Marx, Foucault, Neo-Zapatismo
Chapter Five: The Teaching(s) of Neo-Zapatismo: Counter-power(s), Resistance(s), Autonomy(s)
We think the problem of power should be reassessed… We believe that if we reconsidered the premises of how we see power, the problem of power, stating that we didn’t want to ‘seize’ it, this would lead to another way of doing politics…
Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, “Participation in Panel I of the First Intercontinental Congress for Humanity and Against Neoliberalism,” July 30, 1996
After all the arguments developed thus far, it is now time to ask: How is the complex problem of power presented and resolved within the neo-Zapatista worldview? What is the specific theory of power put forth by Mexican neo-Zapatismo? What does it contribute, in theoretical and analytical terms, to the reflections developed by Karl Marx and Michel Foucault?←95 | 96→
Before we can answer these important questions, we must first clarify three issues for propaedeutic purposes. First, we must define the essential nature of neo-Zapatismo, especially with respect to the major historical precedents that gave way, through complex synthesis, to this exceptional contemporary anti-systemic movement. Second, we must clarify how neo-Zapatismo defines “theory”—and the relationship between theory and practice, popular knowledge, and the currently dominant hierarchy of knowledge. Finally, we must determine the real ways in which power and powers existed prior to 1994, and how they exist now, both within neo-Zapatista communities and beyond them. The ways, in short, that shape and singularize the neo-Zapatista theory of power.
When we discuss what neo-Zapatismo is as an anti-systemic...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.