EZLN, the favorite example of Anarchists and revisionists of an alternative to Marxism-Leninism, has now collapsed due to lack of solid theoretical fundamentals.
Marxism-Leninism is the consistent science of the liberation of the working masses, and no viable alternatives have been seen to date.
article in English https://apnews.com/article/mexico-indigenous-zapatista-rebels-violence-04006895dc4bd430b4b957d459551a12
You're jumping the gun and honestly being a bit smug about it. It says in the article "new structure of Zapatista autonomy", which makes this sound less like a collapse and more like a cryptic announcement that they're just restructuring.......
......Noooow it could well be that the restructuring ends up bringing the movement closer to Marxism-Leninism, but y'know we'll cross that bridge when we get there. For now it's like, don't diss them, OK? The Zapatistas are our friends.
Seems they do complain about increased pressure from the government and cartels on them, accuse USA of being the cause of that, and the need to reorganise themselves to resist it.
So, even at the best possible interpretation it still means they are going in the opposite direction to anarchism, so the comment is correct. And they ARE dissolving their current organs so the headline is not incorrect too.
As they say, everyone either lives long enough to become an ML or they die. There's a reason they call it the immortal science.
It sounds a bit more than just restructuring though, these bits in particular talk about dissolution
it was decided to dissolve the Zapatista Rebel Autonomous Municipalities (MAREZ) and the Good Government Boards. The Caracoles remain, but they will remain closed to the outside
after a long and profound critical and self-critical analysis,… it was decided to dissolve the … Autonomous Municipalities and the Good Government Boards. We will discuss the reasons and process by which this decision was made little by little
I'm not trying to be glib about this, and obviously it would be a net positive if Zapatistas managed to succeed. However, what happened highlights the problem with the approach of building autonomous communities with the larger context of a capitalist state. And this is precisely the approach I see Anarchists advocate for.
Long term success is only possible when the end goal is for the workers to build their own state and to be able to defend it from both internal and external threats. The same problems that Zapatistas encountered will also be encountered by other movements based on similar principles.
If im reading the context as to why they have disvolved as well it seems like they are worried about the cartel mostly; it must be hard having an autonomous zone when you have state sanctioned death cults armed with the latest in american military equipment riding around doing what they want; they specifically said that they advise people not travel to attend there latest conference as the territory is too destabilized, but they havent actually said what the next form of organizing will look like.
Its likely best to wait till post-meeting when they have laid out what the future looks like for them before making any definitive statements on there collapse.
Yeah. Considering how many Marxist parties have failed to even get off the ground, there's no high horse to even sit on here.
we aren't on a high horse about this, I don't think any marxist here is happy about the Zapatistas being gone
They aren’t gone, they’re reorganizing in a more centralized way fit to fight the cartels, as far as I can tell.
Although yes, I will be more happy once I see such reorganization complete
Terminally online dipshits actually read the Article challenge, status: impossible
The irony of reading hexbears and lemmygradtsy posting about how "the Zapatistas have collapsed" literally right after I saw a comment on here about how Redditors "don't actually read news, but just vibe over headlines", I swear...
Their official statement:
it was decided to dissolve the Zapatista Rebel Autonomous Municipalities (MAREZ) and the Good Government Boards. The Caracoles remain, but they will remain closed to the outside
after a long and profound critical and self-critical analysis,.. it was decided to dissolve the ... Autonomous Municipalities and the Good Government Boards. We will discuss the reasons and process by which this decision was made little by little
The region will remain in the hands of the Mexican state. Dissolution of the structures must be interrogated for conceding to the current conditions of power in Chiapas. Increases in federal troops and deepening of the existing capitalist economic dependency.
You've hacked up the quote to show only the parts you want to show. The rest of the paragraph you quoted reads as follows:
We will tell you the reasons and process by which this decision was made little by little in the following texts. I can only tell you that this evaluation, in its final phase, began about 3 years ago. We will also explain to you what the new structure of Zapatista autonomy is like and how it has been developing.
As others in this thread have been saying.... They're restructuring to address the situation with the cartels. We'll have to see what that looks like, and if it will work. But it's dishonest to characterize this as a collapse, as though they're dissolving these political organs, and nothing else. Which they're clearly saying isn't the case.
As others in this thread have been saying… They’re restructuring to address the situation with the cartels. We’ll have to see what that looks like, and if it will work.
I'm going to predict that it will involve some hierarchy and authority, inevitably.
And I'm sure it will. But it feels super weird to me that this is being used to dunk on anarchists.
The Zapatistas suffer from a problem of ideological eclecticism. There are MLs, Maoists, Anarchists, liberals, and indigenous nationalists all tied up in that movement, and it can't be easily pinned down.
I wish I could find it, but I once saw an interview with Subcomandante Marcos where the interviewer asks him about international support, and he gives a somewhat exasperated sigh and a knowing look to the camera and says "yes, from the Anarchists".
There's a clear feeling from the Zapatistas, that while they're grateful for the support from western anarchists, they're also frustrated by this simplification of who and what they are by westerners.
So it just feels gross and weird to me, that one group of western leftists is using the very real, existential, struggle of a revolutionary movement (no matter how flawed), as an excuse to dunk on another group of western leftists.
Idk, maybe log off, actually
If you see me pointing out that lack of a solid foundation leads to socialist projects dissolving as a dunk on anarchists, then that kind of says it all.
I don't see any dunking on anarchists. I see people celebrating progress.
From the OP:
EZLN, the favorite example of Anarchists and revisionists of an alternative to Marxism-Leninism, has now collapsed due to lack of solid theoretical fundamentals.
From another comment:
Got in an argument with an anarchist who was pro-Zapatista and called me a redfash tankie. I doubt this will sway him in the slightest.
There's clearly a dishonest interpretation of what's going on, with a revolutionary movement in the global south, being used by western leftists to dunk on other western leftists.
Dunking on? Or exulting in being proven right?
I don't personally buy this false equivalence that there are two western leftist groups engaged in a zero-sum game of one-upmanship. I see this as yet another demonstration of the futility of western anarchist cult-like thought and therefore progress being made. There are very real contradictions being resolved for those who want to see them.
The western anarchists I know in real life have moved from backing the Nazis in Ukraine to demanding condemnation of Hamas, to today whingeing about ML's because of this story. We are not the same. But I guess they're no true anarcho-Scots.
It appears you don’t understand that the Zapatistas are not in fact anarchists.
It appears then you think everyone in this thread is going off half cocked.
they use some anarchist method, of which have collapsed
Have you noticed that this part of the thread has become invisible if you open the main thread?
you're on lemmygrad, we are a sectarian instance, we are Marxist Leninists
why wouldn't we not criticize anarchism?
I've "hacked up" the quote to show the relevant parts of what actually happened in tangible terms. They're dissolving because they tried to create autonomy within the context of an oppressive capitalist state, and that was never going to be sustainable. You can keep pretending this isn't a collapse, but at that point you're the one being intellectually dishonest and avoiding admitting the actual reality of what this "restructuring" means.
That's sad to hear. I hope they can restructure themselves to keep their state going without falling back to the capitalist regime.
Celebrating when our indigenous comrades suffer a setback in self-determination is not a good look. As MLs we should support their fight against Capital even if it doesn't precisely follow doctrine. There's much to be learned from Zapatismo.
The Zapatistas don't even call themselves Anarchists or claim n Anarchist lineage. Don't be smug against them just to own terminally online anarchists
Obviously it would be better if they could succeed, but it's also important to recognize that what we're seeing was entirely predictable. It's important to look at both the positive and the negative aspects of the approach critically in order to learn to avoid the same pitfalls in the future.
And while it's true that there is no direct lineage between Zapatistas and western Anarchists, it's clear that a lot of the ideas and methods are compatible. Hence, the problems that Zapatistas ran into will also be encountered by other movements founded on similar principles.
My main point was that long term liberation cannot be achieved by carving out autonomous regions within a capitalist state. The workers must take charge of the state itself. So far, ML approach has been the only reliable way to achieve that.
Ok fair, yes. The issue of how to survive long term when there's a hostile state threatening and surrounding you has genuinely been one of my biggest reservations about Anarchism as a whole and is why I come down in favor of having a state
Yogthos is just pointing out how a Workers state must be constructed for the most likely chance of survival. He wasn't gloating.
And who's to say Zapatismo can't Evolve like other branches of socialist ideology?
There should no one be celebrating or going "I told you so", we need more unity and we can learn from one another
it seems they're just moving toward what Marxists Leninists are doing
I don't think anybody is saying that, and we all hope that Zapatismo can and will evolve based on their current experience.
At the very least I hope they take notes from the ML approach, or arrive to a similar one all on their own. I don't think there's anything wrong with Zapatismo evolving in its own unique way, but if they're going to survive as a movement then they have to adopt methods that.
Got in an argument with an anarchist who was pro-Zapatista and called me a redfash tankie. I doubt this will sway him in the slightest.
I don't think some realize that when you get rid of the anarchist methods in favor of more centralized ML ones, that fundamentally makes it not any sort of anarchist adjacent movement. Which is what I think Yogthos is saying in relation to that.
Marxism Leninism is the correct path, tested by blood and time. Its sad to see modern communism having to retread old ground.
Although yeah, it always sucks to see any indigenous project crumble, anarcho-communist or no.
Im so sad people can be happy about this kind of failure. This is why i hated irl activism. Its just a sea of people sabotaging you and your own underlings going behind your back to sabotage your allies. Theyll then celebrate, call you some sort of name, and call your boss to accuse you of being a child molester because how dare you ban them for groping someone at a meeting.
Did i get fired? No, because i have never been accused of being a child molester before the baseless accusation by the marxist leninist groper that hated how we accepted help from anarchists to feed homeless people.
Im drunk
I was sharing a story from my life to make a point but i went full Grandpa Simpson
My job drug tests and i refuse to do weed through any method other than shoving gummies up my ass. One time i thought i was shoving gummy bears up my ass, but my husband comes in and informs me that they had weed in them. I had just passed my drug test but i had work later that day. I knew i was going for a ride.
After a fairly stressful drive to work i emptied the gummies in a bathroom trash can (i refuse to associate toilets with my sex stuff because sex is a beutiful thing between man and man, not the dirty fulfillment of a biological function.
Its always really disturbed at how sex has been commodified in our culture. They think that its a toy to be bought, instead of an activity to share.
Now, my story begins in 19-dickety-two. We had to say "dickety" cause that Kaiser had stolen our word "twenty". I chased that rascal to get it back, but gave up after dickety-six miles…
has now collapsed due to lack of solid theoretical fundamentals.
lol. k
if you're expecting pro 'anarchist methods', you shouldn't be in the Marxist Leninist instance
your reply is bad because it lacks solid theoretical fundamentals
all smart ass comments aside, im mostly throwing shade at OP for how ridiculous they sound.
the Zapatista movement, which lasted for 40+ years 1/2 the USSR, and isn't even gone just restructuring, completely collapsed because they didn't read enough theory!!!!
OP is perpetuating negative ML stereotypes in a big way.
