Ya Basta! A Cry that Echoes Beyond Borders

YaBasta!ACrythatEchoesBeyondBorders: ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksinthe

ZapatistaUprising

NicoleGulewitsch

UniversityofGuelph,Guelph

DuringtheZapatistarebellion,avastnetworkoforganizationsandactivistscame togethertostrugglenotonlyalongsidetheZapatistas,butasZapatistasthemselves. Theformationofatransnationalnetworkasfarreachingandpowerfulasthisisas intriguingasitisrareandsurelydeservesfurtherexplanation.Thispaperwillseek toaddresshowandwhyatransnationalsolidaritynetworkwasformedduringthe Zapatistauprising.Iarguethatthetransnationalsolidaritynetworkwasformed asaresultofthestrategicframingof‘Zapatismo’throughneoliberalinjusticeand radicaldemocracyframes,politicalimagination,andacollectiveZapatistaidentity inwaysthatresonatedwithactivistsbeyondthebordersofMexico.

“WhatishappeninginthemountainsoftheMexicanSoutheastthatfindsan echoandamirrorinthestreetsofEurope,thesuburbsofAsia,thecountryside ofAmerica,thetownshipsofAfrica,andthehousesofOceania?”

(SubcomandanteInsurgenteMarcosascitedinKhasnabish2008b:155)

TheZapatistarebellionbeganasaradicalmovementinthesouth-easternjunglesofMexico,butquicklybecameoneofthemostwidespreadandwellknownpoliticalmovements ofthetwentiethcentury.Criesof“YaBasta!”wereheardthroughoutNorthAmericaand inmanyotherpartsoftheworld;thosecriesdidnotgounanswered.AvastnetworkoforganizationsandactivistscametogethertostrugglenotonlyalongsidetheZapatistas,but asZapatistasthemselves.Theformationofatransnationalnetworkasfarreachingand powerfulasthisisasintriguingasitisrareandsurelydeservesfurtherexplanation.This paperaddresseswhyatransnationalsolidaritynetworkwasformedduringtheZapatista uprising.

MuchoftheliteratureontheZapatistauprisingusesnetworkanalysistoexplainthe developmentofthetransnationalsolidaritynetworkwithinthemovement(dellaPorta andTarrow2005;Olesen2004,2005).However,thereislessscholarshipthatseekstounderstandwhyatransnationalnetworkemergedwithintheZapatistamovement.Thomas Iwouldliketothanktheanonymousreviewersfortheirinsightfulcommentsonearlierdraftsofthis paper.

Olesen(2005)offersasophisticatedanalysisofthedevelopmentofthetransnationalZapatistasolidaritynetworkbyexaminingtheresonanceofZapatistaframingalongsubjective,systematic,andtechnologicalchannels.Heusesframingtheorytodemonstrate howtheresonanceoftwodominantframes,theneoliberalinjusticeframeandradical democracymasterframe,facilitatedtheformationoftheZapatistasolidaritynetwork.

Khasnabish’s(2008b)workonthetransnationalZapatistasolidaritynetworkbuildson Olesen’sanalysisbyofferingimportantinsightintoanaspectoftheresonanceoftheZapatistamovementoverlookedbyOlesen:theimpactofpoliticalimaginationonresonance. Takentogether,theseanalysesofferausefullensforunderstandinghowandwhytheZapatistamovementresonatedwithsomanyactivistsoutsideofMexico.However,neither ofthemadequatelyaddressestheroleofcollectiveidentityincreatingatransnationally resonantZapatismo.ThispaperbuildsontheinsightsofKhasnabish(2008)andOlesen (2005)inexplainingthetransnationalresonanceofZapatismo,andfurtherstheiranalyses bydemonstratinghowtheframingofacollectiveZapatistaidentitywasalsocriticalto thedevelopmentofthetransnationalsolidaritynetwork.

IaddressthequestionofwhythetransnationalnetworkwasformedthroughanexaminationofboththeframesembodiedinnotionsofZapatismoandthecollectiveZapatista identity,payingparticularattentiontohowandwhythoseframesresonatedwithabroader internationalaudience.IdrawonthespeechesandcommuniqusofSubcomandante Marcos,whoactsasthevoiceoftheZapatistamovement,andwhosewordswereheard throughoutNorthAmericaandEurope,inordertodemonstratetheuseoftheneoliberal injusticeandradicaldemocracyframes.Ithencomparetheuseoftheseframestothe framesusedintheadvocacystatementsofZapatistasolidarityorganizationsoutsideof Mexico.BydemonstratingthecoherencebetweentheframesusedbytheZapatistasand theframesusedbyZapatistasolidarityorganizations,Ishowthattheframesusedbythe ZapatistasdidindeedresonatewithactivistsoutsideofMexico.Moreover,Isuggestthat theframingoftheZapatistamovementshiftedovertimeinordertofostertransnational resonancethroughastrategicprocessofframebridgingandframeamplification.Ithen examinehowacollectiveZapatistaidentityrootedindifference,ratherthansimilarity, helpedtofurtherfuelthedevelopmentofthetransnationalsolidaritynetwork.

Background:TheZapatistaUprising

TheZapatistauprisingbeganonJanuary1,1994,whenSubcomandanteInsurgentMarcosledtheZapatistaArmyofNationalLiberation(EZLN),aguerrillaarmycomprised largelyofindigenouspeasantsandthepoor,inanarmedinsurgencyagainsttheMexican government.Theydeclaredwaronthestate,demandingland,democracy,andjusticein the“FirstDeclarationfromtheLacandnJungle”(Khasnabish2008a).ThisdeclarationcoincidedwiththesigningoftheNorthAmericanFreeTradeAgreement(NAFTA) anddemandedanendtostructuralviolenceagainsttheindigenouspeopleofChiapas andanumberofspecificreformstolabour,education,healthcare,land,democracy,independenceandliberty(Callahan2004).Moregenerally,theZapatistassoughtanendto neoliberaleconomicreforms,includingNAFTA,whichtheysawasincreasinglyjeopardizingthelivelihoodsoflandlessandland-poorpeasantsthroughoutMexicobyprivatizing naturalresourcesandstate-runservices,loweringthesocialwage,limitingbenefitsand

workers’rights,andopeningthemarkettoforeigntrade(Callahan2004).Aftertwelve daysofviolentstruggletheMexicangovernmentregainedcontrolofthefourmajorcities withinthestateofChiapasthattheEZLNhadcapturedandcalledaunilateraltruce (Washbrook2007).

SupportfortheZapatistamovementgrewnationallyandinternationallyandresulted inthecreationofnumeroussolidarityorganizationsandthemobilizationofmanypreexistingorganizations,aspeoplethroughoutNorthAmericaandinpartsofEuropebegan toseetheEZLNnotonlyasavoicefortherightsofindigenouspeople,butasavoice fordemocracyandagainstglobalization,neoliberalism,andcorporate-drivencapitalism (Washbrook2007).However,asDeborahYashar(2007)pointsout,itisimportantnot toreducetheemergenceoftheZapatistarebelliontoaneffectofneoliberalglobalization alone,asmanyeconomicreformsbeganlongbeforetheZapatistauprising.Similarly,she suggeststhatalthoughtheZapatistasdeclaredwaragainsttheMexicangovernmenton thesamedaythatNAFTAwasimplemented,organizingfortheuprisingbeganlongbefore thisdate(Yashar2007).Furthermore,therewereanumberofhumanrightsorganizations thatwerealreadymonitoringtheMexicangovernmentbecauseofpasthumanrights violationsandpoliticalrepression,whichexertedpressureontheMexicangovernment tofulfilitsnewlystatedcommitmenttoupholdinginternationalhumanrightsstandards (Munoz2006).

Asaresultofbothinternalandexternalpressures,theEZLNplayedanincreasingly importantroleinthepoliticallandscapeofMexicooverthenextsixyears,commanding theattentionoftheMexicangovernmentonacontinualbasis(Washbrook2007).Nevertheless,theZapatistamovementdidnotachievemanyofitsobjectives.Itdid,however, leadtothesigningoftheAccordsofSanAndrsin1996,whichwereestablishedto improveindigenousrights.Thegovernmentfailedtoimplementtheaccords,whichhas ledtoanongoingstalematebetweentheZapatistasandtheMexicangovernment.To thisdaytheZapatistaarmyisstillengagedinthestruggle,buttheyhavelostmuchof theirpopularsupportoutsideofMexico,aswellastheirpoliticalcloutwithinMexico (Washbrook2007).

TransnationalNetworksInTheZapatistaUprising

TheZapatistasolidaritynetworkconsistedofnumerousorganizationswithasmanyas eighty-eightformalorganizationsintheUnitedStatesalone(Olesen2004),andwithmembersfromalloverCanada,Europe,andtheUnitedStates(McAdam2003).Thenetwork includedawidevarietyofhumanrightsgroups,anti-globalizationgroups,anarchists, Marxists,socialists,religiousorganizations,andgroupsformedexclusivelyinsolidarity withtheZapatistas.Consequently,theseorganizationsrepresentedawiderangeofinterestsandperspectivesthat,despiteseeminglyendlessdifferences,foundcommonground inthefoothillsofChiapas.HowwasitthatsomanyorganizationswereabletocometogethertojoinintheZapatistastruggle?Theanswertothisquestioncanbefoundpartly intheinformationalinfrastructureoftheZapatistamovement;howeveritisnecessaryto gobeyondastructuralanalysisbyexaminingtheframingofZapatismotounderstand whyactivistsandorganizationsfromsomanydiversebackgroundsunitedaroundthe Zapatistamovement. MSR2011,Vol.2

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch80

AccordingtoOlesen(2004),informationabouttheZapatistauprisingisdisseminated alongfivelevelsofaninformationalinfrastructureviaemailthroughnumerouslistservs andpersonalemailnetworksthatallowtheinformationtotakeon“alifeofitsown” (94)asitcanthenbefurtherspreadbyanyoftheinitialrecipients,makingitapowerfulnetworkingtool.Despitethecentralrolethatthetransnationalnetworkplayedin disseminatinginformationbeyondthebordersofMexico,itisimportantnottooverstatetheroleofinternationalactorsinthestruggle‘ontheground,’asitcontinuesto beastruggledirectedprimarilytowardthestate,andmuchoftherealactionoccurred withintheMexicanborders(Yashar2007).Nonetheless,internationalsocialmovement organizations(SMOs)didplayanimportantroleintheZapatistamovement.

Olesen(2004)suggeststhatseveralSMOsplayedanintegralroleinthemovementby offeringdirectsolidaritybybringingaid,observinghumanrights,andorganizingfairtrade partnerships.Forexample,SchoolsforChiapas,asolidarityorganizationbasedinSan Diego,providedmaterialsandlabourtotheZapatistasfortheconstructionofautonomous schoolsinChiapas(Olesen2004).PastorsforPeace,agroupbasedinChicago,sentnumerousaidcaravanstoChiapas,deliveringfood,clothes,medicineandschoolsupplies. ManySMOsoutsideofMexicoparticipatedintheZapatistamovementmoreindirectly byhelpingtoraiseawarenessabouttheZapatistas’strugglethroughbothpublicdemonstrationsandtheirinformationalandeducationalcampaigns(Olesen2004).Madrid’s ZapatistaSupportNetwork,forexample,statesthatitsprimaryactivities“havebeen informative;[it]distribute[d]smallpublicationscalledtheRAZNotebookswithcommuniqus,andwork[ed]onthemesrelatedtotheZapatistas”(inOlesen2004:83). Moreover,internationalSMOswereabletoputmuchneededpressureontheMexican governmenttorespondtothedemandsoftheZapatistas(Munoz2006).

FramingInTheZapatistaUprising

AccordingtoAlexKhasnabish(2008),muchoftheliteratureontheZapatistasolidarity networkglossesovertheideologicalbasisofthenetwork,thatis,the“collectivesentiment” inwhicha“groupbeginstoimagineandfeelthingstogether”(Appaduraiascitedin Khasnabish2008a:39).IntheZapatistarebellion,thiscollectivesentimentisknown as Zapatismo.Zapatismorefers(quiteloosely)totheideologyorphilosophybehindthe Zapatistamovement(Callahan2004).Toclarify,althoughZapatismoiscloselyassociated withtheZapatistas,theZapatistaArmyofNationalLiberation(EZLN)isthearmythat servestheZapatistas,andtheZapatistasincludebothmembersoftheEZLNandnonmilitarysupportersofthemovement.AccordingtoManuelCallahan(2004),Zapatismo ismorethanjustanideologyorphilosophy—itis“apoliticalstrategy,anethos,aset ofcommitmentsclaimedbythosewhoclaimapoliticalidentity”(218-219).Although difficulttoputintowords,Zapatismomaybebestunderstoodasa‘spiritofstruggle’ whichcapturesnotonlytheideologybehindthestruggle,butthefeelingsofimagination andhopeandadesireforchangesharedbyactivistsinMexicoandabroad.Zapatismo developedwhentheEZLN,throughthecommuniqusofSubcomandanteInsurgente Marcos,broached(or‘framed’)Zapatistademandstoaninternationalaudienceinaway thatresonatedstronglywithabroadrangeoflabour,human,andindigenousrights groups,aswellasmoreradicalmovementsopposedtoglobalization,neoliberalism,and

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch81

corporate-drivencapitalism.

Framingreferstotheprocessbywhichmovementleadersstrategicallyanalyzeevents inawaythatresonateswiththebeliefsandexperiencesofpotentialparticipants,andthen identifyresponsiblepartiesinordertomotivatepotentialparticipantstoact(Noakesand Johnston2005).Collectiveactionframes,then,arethe“action-orientedsetsofbeliefsand meaningsthatinspireandlegitimatetheactivitiesandcampaignsofasocialmovement organization”(BenfordandSnow2000:612).AccordingtoBenfordandSnow(2000), therearethreecoreframingtaskswhichserveparticularfunctionswithinamovement: diagnostic,prognostic,andmotivationalframing.Diagnosticframingreferstotheprocess ofidentifyingtheproblemandattributingittoacause.Prognosticframingrefersto theprocessofidentifyingasolutiontotheproblem(i.e.collectiveaction).Finally, motivationalframingreferstotheprocessofprovidingarationaleforactioninorder toencouragepeopletojoinamovement(BenfordandSnow2000).Anotherimportant aspectofframingistheconceptofframeresonance,whichstressesthataframewillonly bemeaningfultoparticipantsifitdrawsontheculturalsymbolsthatappear‘natural andfamiliar’tothem(NoakesandJohnston2005).Simplystated,ifaframedoesnot fitwiththeexperiencesandbeliefsofthetargetaudienceitwillnotmotivatepotential participantstojoinamovement.Framingtheoryservesasanexcellenttheoreticallens forexaminingtherelationshipbetweenZapatismoandtransnationalparticipationinthe Zapatistastruggle,asitdrawsontheconceptsof framing and frames(orcollectiveaction frames)inexplainingtherelationshipbetweenbeliefsandpoliticalaction.Examining theframingofZapatismowithintheZapatistamovementisimportantforunderstanding thedevelopmentofthetransnationalsolidaritynetworkintheZapatistamovement,as thebeliefsofactivistsclearlyplayedanimportantroleinmotivatingthemtojointhis struggle.

Olesen(2005)identifiestwodifferentframes—theneoliberalinjusticeframe,andthe radicaldemocracymasterframe—whichresonatedstronglywitharangeofSMOsoutside ofMexicoandinspiredthemtojointheZapatistamovement.Inwhatfollows,Ifirst describeeachofthedominantframesusedintheZapatistamovement,anddiscussthe functionofeachframeintheZapatistamovement.Ithendemonstratetheuseofthe neoliberalinjusticeandradicaldemocracyframesinthecommuniqusandspeechesof SubcomandanteMarcosandtheEZLN.Igoontodemonstratetheresonanceofthese framesamongZapatistasolidarityorganizationsbyshowingthecoherencebetweenthe framingusedbytheZapatistasandtheframingusedintheadvocacystatementsand blogsofsolidarityorganizations.

Theneoliberalinjusticeframespeakstobotheconomicandpoliticalglobalization (Olesen2005).AccordingtoOlesen(2005),theneoliberalinjusticeframehighlightsthe impactsofneoliberalismatbothnationalandtransnationallevels.Itemphasizesthe lossofsovereignty,diversity,andidentityrelatedtoneoliberalism(Olesen2005).Moreover,theneoliberalinjusticeframeidentifiesneoliberalismastherootoftheZapatistas’ grievances.Assuch,theneoliberalinjusticeframecanbeseenasthedominantdiagnosticframeusedintheZapatistamovement.InMexico,theneoliberalinjusticeframe resonatedwiththeconcernsthatmanypeoplesharedregardingtheimpactsoftheNorth AmericanFreeTradeAgreement,includingthelossofsovereignty,theprivatizationof publicservices,andNAFTA’simpactonsmallfarmers,particularlyonmaizeproducers

whowouldbeunabletocompetewiththehigheryieldsproducedbyAmericanfarmers(Olesen2005).Theglobalizationofneoliberalismhasmeantthatneoliberaleconomic reformscanbefelt(albeitinverydifferentways)inmanyplacesoutsideofMexico,includingCanadaandtheUnitedStates.ThestrategicchoiceoftheEZLNtotargetNAFTA wasimportantinbridgingactivistsandorganizationsinCanadaandtheUSbecause, asmembersoftheagreement,itprovidedthemwithalinktothestruggleinChiapas (Olesen2005).Inadditiontothis,theneoliberalinjusticeframecapturedtheinterestof anumberofpre-existingorganizationsalreadymobilizingagainstneoliberalismpriorto thesigningofNAFTA(Olesen2005).Moreimportantly,however,thisframeresonated withtheideologicalbeliefsofactivistsoutsideofMexico.

TheneoliberalinjusticeframecanbeseeninmanyofthecommuniqusofSubcomandanteMarcosandtheEZLN.EventheearliestcommuniqusofMarcosspeakto theinjusticesrelatedtoneoliberaleconomicpolicies,citingNAFTAandglobalizationas therootoftheirstruggle.Thisisillustratedinthefollowingcommuniqureleasedin 1993,afullyearpriortotheEZLN’sformaldeclarationofwaragainsttheMexicanstate, inwhichtheEZLNidentifiesanumberofgrievancesrelatedtothelackofsocialservices suchashousing,healthcare,andeducation,associatedwithneoliberaleconomicpolicies:

Wehavebeendeniedthemostelementalpreparationsotheycanuseusas cannonfodderandpillagethewealthofourcountry.Theydon’tcarethatwe havenothing,absolutelynothing,notevenaroofoverourheads,noland,no work,nohealthcare,nofoodnoreducation.Norareweabletofreelyand democraticallyelectourpoliticalrepresentatives,noristhereindependence fromforeigners,noristherepeacenorjusticeforourselvesandourchildren (EZLN“DeclarationoftheLacandnJungle”1994).

Inordertoincreasetheresonanceoftheneoliberalinjusticeframe,theEZLNusedframe bridgingtobroadenitsdescriptionoftheimpactsofneoliberalismonMexicotoinclude internationalaudiences(Olesen2005).Framebridgingreferstothe“linkingoftwoor moreideologicallycongruentbutstructurallyunconnectedframesregardingaparticular issueorproblem”(BenfordandSnow2000:624).Framebridgingisevidentinacommuniqureleasedin1996in“TheFirstDeclarationofLaRealidad”inwhichtheZapatistas framedneoliberalismasawaragainsthumanity,statingthat“re-named‘neoliberalism,’ thehistoriccrimeoftheconcentrationofprivileges,wealthandimpunitiesdemocratizes miseryandhopelessness.Anewworld-wariswaged,butnowagainsttheentirehumanity...”(inOlesen2005:137).Theresonanceoftheneoliberalinjusticeframecanbeseen intheadvocacystatements,articles,andblogentriesofmanysolidarityorganizations, astheyfrequentlyidentifyneoliberalism,andcapitalismmoregenerally,asthesourceof theirstruggleandacknowledgethatitunitesthemwiththeZapatistas.Forexample,RJ MaccaniquotesthespokespersonfromMovimiento,anorganizationofprimarilyMexicanimmigrantsinNewYorkCity’sEastHarlem,inablogentryontheUKZapatista SolidarityNetworkwebsite(2010):

We,fromNewYork,hadbegunorganizingourselvesforadignifiedlifeandso thatwewouldnotbedisplacedfromourhomes,andsawthatourproblems werecausedbythecapitalists,therich,thebadgovernments...Thuswesaw thatindifferentplaces,differentcountries,ourstruggleistoliveadignified

MSR2011,Vol.2

life.Andforthemthecapitalistswishtokickthemoffoftheirland...Ushere inNewYork,theminSanSalvadorAtenco,wearewagingseparatestruggles butagainstthesamething.Theproblemsthatwehavearecausedbythe samepeople,bycapitalism.

AccordingtoOlesen(2005),theradicaldemocracyframeservedasthemasterframe guidingtheZapatistamovement.Masterframesserveas‘broadideationalresources’that activistscandrawontoincreasetheresonanceofamovement’sframing,particularly whentheyarerootedinwidelysharedideasorbeliefs.Olesensuggeststhattheradicaldemocracymasterframecontainedbothalatentmasterframeandanactionmaster frame.Thelatentmasterframewasrootedinabstractideasaboutradicaldemocracy. Theradicaldemocracyframeembracedthecivilandpoliticallibertiesofliberaldemocracy,butextendeddemocraticprinciplestoincludesocialandeconomiclibertiesaswell (Olesen2005).Furthermore,fortheZapatistas,democracymeanttransformingpolitical,social,andeconomicstructuresaroundradicaldemocraticideasbyredistributing powerthroughhorizontaldecisionmakingprocessesbasedonconsensus,anddemandingtheaccountabilityofpoliticalofficialstocitizensrootedinthenotionof‘rulingby obeying’(Olesen2005).Olesen(2005)arguesthatradicaldemocracy,framedasanextensionofliberaldemocracy,resonatedmorestronglyamongactivistsoutsideofMexico thanasocialistdemocracyframewouldhaveinthepost-ColdWarcontext.Theradical democracyactionmasterframe,whilederivedfromtheideasofthelatentmasterframe, providedconcrete‘guides’forcontentioussocialactionbytranslatingideasaboutradical democracyintothegoalsoftheZapatistamovement(Olesen2005).Thus,theradical democracyactionmasterframedemandedtherestructuringofpolitical,social,andeconomicstructuresaroundhorizontaldecisionmakingandprinciplesofsocialandeconomic justice.Theradicaldemocracyframecanbeseenasthedominantprognosticframeas itofferedactivistsasolutiontotheZapatistas’grievances.TheZapatistas’useofthe radicaldemocracyframeisapparentinacommuniqubytheEZLNin2000:

FortheZapatistas,democracyismuchmorethantheelectoralcompetitionor thealternationofpower.Butitisalsotheelectoraldisputeifitisclean,equal, honest,andplural...Wewanttofindapoliticsthatgoesfromthebottomto thetop,oneinwhichto‘rulebyobeying’ismorethanaslogan,oneinwhich thepowerisnottheobjective...IntheZapatistaidea,democracyissomething thatisconstructedfrombelowandwitheveryone,includingthosewhothink differentlythanwedo.Democracyisanexerciseinpowerbythepeopleall thetimeandinallplaces(inOlesen2005:156).

TheEZLNusedframeamplificationtoincreasetheresonanceoftheliberaldemocracy frametoawideraudience.Frameamplificationreferstotheprocessofstrengthening existingframesbyembellishing,clarifying,oridealizingthemtomakethemresonate withawideraudience(BenfordandSnow2000).Thethrustoftheradicaldemocracy actionmasterframeinMexicowasaimedatincreasingautonomyforindigenouspeople inChiapas,aswellassecuringpoliticalrepresentationforallMexicans(Olesen2005). AlthoughithasbeensuggestedthattheZapatistaswerestrugglingforamoreradical formofdemocracythaniscommonoutsideofMexico(Callahan2004),byamplifyingthe radicaldemocracyframe,theZapatistaswereabletocapitalizeonwidelysharedvalues

MSR2011,Vol.2

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch84

surroundingtheimportanceofdemocracyinCanada,theUnitedStates,andEurope (Olesen2005).Theresonanceoftheradicaldemocracyframecanbeseeninthewords ofaDenver-basedsolidarityactivist:

Ithinkthatwhatwearetryingtodohereintermsoforganizingcoalitions foreconomicjustice,wearesayingweneedtogetthepowerintothehandsof grassrootsorganizationsandhavemoredemocraticformsofgovernment...(in Olesen2005:172).

Yashar(2007)notesthatindigenouspeoples’movementsincreasinglyusehumanrights discoursesastheyhavebecomemuchmorewidelyrecognizedandagreedupon,particularlywiththeILOConventiononIndigenousandTribalPeoplesinIndependentCountries, butsuggeststhattheyhavenotbeensuccessfulinmanyLatinAmericancountrieswithless thanadequatehumanrightshistories.Nevertheless,thistypeofframinghelpedtoexpand thetransnationalsolidaritynetworkoftheZapatistamovementbymobilizingthesupport ofhumanrightsorganizationsthathadalreadybeenactiveinMexicoasaresultofearlier humanrightsviolations.Theyactedascriticalalliestothemovementbyputtingpressure ontheMexicangovernmenttoupholdinternationalhumanrightsstandardsthroughout theconflict(Munoz2006).Thecommitmentofinternationalsolidarityorganizations toupholdinghumanrightsstandardsassociatedwithliberaldemocracycanbeseenina blogentryontheUKZapatistaSolidarityNetworkwebsite(2010):

Butfromhere,neitherintimidation,noreviction,norimprisonment,nordisappearances,normurders,canbehidden;fromhere,wewillstillbewatching andspreadinginformation,notonlyabouttheattackssufferedbyourcompanerosworkinginthedefenceofhumanrights,butalsoabouttheactsof aggressioncontinuallybeingexperiencedbyourcompanerosfromtheOther CampaignandfromtheZapatistas,thosepeoplebelowandtotheleft,who arebuildingandresisting,accordingtotheirowncustomsandtraditions,and whostruggleforthedestructionofthatsystem—onewhichwealsofightfrom here—Capitalism.Onceagain,wesaytheyarenotalone!

Inthisstatement,theUKZapatistaSolidarityNetworkidentifiesitsroleinthemovement asitseesitasahumanrightsobserver,andalsospeakstotheideologicalbasisofits supportofthemovement,whichitdescribesas‘inthedefenceofhumanrights.’Further, itreferstothe‘actsofaggression...beingexperiencedby...thosepeoplebelowandto theleft.’

Table1summarizesthekeyfeaturesofthedominantframesusedintheZapatista movement.Itillustratesthecorevaluesassociatedwitheachframe,thetargetaudience ofeachframe,thefunctionofeachframe,aswellasthestrategyusedtoexpandthe resonanceofeachframe.Insum,theneoliberalinjusticeframeemphasizedthedetrimentalsocialandeconomiceffectsofneoliberalism,andservedasthediagnosticframe intheZapatistamovementbyidentifyingneoliberalismasthesourceoftheirgrievances. Theradicaldemocracyframeofferedanalternativetoliberaldemocracybasedaround socialandeconomicjusticeand‘powerfrombelow,’andservedastheprognosticframe intheZapatistamovementbyidentifyingasolutiontotheproblemsassociatedwithneoliberalism.Theneoliberalinjusticeframeandradicaldemocracyframeresonatedwith MSR2011,Vol.2

activistsininternationalsolidarityorganizationsonideologicalgroundsand,takentogether,formedastrongsenseofZapatismo.TheZapatistasincreasedtheresonanceof theirframesthroughacombinationofframebridgingandframeamplificationincommuniqusdirectedtowardtheinternationalactivistcommunity.Theresonanceofthese framesisevidentinthesimilaritybetweentheframingusedintheadvocacystatements andblogentriesofsolidarityorganizations,andthecommuniqusoftheEZLN.The transnationalresonanceofZapatismoisparticularlyevidentinthewordsofoneZapatista solidarityactivist:

TheissuesthattheZapatistasaddressarenotspecifictoMexico.When theyspeaktohumandignity,theirmessageisuniversal.Whentheylisttheir specificdemands,theyaddressthebasicneedsofeveryhumanbeing...Their emphasisonthedignityofeveryhumanbeingbridgesissuesandbordersand opensthedoortoaworldwidemovementforhumanity(inOlesen2005:121).

PoliticalImaginationInTheZapatistaUprising

InadditiontothetwodominantframesidentifiedbyOlesen,Khasnabish(2008b)identifiesathirdaspectofZapatismothatwascriticaltothetransnationalresonanceofthe Zapatistamovement,whichhecalls‘politicalimagination.’Politicalimagination,accordingtoKhasnabish(2008b)referstoimaginationasbothanintegralaspectofcontentious action,andastheimpetusandprocessesinvolvedinarticulatingpoliticalprojectsthat haveemergedasaresultofZapatismo.Morespecifically,heusestheterm‘political imagination’todescribethe‘terrainofpossibility’thatemergedasaresultofinteractionsbetweennorthernactivistsandZapatismo.AccordingtoKhasnabish(2008b),the ‘politicalimagination’embodiedinZapatismoofferedactiviststhevisionofanewwayof MSR2011,Vol.2

Table1:CollectiveActionFramesoftheZapatistaMovement

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch86

doingthingsandasenseofhopethat‘anewworldispossible’,allofwhichencouraged activiststojoinintheZapatistastruggle.Hesuggeststhatpoliticalimaginationisnot anindividualact,butratheracollectiveexpressionofpossiblefuturescreatedthoughthe interactionbetweenactivistsandideas.Theframingofpoliticalimaginationcanbeseen intheEZLNcommuniqu“InourDreamsweHaveseenAnotherWorld,”releasedin 2001:

Inourdreamswehaveseenanotherworld,anhonestworld,aworlddecidedly morefairthantheoneinwhichwenowlive.Wesawthatinthisworldthere wasnoneedforarmies...Andinthisworldtherewasreasonandgoodwill inthegovernment,andtheleaderswereclear-thinkingpeople,theyruledby obeying.Thisworldwasnotadreamfromthepast...Itcamefromahead, fromthenextstepweweregoingtotake.Andsowestartedtomoveforward toattainthisdream...Anditwasforall.Thisiswhatwewant.Nothing more,nothingless(inKhasnabish2008b:152).

Thiscommuniquoffersaprovocativeandenticingalternativevisionforsocietyandis rootedinanimaginedfuture.TheresonanceofpoliticalimaginationamongactivistsoutsideofMexicocanbeseeninthewordsofasolidarityactivistinterviewedbyKhasnabish: “...ifwecan’timaginesomethingdifferent,wecertainlycan’tstartmovingtowardsit, wecan’tstartenactingitandthatistheplaceI’mmostterrified[of]...thatwe’lllose” (InKhasnabish2008b:174).Politicalimaginationwasimportanttothedevelopmentof thetransnationalZapatistanetworkbecauseitinspiredactiviststostruggleforchange byplantingimagesofhopeandanalternativevisionofsocietyintheheartsandminds ofactivists.Thus,whileIhaveonlybrieflyexaminedKhasnabish’sanalysisoftherole ofpoliticalimaginationintheformationofthetransnationalnetworkintheZapatista movement,hisanalysisclearlycontributestoourunderstandingofthedevelopmentof thisnetwork,andisimportanttomyanalysis.Anotherimportantfactorinexplainingthe developmentofthetransnationalnetworkandthetransnationalresonanceofZapatismo iscollectiveidentity.

IdentityInTheZapatistaUprising

Khasnabish(2008b)arguesthatZapatismoresonatedwithactivistsandSMOsbecause, inadditiontoresonatingwiththecommonlyheldbeliefsofactivists,theZapatistas putforthanumberofinvitationstointernationalsolidaritygroups,throughtheircommuniqus,toengageinthestruggle as Zapatistas,ratherthanasoutsideobservers. However,itisimportanttokeepinmindthattheZapatistasdidnotendorseasingle, homogenouscollectiveidentity,butinstead,supportedthenotionthatpeopleeverywhere couldbeZapatistasintheirownway,strugglingforchangeintheirownwaysandon theirownsoil(Callahan2004).Nevertheless,thissuggeststhatitisimportanttoconsidertheroleofidentityintheformationofthetransnationalsolidaritynetworkinorder tofullyunderstandtheresonanceofZapatismo.Indeed,itiswidelyrecognizedthata sharedcollectiveidentityisneededinordertomobilizeparticipantsinanysocialmovement(Bernstein2008).Moreover,socialmovementscholarshaveshownthatidentityis implicatedinallaspectsofsocialmovements,fromtheinitialmobilizationofparticipants, MSR2011,Vol.2

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch87

tosustainedparticipation,strategy,organizationalform,movementsuccess,andframing itself(Einwohner,Reger,andMyers2008).

Thecreationofacollectiveidentityisparticularlyimportantinsolidaritymovements sincesolidarityorganizationsare,bydefinition,notmotivatedbythebenefitsaccrued bytheorganizing(sometimescalled beneficiary:seeZaldandMcCarthy1977)group, andthereforebecomeinvolvedbasedontheirideologicalvaluesandbeliefs(Myers2008), suchasabeliefinthemoralrighteousnessofamovementoranideologicalcommitment topromoting‘justice’or‘equality.’Althoughtherewerecommoninterestsbetweenthe Zapatistasandtheorganizationsthatmadeupthetransnationalsolidaritynetwork,such asasharedinterestinreducingtheimpactofneoliberalpolicieslikeNAFTA,thesolidarity tiesweremoredeeplyrootedinideologicalbeliefssurroundinghumanrights,dignity, autonomy,equality,anddemocracy.Thiscanbeseeninthe“Manifesto”ofPeoples’ GlobalAction,atransnationalsolidarityorganizationformedin1998:

Weassertourwilltostruggleaspeoplesagainstallformsofoppression.But wedonotonlyfightthewrongsimposedonus.Wearealsocommittedto buildinganewworld.Wearetogetherashumanbeingsandcommunities,our unitydeeplyrootedindiversity.Togetherweshapeavisionofajustworldand begintobuildthattrueprosperitywhichcomesfromhumanempowerment, naturalbounty,diversity,dignityandfreedom(Peoples’GlobalAction1998).

Insayingthis,thePeoples’GlobalActionassertsthattheircommitmenttothemovement isrootedin‘avisionofajustworld’basedon‘humanempowerment,naturalbounty, diversity,dignityandfreedom.’

VertaTaylorandNancyWhittier(1992)suggestthat“...collectivepoliticalactors donotexistdefactobyvirtueofindividualssharingacommonstructurallocation;they arecreatedinthecourseofsocialmovementactivity”(109-110).Theyproposethat threefactors—boundaries,consciousness,andnegotiation—actasanalytictoolsforunderstandingtheprocessofconstructingcollectiveidentities.Iarguethatacollective Zapatistaidentity,rootedinaglobalconsciousness,wasanintegralaspectofthetransnationalresonanceoftheZapatistastruggle.Inwhatfollows,Ibrieflydiscusseachofthese factors,andthengoontoshowhowboundariesandconsciousnesscanbeappliedtothe constructionofacollectiveZapatistaidentitythroughtheframingeffortsoftheEZLN, andparticularly,throughthecommuniqusofSubcomandanteMarcos.

Boundariespromoteanawarenessofthecommonalitiessharedamongsocialmovement participantsthatdistinguishthemfromthedominantgroup(TaylorandWhittier1992). Theboundariesofidentityareconstructedinpartthroughdiagnosticframing,inwhich thein-group,or‘us’isdistinguishedfromtheout-group,or‘them,’aswellasthrough theongoingprocessofaffirmingandreaffirmingidentitythroughsocialinteractionwith movementparticipants.WithintheZapatistamovementboundarieswerestrategically stretchedtocreatea‘globalidentity’thatallowedactiviststoseethemselvesasaunified group,whichincreasedtheresonanceofZapatismo.AccordingtoKhasnabish(2008b),the Zapatistasofferedactiviststheopportunityto‘readthemselvesin’asZapatistas.Thiscan beseenasanexampleofhowtheboundariesoftheZapatistaidentitywerestrategically stretchedtoincludeactivistsandorganizationsoutsideofMexico.Thedeliberateness withwhichthiswasdoneisclearinanoftcitedquoteofSubcomandanteMarcos:“...if youwanttoseewhoMarcosis,seewho’shiddenbehindthemask,thentakeamirror MSR2011,Vol.2

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch88

andlookatyourself.ThefaceyouseetherewillbethefaceofMarcos,becauseweareall Marcos”(inOlesen2005:116).Thisisanexcellentexampleofboundaryframingthat implorestheaudience(whetherlocallyortransnationally)toseethemselvesasnotonly Zapatistas,butasanimportantpartoftheZapatistamovement.Theextenttowhich Marcos’framing—thatis,hisinvitationtojoinintheZapatistas’struggleasZapatistas— resonatedwithawideraudienceissummedupbeautifullybyonesolidarityactivist:

[W]edidn’tmarchthewaypeoplelikeushadinthe1970sand1980s,saying we’reagainstthewarinthesouth,wesupportthosepeopledownthere;we marchedandsaidweareZapatistasandthewarisrighthereunderourfeet... (inKhasnabish2008b:141).

Consciousnessreferstotherealizationthatagroupsharescommoninterestsbasedon grievanceswhichresultfromstructural,culturalorsystematiccausesratherthanpersonal failings.Consciousnessisimportanttothedevelopmentofacollectiveidentitybecauseit enablesparticipantstoestablishnewexpectationsconcerningtheirtreatmentorrolein relationtothedominantgroup,whichenablesthemtomobilizearoundthoseexpectations (TaylorandWhittier1992).TaylorandWhittier(1992)suggestthatconsciousnessis developedthroughanongoingprocessinwhichparticipantsre-evaluatethemselvesand theirexperiences,andiscommunicatedthroughthespeeches,writingsandothersocial movementpublicationsthatexistwithinasocialmovement.AccordingtoOlesen(2005), theformationoftransnationalnetworksrequiresthedevelopmentofaparticularkindof consciousness,thatis,a‘globalconsciousness,’inwhichactivistshaveanunderstanding oftheworldasaunifiedwhole.Aglobalconsciousnesswascriticaltothedevelopmentof acollectiveZapatistaidentitybecauseitenabledactiviststoseethemselvesasaunified groupworkingtowardsharedgoalsaspartofacommonstruggle.Effortstocreatea globalconsciousnesscanalsobeseeninmanyofMarcos’communiqus,suchashis 2001statementin“FlowerslikeHopeareHarvested”:

Weknowwehavebrothersandsistersinothercontinents.Weareunitedbya worldorderthatdestroysnationsandcultures...Todaywesufferanewworld war,awaragainstallpeoples,againsthumanity,againstculture,against history.Itisaninternationalwar,ofMoneyversusHumanity,carriedout byahandfuloffinancialinstitutions...Nowthisinternationalterroriscalled neoliberalism...(MarcosinKhasnabish2008b:55).

Throughthiscommuniqu,theEZLNattemptedtoraisetheglobalconsciousnessof peopleoutsideofMexicobyreferringtoneoliberalismas‘awar...againsthumanity’and as‘aninternationalwarofMoneyversusHumanity.’Moreover,thiskindofframingresonatedwithmanysolidarityactivistswhojoinedthemovementonideologicalgrounds. Forinstance,oneactivistdemonstratedhowthiskindofframinghelpedtofosteracollectiveZapatistaidentityamongsolidarityactivistswhichallowedactiviststoparticipate inthestruggleasZapatistasintheirownways:

...ifyoucontinuetogothroughalltheeloquentreadings[oftheZapatistas],yougo,waitaminute!IcanbeaZapatistatoo!...Weallsufferthe samethings...indifferentwaysandwecanchangethemindifferentways(in Khasnabish2008b:147).

MSR2011,Vol.2

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch89

Finally,negotiationdescribestheprocessbywhichsocialmovementsseektochangesymbolicmeaningsbyrecognizingthatmostdailyinteractionsbetweendominantandsubordinategroupsreinforceunequalpowerrelationsandreaffirmnegativeconceptionsof thesubordinategroup(TaylorandWhittier1992).Socialmovementgroupsandactivists attempttoresistthenegativedefinitionsthathavebeenascribedbythedominantgroup, andredefinethemselvesinawaythatdemandschangethroughthenegotiationoftheir identitywithinpersonalandpoliticalsettings(TaylorandWhittier1992).Negotiation willbemostevidentinprognosticframing,inwhichSMOsorleadersdefinethesolutiontotheproblem,particularlywherethemovement’smaingoalsaredirectlyrelatedto changesinidentity(suchasinthecivilrightsorwomen’smovement).However,because thesolidaritynetworkwasnotprimarilyorganizedaroundidentityinthissense(although theZapatistasinMexicodidorganizearoundbothindigenousandMexicanidentities), butwasratherrootedinmoreideologicalgrounds,thisaspectofTaylorandWhittier’s modelisnotasrelevanttotheresonanceoftheframingofZapatismo.

Conclusion

Inthispaper,Isuggestthatidentityboundarieswerestrategicallystretchedtocreatea ‘globalidentity’thatallowedactiviststoseethemselvesasaunifiedgroup.Ipropose thatthisglobalidentitywasrootedina‘globalconsciousness’thatenabledactiviststo recognizesimilaritiesbetweenthestrugglesfacingactivistsinChiapasandthestruggles facingactivistsinotherpartsoftheworld,andthatallowedthemtorecognizecommon goalsforchange.However,amorethoroughanalysisoftheroleofcollectiveidentityin theZapatistamovementisneededinordertogainabetterunderstandingoftheextent towhichacollectiveZapatistaidentitywascreatedwithintheZapatistamovementand thedegreetowhichthisidentityresonatedamongactivistsoutsideofMexico.Future researchwouldalsodowelltoexaminethestrengthsandlimitationsofglobalcollective identitieswithintransnationalsocialmovements.

ThroughoutthispaperIhaveattemptedtoshedlightonwhytheZapatistauprising ledtotheformationofatransnationalsolidaritynetwork.Ihavearguedthatthetransnationalsolidaritynetworkwasformedasaresultofthestrategicframingof‘Zapatismo’ throughtheneoliberalinjusticeandradicaldemocracyframesidentifiedbyOlesen(2005), thepoliticalimaginationidentifiedbyKhasnabish(2008b),andacollectiveZapatista identity.Bydrawingonframingtheory,thisanalysisoffersausefulwayoftheorizing therelationshipbetweenZapatismoandtheformationofthetransnationalZapatistasolidaritynetworkbyemphasizingtheconnectionbetweentheideas,beliefs,andidentities expressedinthecommuniqusoftheEZLN,andtheideas,beliefs,andidentitiesofactivistsoutsideofMexico.Moreover,thisanalysisprovidesamorecompletepictureofthe resonanceofZapatismobyconsideringtheroleofdominantframes,politicalimagination and collectiveidentity.ThepoliticalvisionoftheZapatistashasinspiredactiviststojoin inthestrugglefordemocracyandagainstneoliberalism,andindeed,criesof“YaBasta!” canstillbeheardfarbeyondthebordersofChiapas.

NicoleGulewitsch isanMAstudentinthedepartmentofsociologyandanthropology attheUniversityofGuelph.HercurrentresearchfocusesonalliancesbetweenIndigenous

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch90

peoplesandenvironmentalmovementorganizations.Pleasedirectallcorrespondenceto NicoleGulewitsch.Email: gulewitn@uoguelph.ca

References

Benford,R.andD.Snow.2000.“FramingProcessandSocialMovements:AnOverview andAssessment.” AnnualReviewofSociology26 :611-39.

Bernstein,M.2008.“TheAnalyticDimensionsofIdentity:APoliticalIdentityFramework.”Pp.277-301in IdentityWorkinSocialMovements,editedbyJ.Reger,D. Myers,andR.Einwohner.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

Callahan,M.2004.“ZapatismoBeyondChiapas.”Pp.217-228in GlobalizeLiberation: HowtoUproottheSystemandBuildaBetterWorld,editedbyD.Solnit.SanFrancisco:CityLightsBooks.

dellaPorta,D.andTarrow,S.2005. TransnationalProtestandGlobalActivism. Lanham: RowmanandLittlefield.

EZLN.1994.“DeclarationoftheLacandnJungle.”AccessedDecember2010at: http: //www.ezln.org/documentos/1994/199312xx.es.htm.

Einwohner,R.,J.RegerandD.Myers.2008.“IdentityWork,Sameness,andDifference inSocialMovements.”Pp.1-20in IdentityWorkinSocialMovements,editedbyJ. Reger,D.MyersandR.Einwohner.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

Khasnabish,A.2008a.“ATearintheFabricofthePresent.” JournalfortheStudyof Radicalism2 (2):27-52.

.2008b. ZapatismoBeyondBorders:NewImaginationsofPoliticalPossibility. Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress.

McAdam,D.2003.“BeyondStructuralAnalysis:TowardamoreDynamicUnderstandingorSocialMovements.”Pp.281-298in SocialMovementsandNetworks: RelationalApproachestoCollectiveAction ,editedbyM.Diani,andD.McAdam. NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

MunozJ.2006.“InternationalOpportunitiesandDomesticProtest:Zapatistas,Mexico,AndtheNewWorldEconomy.” SocialMovementStudies5 (3):251-274.

Myers,D.2008.“AllyIdentity:ThePoliticallyGay.”Pp.167-188in IdentityWork inSocialMovements,editedbyJ.Reger,D.MyersandR.Einwohner.Minneapolis: UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

Noakes,J.andH.Johnston.2005.“FramesofProtest:ARoadMaptoaPerspective.”Pp. 1-32in FramesofProtest:SocialMovementsandtheFramingPerspective,editedby H.JohnstonandJ.Noakes.Lanham:RowmanAndLittlefieldPublishers,Inc.

Olesen,T.2004.“TheTransnationalZapatistaSolidarityNetwork:AnInfrastructure Analysis.” GlobalNetworks4 (1):89-107.

MSR2011,Vol.2

ZapatismoandInternationalSolidarityNetworksNicoleGulewitsch91

.2005. InternationalZapatismo:TheconstructionofSolidarityintheAgeof Globalization. NewYork:ZedBooksLtd.

Peoples’GlobalAction.2010.“Manifesto.”AccessedDecember2010at: http://www. nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/en/pgainfos/manifest.htm

Taylor,V.,andN.Whittier.1992.“CollectiveIdentityinSocialMovementCommunities: LesbianFeministMobilization.”Pp.104-132in FrontiersinSocialMovementTheory, editedbyA.MorrisandC.Mueller.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress.

UKZapatistaSolidarityNetwork.2010.Website.AccessedDecember2010at: http: //glasgowchiapassolidaritygroup.wordpress.com/.

Washbrook,S.2007.“Introduction—TheChiapasUprisingof1994:HistoricalAntecedentsandPoliticalConsequences.”Pp.1-33in RuralChiapasTenYearsafter theZapatistaUprising ,editedbyS.Washbrook.NewYork:TaylorandFrancisLtd.

Yashar,D.2007.“ResistanceandIdentityPoliticsinanAgeofGlobalization.” TheANNALSoftheAmericanAcademyofPoliticalandSocialScience610 :160-81.

Zald,M.,andJ.McCarthy.1977. TheDynamicsofSocialMovements:ResourceMobilization,SocialControl,andTactics. NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

ThispublishedarticleislicensedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercialNoDerivs3.0UnportedLicense.CopyrightforthisarticleisheldbyMcGillSociological Review.

MSR2011,Vol.2