Re: AUT: Sylvie DeNeuve and Charles Reeve on EZLN

["Geoffrey J McDonald" <geosophia@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Monty,
	Many militia-types do claim to oppose racism and sexism, the US state,
transnationals, etc. etc. (Last year Debbie Nathan wrote some excellent
articles on the Republic of Texas group--which she got to know
personally--and found them at pains to express political correctness) My
point is that we tend to scrutinize these claims a lot more critically when
they're close to home. And its been my impression that the Zapatista
groupies are less willing to apply these critical standards.
	Some Mexican anarchists I know have expressed contempt for those U.S.
enthusiasts of the EZLN who ignore the guerrillas in southern Guerrero.
Their issues are substantially the same, yet there aren't swarms of leftist
tourists descending on that state. The reason is that they don't have
public relations savvy.
	Geoff
     	



> In a message dated 98-02-27 22:40:18 EST, you write:
>
> << Here in
>  the US, organizations of landless farmers who march around in the woods
and
>  espouse nationalism (also in a mythicized version of original
revolutionary
>  purity) are rightly derided by the left as manifestations of
desperation,
>  political backwardness, even fascism.  >>

> But this comment offends me: if the "landless farmers" opposed racism,
> supported women's struggles, involved the community in detailed decision-
> making processes, opposed the actual practice of capitalism as carried
out in
> their area, opposed the state and the US state and the transnationals,
> organized to create methods of production that are not capitalistic,
etc., all
> of which are done by the zapatista communities, don't you think you might
> support them -- even if you did not think they were perfect?
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---


     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---