This list of FAQs (frequently asked questions) was inspired by
real questions from real people!!
Believe it or Not!

>I have to admit that aside from what i read in the american press and in >your emails, i know little about the zapatista rebels and their goals. The >u.s. press has certainly tried its hardest to downplay whatever ideology >the ezln has. But i also suspect that my lack of knowledge shows that the >zapatistas' ideas and program are extremely vague... even for a bunch of >guerrilleros! Hopefully i can benefit from your store of knowledge, so >please indulge my questions... Zapnet responses to the questions: > >1. Do you consider yourself a sympathizer solidaridad-type with the EZLN? Yes, we do. We just came back from spending 10 days with the Zapatistas in the jungle, and are deeply moved by their calm, perceptivity, determination, gentleness and humility. >2. Does the EZLN realistically expect to get control of the national >government or perhaps the state government in Chiapas? The EZLN has never had any interest in getting control of state or national power. Their project is to mobilize civil society to engage in constructive dialogue about what kinds of political and economic alternatives they would like to see, and propose them to the national government. The EZLN has also been in dialogue with the Mexican government for over two years, discussing issues such as indigenous rights and electoral reform. >3. What kind of government would the zapatistas impose? (elected, dictatorship of the proletariat, what?) Again, they would never impose a government. They have been explicit, from the inception of their movement, that they will not, under any circumstances, take control of the state. The government they would like to see in Mexico is a democratic government, elected fairly, in which politicians truly represent the needs and beliefs of their constituents. >4. What kind of economic system do the zapatistas want to impose: socialism >as commonly understood with state ownership of production, capitalism >with social safety net, some variation on maya forms of production and >exchange-- do they have any economic ideas besides the rather >platitudinous "more just society"? ...We would recommend looking at the research of Dr. Harry Cleaver and the information list serve Chiapas95 which is a service of Accion Zapatista. You can subscribe to Chiapas95 by sending the message "subscribe chiapas95" to "majordomo@eco.utexas.edu". However, we do know that the Zapatistas are not Marxist or socialist, per se. They are against 'neoliberal' ecenomic policies which include such things as: privatizing state systems of production (oil, transporatation, etc.), removing subsidies and tariffs which protect small farmers, and using a 'less government' rationale for providing less health and educational assistance to impoverished people. They [The Zapatistas] would like indigenous people to be decently paid for the work they do, have arable land to farm (instead of the rocky cliffsides they work now), and have access to health and educational facilites. Chiapas is the Mexican state richest in natural resources and poorest in living conditions. 15,000 Indigenous Mexicans die each year, in Chiapas alone, from malnutrition and easily preventable diseases. The literacy rate is attrocious. These are the kinds of issues they are trying to pressure the government to address. They are also demanding an end to political repression, including bombings and evacuations of indigenous villages, massacres of unarmed peasants, and imprisonment of people like Elorriaga, who are doing humanitarian or communications work in the area. > >5. Do the zapatistas view the united states as an imperial enemy or a >potential ally? It is interesting that a primary raison d'etre of the PRI >regime has been resistance to yankee imperialism, but it is this same >regime that the EZLN indicts as hopelessly corrupt and oppressive... The Zapatistas point out that the PRI have been bombing and patrolling their villages with military vehicles and arms given to them by the US to combat drug traffickers. They are aware of the fact that the US government has an interest in keeping them out of the international spotlight. You may have read of Riordon Roett's memo to the Chase Manhattan bank. In January 13, 1994 (two weeks after the Zapatista uprising), Roett, serving as a consultant to Chase Manhattan Bank, sent a four-page report on Mexico to the bank's top clients. Roett, a Johns Hopkins professor of Latin American Studies and former president of LASA (the Latin American Studies Association), also gave this memo to a number of senators, including Bob Dole. In it, he wrote: "There are three areas in which the current monetary crisis can undermine political stability in Mexico. The first is Chiapas; the second is the upcoming state elections; and the third is the role of the labor unions... The government will need to eliminate the Zapatistas to demonstrate their effective control of the national territory and of security policy... The Zedillo administration will need to consider carefully whether or not to allow opposition victories if fairly won at the ballot box..." This memo was leaked, published, and posted on the internet, resulting in a scandal which forced Chase Manhattan to fire Roett. When members of LASA proposed that LASA make a statement, not against Roett's right to say such things, but distancing LASA as an organization form the views expressed by its former president in this memo, the members of the LASA board refused to allow the statement to be made. In any case, the Zapatistas know what kind of involvement the PRI government has with the US government. They are very clear about this in their communiques. They are effectively demonstrating that the PRI has a closer relationship with the US government than it has appeared to in the past (although, who would doubt their alliance in the NAFTA era?). >6. Do you personally find the more dramatic aspects of the ezln (masks, >secret code names, etc.) compelling or clownish and cheesy? We find them sybollically powerful. There is such a history of political repression in Mexico, that it is no doubt a risk for anyone, Zapatista or otherwise, to speak out in public contestation of PRI policies. Of course, the ski masks don't hide the identities of such visible fugures as Marcos, Tacho or Maribel. We may not know what their whole faces look like, but we have no trouble picking them out in a crowd or photograph after seeing them once. But they offer the option to students, peasants and workers (whoever) of going out to join a protest without being immediately identifiable - and, at the same time, demonstrating agreement with EZLN demands, even if they are gathering to address issues specifically relevant to their own circumstances. Also, there is the Mexican mystique with the mask; Octavio Paz, and all that. And the mask is a symbol which says: There are no caudillos among us; we are not interested in seizing power; and there is no one leader of our movement. We are acting collectively to raise issues relevant to all impoverished poeple in Mexico. If one of us dies, another will continue speaking.