ, activists have often referred to the Zapatistas as a source of inspiration. The possible reasons for this identification are worth noting, and they highlight the unique character of the Zapatistas' practices of dissent. In particular, their decision to maintain independence from political parties and the state has opened up new arenas for participation and experimentation in self-government. Disillusionment with existing forms of representation is not, of course, restricted to Mexico, and the Zapatistas' hope is that this situation can give way to the emergence of alternative channels for achieving social change. Indeed, one of the most striking aspects of the Zapatistas is the fact that their demands immediately resonated with so many people around the world. In part, this was due to the rapid-fire transmission of their communiques and letters through the Internet, but it was also related--perhaps more so--to the growing realization of linkages between decisions taken in one part of the world and events in another. (2) The Zapatistas proved adept at connecting their own experiences with those of other communities facing similar experiences of economic exclusion and political marginalization--both within and beyond Mexico. Such connections were restated in the Zapatistas' Sixth Declaration of the Lacandona Jungle released in June 2005. This document provides an analysis of the national and international effects of neoliberalism, calls for the development of a national alternative program from the left, and invites solidarity groups and social movements from other countries to help organize another international meeting against neoliberalism and for humanity (similar to previous meetings held in 1996 and 1997). Although the Zapatistas emerged from complex and conflictive local histories of dissent, their rebellion is also a sign of the crisis and transformation of capitalist states around the world, particularly in Latin America. (3) At the global level, we have witnessed the decline of state-led development models in which various degrees of national economic regulation allowed for redistributive programs of a broadly supported welfare state. The dismantling of this model in favor of greater deregulation, trade liberalization and private enterprise has been a common experience for many countries, including Mexico. POLITICAL THEORISTS MICHAEL HARDT AND ANTONIO NEGRI have argued that this transformation is best conceptualized as a passage from imperialism to Empire. (4) In their analysis, imperialism refers to a system in which dominant nation-states compete for control of territory and resources in order to enhance their own national power. Empire, on the other hand, has no national home, although some nations are clearly more influential than others in directing its operations. Instead, Empire is a global network of power relations that perpetuate capitalism through the constant reorganization of social life and natural resources. Click for Full Size With Empire, dissent does not emanate from a space that is outside the global capitalist system (that is, in the sense of combating the imposition of a foreign power,
En;Harvey,Inclusion thru Autonomy:Zaps and Dissent
-- This message is forwarded to you by the editors of the Chiapas95 newslists. To contact the editors or to submit material for posting send to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:08:38 -0600 (CST) From: Chiapas 95 Moderators [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Harvey,Inclusion thru Autonomy:Zaps and Dissent NACLA Report on the Americas, Sept-Oct 2005 v39 i2 p12(8) Inclusion through autonomy: Zapatistas and dissent. (REPORT: EMPIRE AND DISSENT) Neil Harvey. Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2005 North American Congress on Latin America, Inc. THE ZAPATISTA MOVEMENT IS PROBABLY ONE of the best-known examples of dissent against the neoliberal model of economic globalization. On January 1, 1994, over 3,000 indigenous people staged an armed uprising against the government of then-President Carlos Salinas de Gortari and issued a list of demands for basic social and political rights. The rebellion was timed to coincide with the start of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), an accord that reduced most tariffs on trade between the United States, Canada and Mexico. The Zapatista's principal spokesperson, Subcomandante Marcos, argued that NAFTA represented a death sentence for Mexico's indigenous people and called on all Mexicans to participate in their own ways for a more democratic, just and sovereign nation. (1) More than eleven years have passed since the Zapatistas first caught international attention. In that time, other social movements have expressed similar demands for social justice and greater participation in decision-making bodies. Meetings of the G-8, World Economic Forum and World Trade Organization have routinely been met with large-scale protests highlighting the common perception that economic globalization is occurring without the kinds of democratic constraints that are necessary for ensuring the defense of human rights and environmental protections. Although their precise demands and forms of organization may differ, activists have often referred to the Zapatistas as a source of inspiration. The possible reasons for this identification are worth noting, and they highlight the unique character of the Zapatistas' practices of dissent. In particular, their decision to maintain independence from political parties and the state has opened up new arenas for participation and experimentation in self-government. Disillusionment with existing forms of representation is not, of course, restricted to Mexico, and the Zapatistas' hope is that this situation can give way to the emergence of alternative channels for achieving social change. Indeed, one of the most striking aspects of the Zapatistas is the fact that their demands immediately resonated with so many people around the world. In part, this was due to the rapid-fire transmission of their communiques and letters through the Internet, but it was also related--perhaps more so--to the growing realization of linkages between decisions taken in one part of the world and events in another. (2) The Zapatistas proved adept at connecting their own experiences with those of other communities facing similar experiences of economic exclusion and political marginalization--both within and beyond Mexico. Such connections were restated in the Zapatistas' Sixth Declaration of the Lacandona Jungle released in June 2005. This document provides an analysis of the national and international effects of neoliberalism, calls for the development of a national alternative program from the left, and invites solidarity groups and social movements from other countries to help organize another international meeting against neoliberalism and for humanity (similar to previous meetings held in 1996 and 1997). Although the Zapatistas emerged from complex and conflictive local histories of dissent, their rebellion is also a sign of the crisis and transformation of capitalist states around the world, particularly in Latin America. (3) At the global level, we have witnessed the decline of state-led development models in which various degrees of national economic regulation allowed for redistributive programs of a broadly supported welfare state. The dismantling of this model in favor of greater deregulation, trade liberalization and private enterprise has been a common experience for many countries, including Mexico. POLITICAL THEORISTS MICHAEL HARDT AND ANTONIO NEGRI have argued that this transformation is best conceptualized as a passage from imperialism to Empire. (4) In their analysis, imperialism refers to a system in which dominant nation-states compete for control of territory and resources in order to enhance their own national power. Empire, on the other hand, has no national home, although some nations are clearly more influential than others in directing its operations. Instead, Empire is a global network of power relations that perpetuate capitalism through the constant reorganization of social life and natural resources. Click for
