‘This is not a movement of leaders, but of bases’
The APPO has never been an organization but rather the name for a movement. The current crisis does not represent a rupture in this convergence, between the actors or groups within the APPO, but rather, is a feature of the essence of the movement. It is the natural result of a process in which some of its actors have wanted to define this movement as if it were an organisation or a political party; pretending to appropriate for itself the right to represent the movement. The struggle of the APPO has not only been against the government of Ulises Ruiz, but against all authoritarianism remaining in the pueblos, neighbourhoods and social organizations themselves. This struggle against authoritarianism extends to many spheres, including, to use just one example, Section 22 itself, when, in their moment, the teachers repudiated the leadership of Rueda Pacheco.
In order to understand what is happening in Oaxaca, we need to return to its recent past. Firstly, we need to remember that we are the most culturally-diverse state in the country, with a majority indigenous population; of 570 municipalities, 418 are governed by internal organisational customs (assemblies). By means of the struggle forindigenous autonomy, a partial recognition of these systems of governance was achieved; nevertheless, the struggle continues for the full right to self-governance. This notwithstanding, Oaxaca is a state which, historically, has generated diverse social movements. Already in its past it has removed three governors from office, the last being at the end of the seventies. The six-year term of Jose Murat, the “governor” prior to Ulises Ruiz, ended in a politics of “money or lead”. In other words, you will be bought, or you will be punished. Similarly, prior to this, the term of Diodoro Carrasco also utilised heavy-handed tactics. Nevertheless, many pueblos, organisations and entire regions fought for their right to self-government; for example, Loxichas, Unión Hidalgo, San Blas Atempa, Xanica and Benito Juárez in the Chimalapas. Social organisations suffered political repression from state goverments. In short, the movement and parts of the struggle lived through a phase of demobilization and disarticulation. In this tense scenario, Oaxaca saw, for the first time, the presence of a “centre left” candidate who had been an apparatchik of the state government, and who had run against Ulises Ruiz for the position of governor.
In evident fraud, and in the midst of popular discontent, Ulises Ruiz arrived in power with the slogan “no marches, blockades or encampments” and, in an authoritarian and clearly pre-meditated action, moved the executive and legislative seat of power to a town half an hour from the capital. Continuing along these lines, the government constructed their judicial city in the municipality of Reyes Mantecon. In this manner, they paved the way to convert Oaxaca into a city at the service of tourism, a sort of colonial Disneyland, continuing with a series of renovations to remodel the urban landscape; most visibly in the Zocalo, where, flushed with money and power, they cut down trees and raised spaces to create areas more in tune with the extravagant tastes of the governmental class. Furthering the multi-million theft of cultural heritage and governmental funds, the government also gave the go-ahead to the expansion of the bus terminal into the Jalatlaco barrio, one of the oldest in the city, thus generating a great unrest that gave birth to the citizen council in this neighbourhood.
In addition, the government of Ulises Ruiz began a campaign of aggression against the newspaper Noticias, including the occupation of heir warehouses and buildings; revenge for its director’s support for he opposition candidate who had already won in the minds of the people.
It was in this context that Section 22, representing the Oaxacan teachers, began on the 15th May, as they do every year, to issue a series of demands, such as higher wages to cope with the higher cost of living. This mobilization of the teachers was not supported by the people, for various reasons. Nevertheless, when the state police entered the Zocalo on the 14th June to evict them through brutal repression, it provoked an uprising of spontaneous solidarity, on a scale that had never seen before.
Political parties and vertical organisations
On the 5th of August 2007, the people of Oaxaca returned to show that they are not prepared to participate, and far less to believe, in bourgeois and capitalist “democracy”. And they did so with a greater forcefulness than on previous similar occasions; the day of the elections for the state congress saw more than 80% of the population abstain. In the face of these undeniable facts, some detractors prefer to search for excuses for what happened, despite understanding perfectly well the message sent by the people through their massive and deliberate electoral abstention: that nobody believes any longer in institutions which serve, in the name of the people, those politicians and their friends, working in favour of private interests.
We do not care about the lawsuits against the fraud of the PRI, nor the disputes between the parties over the supposed legality or illegality of a congress made up solely of members of one party which serves only one interest. Rather, we believe that what really matters is the fact that the system is a fraud in its totality. Is it not the case that we have here is a political system which gives power to people other than the citizens it supposedly represents, and that its intent is to legitimise that which only 20% of the electorate “chose”? This is without discounting further those who voted for the PRI under threats and tricks, bought votes, and without taking into account the falsification of figures. It is clear that the government knows they are illegitimate, and they know that the 5th of August represented another step forward for the Oaxacan people in their struggle to free themselves from tyranny and for respect of their dignity.
Currently in Oaxaca, the internal debate of the APPO and the social movement has polarised. And the mass media has accomplished its mission of clouding the motives of this debate: positioning at its’ whim, the “moderates” on the one side and the “radicals and intransigents” on the other. Conveniently, they emphasize the division between the electoral block of the APPO and those groups “out of control”, as they call them. But for us, there is no such simple division. On the contrary, the process of reorganisation is far more diverse and complex than that. There is no doubt that there are honest people who believe that participating and putting forward candidates can eliminate the tyranny in Oaxaca, or that proposing laws can change the relation of society to the State. Nevertheless, in a movement of movements such as that which has developed since 2006, we believe intuitively that the process has gone beyond cosmetic change and reform of so-called ‘democratic’ laws and institutions. What is being confronted here is a vision of ‘development’ and ‘progress’ which is poised to rob everything from us, and this is being challenged through the construction of extremely diverse paths toward a dignified and fair life, just as much in the countryside as in the city.
There are organisations that concentrate on the ‘democratisation’ of existing institutions. What is meant by this? For nearly two decades, talk of socialism has been abandoned in order to roll over to capitalism, and in this way began the ‘struggle’ in the name of ‘democracy’. However, if we are to understand this concept, it is necessary to re-examine its origin.
The original meaning of the word democracy comes from Greek and signified the “power of the people”. Needless to say, it now has nothing in common with its’ original meaning. Capitalism and its’ proponents have attempted to make us believe that the form of ‘democratic’ government it presents, supposdly based on the participation of the people in decision-making, was, and remains, the only form of political organisation, or at least the least imperfect. Yet, amongst the same Greeks from whom came the concept of democracy, that which was called “the people”, was nothing more than a class from ‘high society’, ‘enlightened’ because they were supposedly the only ones capable of deciding the common good. This they purported to do so, whilst simultaneously marginalising and oppressing the rest of the population. This form of politics that the rich and poweful call ‘democracy’ robs the people of their voice and of their capacity to make decisions over their own lives. This idea is based on the notion that the people ‘don’t know’ what they want and ‘don’t know how’ to govern themselves, and as such, constitutes one of the fundamental pillars used to justify the repression that supposedly serves to safeguard ‘law and order’ and ‘peace’.
However in Oaxaca, the majority of the people, and above all the indigenous pueblos, are already aware of this. In reality it has always been this way. And their response has always been the same: the full right to govern themselves, through methods which, whilst imperfect, attempt to subordinate power to collective decision. In the same way, the organizational practice and the spirit of the barricades during the popular mobilization also re-create the self-organisation that, in spite of the times of repression and alarm in which they took place, demonstrated a vitality and confidence in self-defence far removed from the sort of organization based on the ‘democracy’ that concentrates power and decision-making in the hands of a few.
Vertically-controlled organisations have attempted to appropriate and control the movement and impose their vision. These organisations betrayed the movement. They allied themselves with political parties which represent neither the struggle nor the principles generated in 2006. These opportunist organisations, such as the FPR and the FALP accepted the distribution of support and credit financed by the system, through proxies such as motor taxi licences and other crumbs. Many have been co-opted by the State and have returned to their habitual behaviour: their shady negotiations and receipt of resources as a sort of palliative to poverty, they institutionalize the struggle in order to regain their status as intermediaries between Power and the people. As such, the key challenge that faces these so-called civil organizations, which began as intermediaries and now have the opportunity to accompany this struggle for the people’s dignity, is clear.
It is evident that the structure of the APPO Council is not useful for the movement’s reorganisation. Neither the provisional leadership, nor the media leadership, directed the path of the movement. There cannot and should not be an imaginary structure, which from some office or hotel, deigns to make decisions on behalf of the pueblos of Oaxaca. We need to find forms of participation that guarantee the articulation of all the pueblos; what we have in common is many times more than what divides us. If our principles are upheld, and the respect is there to unite us in our diversity, it is possible to cross to the next stage in the struggle stronger and better organised. We do not forget the graffiti collectives that repeat in their slogans: This is not a movement of leaders, but of bases. The debate that seeks only changes in the law and ‘democratisation’ of existing institutions provokes the belief that all we can achieve is modifications in the law and that an ‘enlightened” minority will do the work. In terms of facts, laws are useless for the people from below; they are created for the powerful and rich. Over many years, we have become accustomed to seeing legislative assemblies as the centre of power, but we consider this to be a grave error caused by inertia or deceit. A superficial vision of history has made us believe that power comes to the people via the Parliament. Nevertheless, power resides in the people, and is entrusted momentarily, periodically, to those the people choose as their representatives.
All these arguments cannot make us renounce the importance of those “umbrella” laws that exist and contribute to the strengthening of previously debilitated processes of self-organisation in the pueblos and neighbourhoods; mainly in urban areas, due to individualisation and the development model which excludes the majority to benefit a few. Without a doubt, it is important to support the citizens with actions to revoke the mandate, the participatory budget, the referendum, the plebiscite and all the proposals approved in the Forum Constructing Democracy and Governability in Oaxaca, held by Section 22, the APPO, civil organizations, traditional authorities and individuals, in August 2006, in which more than 1000 people participated in reflecting on the changes that are required in Oaxaca.
Equally, we recognise the importance of the proposals of the Constitutive Congress of the APPO in November 2006 and the resolutions of the regional assemblies in 2007 in the framework of the movement. We also stress the importance of the regional assemblies such as the Istmo assembly held in Ixtepec, the Guelatao assembly in the North Sierra, as well as the Autonomies in Tlahuitoltepec Forum in the Mixe and the State Forum of Indigenous Pueblos.
Communality as resistance and liberation
In reality, the APPO Council does not represent the wide and diverse social movement. That which some call dispersion, is in fact the process of reorganisation taking place in various spaces and specific territories. A new phase is starting, the outcome of which no-one can predict. In the round tables and in the last plenary of the Third State Assembly, in which the electoral block did not participate, the APPO was defined as a movement of movements, its main organ as the General Assembly, and its principal characteristics as Communality and pluri-culturalism. The APPO has to fight from the bases for the construction of popular power. If it moves forward with concrete definitions, it will not be merely one resolution more, but a real construct that could restructure the APPO. The struggle then, is not only for the overthrow of the governor, but to create the conditions for autonomy and popular power in every corner of the state. These are some of the accords that came out of the Third Assembly. Although this assembly was not fortified and built on it is important that the communalist character of the movement was recognised; it clearly goes beyond what is being called the APPO or social movement. What is important now is an analysis from below and clarity in the changes we wish to see.
On the other side is the APPO of the streets, of the soul; those who identify themselves not with the name, but rather with the work to be done. Those who continue marching forward but who are often unseen, creating alternative types of organization through tianguis populares (popular markets), caravans, marches, meetings, building of compost toilets, vegetable gardens and the sharing of roles and knowledge. These are the invisible things that do not appear in the media, yet finally achieve a strong voice that generates human relations of a collective nature, which break through the structures of capitalist individualism.
The principal of Communality as a source of inspiration for the strength of the APPO and the social movement has been so important that it is necessary to focus on its meaning. Floriberto Díaz, an indigenous Oaxacan activist and intellectual proposed the concept from his experience with the indigenous pueblos, and to attempt to shed light on a way of life based on their communitarian model. Floriberto observed that Communality is built on four fundamental elements, which are indigenous laws: communal territory (use and defense of collective space), communal work (interfamilial through mutual aid and communal by means of ‘tequios’, gratuitous work carried out for the benefit of the community, communal power (participation in assemblies and in the carrying out of the various civil and religious offices that make up their governmental system) and communal recreation (participation in festivals and sponsorship thereof). This characteristic of the communities and indigenous pueblos’ political organisation is based on their own concept of power as service to the pueblo, and assemblies as political decision-making process. Jaime Luna says, “The meaning of power in indigenous populations is very different from a mestizo rural or urban world. In our communities the power is a service, the execution of an assembly´s norms, of the collective. In the other, it means the execution of decisions by the authority itself, elected though electoral mechanisms with little control by society. An authority in community is a employee in the service of all, an employee with no payment, he cannot make his own designs and when he must do so, it can only be realised after consultation. On the contrary, the political power in rural or urban mestizo societies is the possibility of executing their own ideas and satisfying their personal interests, no assembly exists”. Luna explains: “the assembly is the maximum authority in the community. It always works by consensus, but in some cases for practical reasons the vote is used. The election of the authorites does not reflect any political parties’ intentions because it is founded in prestige, in work”. This conception of power makes us understand that “our immediate obstacles are the political parties”.
From its conception, the idea of Communality has been related to the concept of autonomy, which is the exercise of the power of the people. Communality constitutes and creates the necessary conditions towards a full self-government. Benjamin Maldonado tells us that the idea of Communality as the governing principle of indigenous life, arises and is developed through means of discussion, agitation and mobilisation, although not as an ideology of combat but rather an ideology of identity, demonstrating that the indigenous specificity is their communal identity with its own ancient, historical and cultural roots, and from which it attempts to orientate the life of the people, as a People.
Communality is a concept understood by a large part of the teaching body and amongst indigenous Oaxacan intellectuals, through their experience in communities of which the majority are indigenous, as well as their exercises of systematizacion to explain their immediate reality. Communality, in its’ present context, does not indicate solely the recognition of our indigenous pueblos’ way of life and its influence on the inner life of the movement, but it is also a readiness to act critically and collectively against imposition, intolerance and an electoralism that seeks only to reproduce the same schemes of domination from which our people have suffered.
The proposal of Communality can be understood as the equality of rights and obligations of all members of a community to participate in the decision-making process (and where the community is headed), so as to enjoy its goods and produce.
In the APPO, this principle is recognised as the inspiration of the movement; the difficulty in its’ implementation in the Council was precisely that there was no defined territory. The city of Oaxaca and the offices in which the Council met did not permit each one of the pueblos, organisations and sectors to achieve consensus in the short, medium or long-term. But by this stage, many have been inspired by this proposal. What remains is to see what the people from the colonias and urban spaces have to say.
The reorganisation of the movement
It is necessary to peer a little into the future to visualise part of the profound change that is needed in Oaxaca, and which we all yearn for. What seems most realistic and likely to succeed, is if we continue with the regeneration of an opposition movement based on present Oaxacan reality, starting with the fact that no-one supports Ulises Ruiz Ortiz or his band of people. There are many difficult elements, but these could also serve as bridges linking a broader and more united movement, because the pressures suffered by the neighbourhoods and communities are very acute and the necessities of everyday life both intense and diversified. It is often observed that the initiatives to organize mobilizations and to present demands to the authorities do not truly reflect priorities or authentic needs, but rather circumstantial factors that attend to the urgent, but disregard the important.
It is thus necessary to reflect on action; if our movement is purely ideological or if we are a movement with a face and a heart which we intuit come from the profoundest depths or our way of thinking, feeling and acting, inherited from our ancestors, and which seeks the common good in We, who are the community. If this intuition is confirmed by all, we could define the constructive routes of action and learn from the past when, for lack of clarity in a project of the country, state, barrio, colonia or community, after the Revolution, the reformist bourgeoisie came to power. This is to say that in the past, the necessary time was not taken to reflect on proposals which would attack problems from the root to move beyond the established order and the chaos generated by the lack of a constructive programme.
It is an annoyance to many that new barricades flourish. Not exactly those of self-defense but more those of decision-making spaces of the communities, from which are born creative and novel forms of self-organisation. We believe that it will be from here, from the neighbourhoods and communities that the energy of change will emerge once again, as well as the strength necessary for this profound transformation. We must give this the necessary time, listen and engage in dialogue with all possible senses, and not only where ideologies, some already bankrupt, prevail.
We think that the social movement, the pueblos, colonias and barrios, in their diverse scenarios of struggle, in their declarations of regional assemblies or public manifestos, are building the power of the people to govern ourselves autonomously. Popular power and autonomy come together to build this path, but it is the way in which it has been built that has generated these differences. For us, what remains of the APPO Council does not advance with the same tempo as the people’s initiatives or actions. For that reason, the confusion outside our immediate communities has spread, and the richness of the process through which this movement journeys, as plural and diverse as society itself, has not been clearly shown.
All these problems notwithstanding, we wish to emphasise that the movement in Oaxaca remains alive, even after the repression of the 25th of November, where there were more than 25 deaths, and more than 300 compañeros incarcerated. There are disappearances, political and military harassment, and there are still political prisoners. It has become known that prior to 2006, there were more than 30 political prisoners. It is undeniable that as a result of this, people do not take to the streets as they did before, but it is also true that the APPO and the social movement have been unable to reach agreement in this period of reorganisation.
From before 2006, Oaxaca had more community radio stations than anywhere else in the country (more than 50), and more have since been appearing in different pueblos and communities. The number of Internet pages announcing actions and proposals of the movement have also grown. There are neighbourhood bakeries, organic gardens, and workshops for children, to which are invited many other collectives or individuals. These are just some examples of the many initiatives. In the continuance of this struggle, women have created other spaces, such as the Encuentro de Mujeres, in which neighbourhoods, collectives and organisations meet. At the moment, an artistic and cultural market is being held and used as a space for reorganisation in which organic vegetables, handicrafts, and other things are being sold. The demand for freedom for the political prisoners continues apace. And young graffiti artists from various collectives are meeting to reclaim public areas for political and artistic initiatives that generate exchange and spread the struggle further.
The Encuentro de Joveñes, made up of organisations, collectives and spaces of youth, organises caravans to pueblos and communities in resistance, to learn and exchange ways of resisting and how to mutually support one another. As well as this, there are different places of learning which generate spaces for reflection on the movement´s actions, capitalism, and how to realise different ways of life that regenerate scope for community in the city.
We are not romanticising. We say that on a march it is impossible to take decisions in assembly, and up till now there have only been marches or political actions that do not provide the opportunity for the people to give their opinion of what is happening and take on a role or obligation within the movement. By this, we do not mean to say that it was only in the barricades that assemblies were created. They were also convened in sectors of civil organisations and other spaces, such as the more than 10,000 assemblies that exist in Oaxaca, and which struggle towards a collective existence.
At present, in Mexico, we can identify three reference points still worthy of mention and of being paid attention to: the citizen´s movement headed by Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador, the Other Campaign initiated by the Zapatistas, and the APPO, or rather, the Oaxacan social movement. To us, it will be the last two, due to their historical depth, that will continue and endure, and without a doubt, live on as historical references of the social struggle in Mexico. For those that know Oaxaca through the APPO, it is necessary to look deeper into the historical memory of our state and to remember that it has always struggled. An elderly lady participating in the APPO said before the cameras: “We are not prepared to carry on resisting for another 500 years, we are fighting for our freedom”. Oaxaca, in its abundant regional, municipal and communal diversity, has its own stories of struggle to tell.
Meanwhile, the repression continues. Under the guise of security, the police presence has risen, and with it, petty crime, violent assaults and mob attacks. Intimidation against opposition continues and political prisoners are still held as hostages of the system. No form of police or military coercion, however, can weaken the firm will of the people. From the depths of our heritage we have learnt to overcome fear. We have learnt to heal ourselves.
We believe that the struggle is with and comes from the pueblos, neighbourhoods and communities, in the organisation beyond the system and the political parties, whose interests will always lie in achieving and maintaining power. We believe that the so called “democratic” structures are designed precisely to impede what profound change can bring, because the people themselves are their only legitimate representatives and only a political organisation arisen from plurality and based on freedom, can realise the profound transformation that all the people of Oaxaca long for.
This article was prepared for a special edition of the magazine “La Guillotina” dedicated to the topic “Re-thinking the Left in Mexico”.
*Silvia Gabriela Hernandez. Sociologist. Political expressant for the facts of the 16th of July Official Gueleguetza. Member of VOCAL.
Kiado Cruz. Social researcher and communicator. Editor of Oaxacalibre.
Rubén Valencia. Social activist and researcher. He has been an APPO Councillor. Collaborator in VOCAL and Universidad de la Tierra in Oaxaca.