[nettime-lat] traduccion

[castorandino@terra.com.pe]

MENSAJE citado por: ricardo dominguez <rdom@thing.net>:
Ricardo. si podrias traducir en castellano esta informacion me 
seria muy util. grasias, tu amigo el castor andino
> 
IndyMedia Chiapas Editorial
> http://chiapas.indymedia.org/
> 
> by IMC-C Editorial 3:22am Fri Feb 9 '01
> editorial@chiapas.indymedia.org
> 
> Indymedia Chiapas (IMC~C) inaugurates its website on Feb 9th 
2001,
> exactly
> six years after Zedillo betrayed his word to uphold "peace 
with dignity"
> in
> southeastern Mexico. The IMC~C bases its counter-information 
offensive
> in
> the respect for la palabra digna.*
> Chiapas, what a theme, what a place, what a struggle, what a 
history,
> what a
> reality, for all that have lived, been involved, been 
affected or
> inspired
> by the last seven years of conflict, repression and betrayal,
> organization,
> mobilization and resistance in this previously forgotten 
corner of the
> world.
> 
> For six long years President Zedillo relentlessly waged war 
against the
> indigenous communities in resistance because they chose to 
struggle for
> schools with roofs, communities with health care and water, 
and above
> all,
> peace with dignity. The Zapatistas and their multitude of 
support bases
> responded by categorically rejecting the economic proposals 
that would
> discard them as a by-product in the wake of globalization.
> 
> Indymedia Chiapas (IMC~C) inaugurates its website on Feb 9th 
2001,
> exactly
> six years after Zedillo betrayed his word to uphold "peace 
with dignity"
> in
> southeastern Mexico. The IMC~C bases its counter-information 
offensive
> in
> the respect for la palabra digna.* Unilaterally betraying the
> cease-fire, on
> February 9, 1995, President Zedillo launched his infamous 
military
> offensive
> against Chiapas' indigenous peoples, attempting to annihilate 
the EZLN.
> Not
> only was the strategy unsuccessful, rather it galvanized 
broad support
> for
> the Zapatistas' words and voice, gaining them further 
revolutionary
> legitimacy in their struggle for liberty, democracy and peace 
with
> dignity
> in a world geared towards consumption, competition, and 
laissez-faire
> economics.
> 
> Indymedia Chiapas sees this as an appropriate moment to 
launch our page
> as
> the Zapatista CCRI (general command) prepares to depart from 
their haven
> in
> the Lacandon Jungle February 24, on its unprecedented trip 
through
> twelve
> states en route to the halls of Congress in Mexico City. The 
EZLN-CCRI
> intends to hold a special session with the Mexican Congress 
demanding
> that
> it respect la palabra digna, signed as a partial peace 
agreement in
> February
> 1996 by the congressional intermediary team (COCOPA), the 
EZLN-CCRI,
> and
> Zedillo's special negotiator. President Fox and the new 
congress have
> an
> opportunity to uphold their word, "peace" in this case and 
the dozens
> of
> campaign promises to "resolve the Chiapas conflict," by 
respecting the
> very
> same San Andres' Accords that were betrayed by Zedillo in his
> unilateral
> executive veto on the agreement's implementation in late 1996.
> 
> Indymedia Chiapas considers it important to offer balanced 
coverage and
> weight to the February 26th World Economic Forum (WEF) 
meetings and
> demonstrations in Cancun. In a special dinner, Fox's cabinet 
will toast
> the
> business elites of the world and potential investors while 
they discuss
> the
> wealth of Mexico's diverse resources and work sectors under 
themes
> titled
> "Financial Outlook, Tequila Sunrise" and "New Administration, 
New
> NAFTA."
> Not to be overlooked are the increasingly in-demand and 
lucrative
> themes
> such as oil, "Energetic Mexico," and "Information and 
Technologies." In
> short, Cancun has the potential to be the second sell-out of 
the
> Mexican
> peoples in less than ten years. The Zapatistas' decision to 
take up arms
> was
> in a part a response to the first of these two major sell-
outs. Their
> uprising stunned the world on January 1, 1994, the very day 
that the
> NAFTA
> (North American Free Trade Agreement) went into effect. 
Before signing
> the
> agreement, the US government mandated the dissolution of all 
collective
> landholdings in Mexico, the "death warrant for Mexico's 
indigenous
> peoples."
> 
> First to lose and most expendable to the Global Economy are 
Mexico's
> diverse
> indigenous peoples from the Tarahumara and the Huicholes in 
the north to
> the
> Loxichas, Mixes, Tzeltales, Tzotziles in the south. If the 
millions of
> Mexican indigenous people and the tens of thousands of 
Mexican electric,
> oil
> and maquila workers are effectively absent from the WEF's 
three day
> agenda,
> what are the chances that they will be taken into 
consideration in the
> implementation of the actual policies agreed upon during 
Fox's economic
> debut?
> 
> Can there be a true "peace with dignity" in Chiapas and 
Mexico if the
> global
> economic institutions, Fox, and the Mexican corporate elite 
propose to
> fashion "Mexico, The Bridge of the Americas"? Indymedia 
Chiapas will
> simultaneously cover the events in Cancun and the EZLN-CCRI 
delegation
> to
> Mexico. We will offer ample coverage and marginalized 
perspectives on
> la
> palabra digna vs. the la traicion de la palabra. On one 
stage, the
> Zapatistas will defend the dignified word in their effort to 
push
> Mexico
> towards an inclusive, progressive, respectful peace plan. On 
the other
> stage, Fox and the WEF will challenge the very essence of la 
palabra
> digna,
> potentially opening the door for the latest traicio'n de la 
palabra
> that
> include revolutionary General Emiliano Zapata's assassination 
on April
> 10,
> 1919 in Chinameca.
> 
> Indymedia Chiapas dedicates itself to creating a tool for the
> dissemination
> of words of dignity, truth and forgotten perspectives by 
relying on
> inclusive, progressive and honest reporting on and by those 
most
> affected
> and involved in today's struggles.
> 
> *la palabra digna means literally "words of dignity" and is 
used in the
> English sense of taking someone at their word, or being held 
accountable
> to
> their word. In Mexico and even more so in Chiapas, where 
literacy rates
> are
> the lowest in the country, peoples from rural communities 
place special
> emphasis on "the word:" a person's word and promise is seen 
as a final
> contract.
> 
> {{{}}}}}}}
> Tuesday,  January 30, 2001
> 
> 
> Marcos:  Achieving Peace Is Closer Than Ever
> 
> 
> Aurelio Fernandez F., correspondent.
> Part 1/3
> 
> La Realidad, Chiapas.
> January 28.
> 
> We are closer than ever today to reaching peace in Chiapas, 
to removing
> our
> ski-masks in the Zapatista Army of National Liberation, said
> Subcomandante
> Marcos.  "Closer than during the Cathedral talks in 1994," he 
added,
> because there has been a very profound change in society, 
measured by
> July
> 2, 2000.
> 
> The guerrillero added that on that date society discovered a 
means of
> acting, because it was no longer only informed, but also very 
worried,
> and
> it wanted to participate.  In this case, the electoral 
process was one
> way
> of doing something.  Mexico's problem continues to be that 
citizenship
> is
> only exercised every six or three years, or whenever there is 
an
> election
> which affects you.  The rest of the time citizens become 
spectators or
> beneficiaries of what the government is doing.
> 
> The rebel leader was interviewed by Carmen Aristegui and 
Javier
> Solo'rzano,
> hosts of the News Image noon and evening broadcasts.  This
> correspondent
> participated in the dialogue.
> 
> "Every time we've come out into public light," Marcos 
said, "the
> response
> we've had is yes.  They haven't forgotten us.  What we're 
therefore
> saying
> to society is that we're not going to continue being an 
unresolved
> issue
> now.  We have the will to see this resolved.  You, society, 
are
> different
> in many senses.  Help us to push this so that it falls on the 
other
> side.
> And I'm not referring to a program where Marcos is going to 
take work
> away
> from Andre's Bustamente and compete with Viajes Ponchito.  
I'm referring
> to
> the indigenous peoples being recognized as such, that you're 
never again
> a
> 'pata rajada', which is an insult in this country.  That the 
color of
> your
> skin, your language, your culture, your way of relating to 
the land,
> with
> religion, even with your partner or with whatever, not be a 
reason for
> discrimination or for persecution."
> 
> Marcos' reference to Ponchito had to do with the fact that 
Andre's
> Bustamente was also present during the interview, waiting his 
turn,
> which
> we will report on tomorrow.
> 
> In an outfit which appeared to have been changed only by the 
passage of
> time, with a scarf whose color was merely a trace, and whose 
fabric
> weft
> was barely supported by its warp, one more symbol from this 
man of
> symbols,
> Marcos appeared unwell.  "You're thinner since the last time 
I saw
> you,"
> Solo'rzano told him.  "I'm on a diet," he parried.
> 
> Aristegui and Solo'rzano questioned the Sub concerning his 
reaction to
> President Fox's insistence that he had demonstrated his good 
will by
> having
> withdrawn troops, having presented the Cocopa's proposal to 
the Congress
> of
> the Union and having shown his willingness for dialogue.
> 
> "Look," Marcos responded, "the problem is that the EZLN 
carries a great
> mistrust, the product of previous governments, and Fox isn't 
to blame
> for
> this, I agree.  But the Indian peoples are asking us to say 
whether
> this
> government is going to sit down for dialogue only to gain 
time, hoping
> that
> our presence in the media decreases and the people forget 
about us.  And
> in
> that way they can make a military strike against us.  It's 
obvious that
> there is a hard-line group in Fox's government, even within 
the Army."
> 
> "On the other hand," he continued, always flanked by Tacho 
and Moise's,
> "We
> see that there are contradictions in the government that make 
it
> unclear
> with whom to negotiate.  Officially it would have to be Luis 
H.
> Alvarez,
> because he's the Commissioner of Peace, but we've received 
envoys from
> Secretary of State Jorge G. Casta~eda, offering him as 
interlocutor of
> the
> government with us, even using international individuals.  
Diego
> Ferna'ndez
> de Cevallos doesn't want peace to be signed, in order not to 
give Fox
> any
> advantages."
> 
> And he goes on to say that the zapatistas think that, in 
response to
> the
> question as to whether he is willing to abandon the military 
route and
> use
> the route of dialogue, "one part of Fox is answering yes, and 
another
> part
> no."
> 
> He added:  "What Se~or Fox has done is to manipulate every 
withdrawal
> (of
> military groups in the region) as a media event."  And that 
means a
> decline
> in the federal Army.  They would have been reinforced in 
silence, and
> nothing would have happened, but he's cutting back in a way 
that is
> permitting that entire group to say:  "He's giving a lot," 
when, from
> the
> beginning, it had been delineated that there were seven 
military
> positions,
> and he had said that was fine.  "As far as we are concerned, 
Fox hasn't
> finished his election campaign, he's continuing it."
> 
> "Really?" asked Carmen Aristegui.  "It's already been said 
that there's
> a
> media contest between you and Fox."
> 
> "We think that as far as that goes, with Fox, we'd lose," 
Marcos
> responded.
> "In the duel of vanities there are professionals and there are
> amateurs.
> We don't gain anything if our ratings go up or down.  One way 
or
> another,
> the zapatistas' public life has been this rise and fall.  How 
many
> times
> have they killed us off in media terms and we appear again?  
We're not
> interested in being more popular than Fox, or less.  What 
we're
> interested
> in is that this problem be resolved, because we believe that 
now is the
> opportunity, and the PRI defeat on July 2 opened a space 
where it's
> possible for this country to decide, but in another way.  We 
want to be
> part of that future, and we don't want to have ski-masks in 
the
> future."
> 
> They Will Not Go To UNAM
> 
> Regarding whether they will visit the UNAM during the march 
to Mexico
> City,
> the Subcomandante noted:  "This is a university community.  
In the case
> of
> the Metropolitan Autonomous, the UAM, we received an 
invitation from
> the
> community, the students, workers, teachers and researchers, 
but in the
> case
> of the UNAM, we haven't received an invitation like that."
> 
> "We can't go to a place where we signify, within the 
progressive forces
> -
> because, one way or another, the UNAM is a catalogue of 
progressive
> forces
> - a means of impacting on the division among those forces.  
If the
> university community of the Autonomous National of Mexico 
were to
> invite
> us, we would go.  But if only one group within the community 
invites
> us,
> no, because then, in a while, they are going to say to us:  
and what
> about
> us?  It's not like in the case of the strike, where it was 
the students
> who
> were on strike and that was that.  They were there.  But 
there isn't
> any
> strike now, right now the university is working like a 
community.  The
> act
> of going only with a group of that group would show a lack of 
respect
> on
> our part towards a university community."
> 
> The light became too dim to be able to continue taping.  The
> technicians
> asked for a respite in order to light the lamps.  "This, my 
Sup, would
> not
> have happened if Ponchivision had organized the work," said 
Andre's
> Bustamente, decked out in his tropical shirt now, awaiting 
his turn.
> 
> {{{{}}}}}}}}}
> 
> La Jornada
> Wednesday,  January 31, 2001.
> 
> 
> Unfulfilled, the 3 Conditions Which Fox Accepted, Says Marcos
> 
> 
> Aurelio Fernandez F., correspondent.
> Part 2/3
> 
> La Realidad, Chiapas.
> 
> Subcomandante Marcos set out clearly a series of points 
concerning the
> current moment regarding the negotiations between the EZLN 
and Vicente
> Fox's government.  First, that three conditions had been 
established
> for
> sitting down to the negotiating table which President Vicente 
Fox
> publicly
> accepted and which have not been fulfilled:  the withdrawal 
of the
> military
> positions in seven of the 246 positions, the release of the 
zapatista
> prisoners and steps towards the Congress of the Union 
accepting
> Cocopa's
> proposal on indigenous rights and culture.
> 
> The federal government has withdrawn its troops from four of 
the seven
> points, but it doesn't want to do so in the other three, 
despite the
> promise to do so, Marcos noted in the interview held with 
Carmen
> Aristegui,
> Javier Solo'rzano and this correspondent.  "The case of 
Guadalupe
> Tepeyac
> particularly concerns us, where hundreds of people have been 
living
> outside
> their homes for 2000 days, 50 of which belong to Fox's 
government," he
> said.  In a trip carried out by journalists, it was able to be
> confirmed
> that the military fort built in that town, following the EZLN 
uprising
> in
> 1994, remains occupied by troops, despite the fact that a 
checkpoint is
> not
> operating there, nor is it being occupied by its native 
residents.
> 
> The leader also noted that, regarding the political 
prisoners, even
> though
> there has been much publicity about the release of some, the 
majority
> continue imprisoned, approximately 80.  According to Marcos, 
the
> zapatista
> prisoners who were released were those who had only been 
facing state
> charges, and it was Pablo Salazar Mendiguchi'a's government 
which
> obtained
> their release.  Those facing federal charges have not been 
freed. 
> "We're
> not talking about prisoners for common crimes," he 
said.  "But about
> those
> denounced by paramilitaries, those who are there for having 
carried a
> civil
> band radio, or those who were found with a green militia cap -
 like
> yours,
> Carmen - or with a brown shirt, those are the ones we're 
referring to. 
> But
> we're not asking them to release rapists and drug 
traffickers.  If they
> were to release those accused of common crimes, they could 
even be held
> in
> the Autonomous Municipalities and be tried there.  Fox has 
not given a
> response to this."
> 
> As far as the steps to see that the Cocopa law is approved, 
Fox has sent
> it
> to Congress, but he has not taken one other step for its 
ratification
> by
> the legislators.  "Fox is saying:  here's the law, here it's 
done.  And
> it's not so.  It's not about supplanting the Legislative 
branch, but
> that
> he does dedicate effort, like we're doing, in order to secure 
the
> approval
> of the Cocopa proposal.  Or, in any case, that he clearly set 
out his
> doubts and his differences, because no one is doing that 
now.  Now the
> discussion is whether or not we should be going with ski-
masks."
> 
> "That's why we're going on the march, to meet with the 
Deputies, who
> have
> already expressed their willingness to receive us (Beatriz 
Paredes,
> among
> others).
> 
> "The communities are asking us for certainty about whether we 
can deal
> with
> this government.  When they're sure it can be like that, 
they'll tell
> us:
> "Make agreements with the government, end the war."  And 
we'll achieve
> an
> opportunity to build peace, because the signing of peace 
doesn't
> achieve
> peace.  There will still have to be much work, but it's going 
to be an
> important step.  That all the EZLN's zapatista communities, 
not just
> the
> leadership, will be able to end the declaration of war and go 
out an
> engage
> in political work in order to rebuild the social fabric of the
> communities,
> which are very damaged now.  That's why we're resistant to 
media events
> they propose to us, like a meeting in order to have our 
picture taken
> with
> Vicente Fox."
> 
> In response to a question about the importance of the march 
they are
> organizing for late next month, Marcos stated:  "It's so 
important for
> us,
> defining, that we think we are repeating January 1, 1994, 
when we
> ordered
> the zapatista leadership into the first line of fire, because 
that's
> the
> way of the indigenous peoples, the chiefs aren't in the 
back.  We are
> sending a very clear signal:  we aren't sending others, they 
can't say
> they
> aren't speaking with the leaders of the zapatista movement."
> 
> Marcos insisted that they won't be going armed;  "As far as 
this goes,
> we
> want to give a very clear message regarding January 1, 1994.  
At that
> time
> we came out as zapatistas to make war and we went armed.  Now 
we are
> leaving as zapatistas in order to engage in dialogue.  Why 
would we
> want
> weapons if we are going to engage in dialogue?  We're willing 
to suffer
> an
> attack, for them to arrest us, for them to throw eggs, 
tomatoes, at us,
> for
> them to pull off our ski-masks.  The ski-masks aren't so 
important to
> us,
> at the end of the day no one cares who's behind the mask.  I 
can take
> it
> off, and when I put it on again I'm Subcomandante Marcos 
again, who is,
> among other things, also a ski-mask.  In contrast to what is 
happening
> on
> the other side of the power, we don't assign that physical 
worth to the
> ski-mask, meaning that they take it off us and we're 
castrated and we're
> no
> longer good for anything.  We are confident that, unlike what 
can happen
> in
> the media trivia, the people understand that what's behind 
the ski-mask
> is
> a debt the nation owes to a sector of the nation, which is 
also a
> native
> group, and that the greatest part of the population forms 
part of their
> blood and of their culture.  Because there are the 
indigenous, although
> they don't want much, but there are many of the historical 
antecedents
> of a
> large part of the urban population."
> 
> The interviewers remember that Beatriz Paredes ahs offered, 
if it is
> necessary, to receive the zapatista march in the highway.  The
> interviewee
> mentioned that on that February 8, 1995 he had a meeting with 
her and
> Esteban Moctezuma when the Army carried out an operation 
whose purpose
> was
> to arrest them.  "We're willing to speak with her, we don't 
bear a
> grudge,"
> he said.  "I have another image.  It seems like one of the 
ties that
> which
> dragged down the PRI was her bonds with the Executive."
> 
> Marcos notes that the movement he belongs to has much hope 
for the
> Congress
> as a legislative body.  "Not just that, we think the nation 
should have
> hope.  If the Congress doesn't make State policy, hold on, 
everything
> is
> going to be patch-patch every day, and there's going to be 
two Mexicos
> again:  the one shown in the media and in the news stories, 
and the one
> going on below.  'El Chapo' Guzma'n is going to be just a 
caricature,
> what
> follows will be more serious.  Because if there's no State 
policy in
> response to organized crime, in response to the main problems 
of the
> national agenda - it's Chiapas, but not just Chiapas, 
regarding the
> economic program and all that - I believe this is going to 
turn into
> chaos.
> The North Americans see this.  That's why they're moving the 
border. 
> What
> else is the Puebla Panama Plan?"
> 
> {{{}}}}}
> 
> Originally published in Spanish by La Jornada
> ______________________
> Translated by irlandesa
> 
> 
> La Jornada
> Friday, February 2, 2001.
> 
> 
> Marcos: Globalization Doesn't Break Down Borders, It Creates 
Them
> 
> 
> Aurelio Fernandez F., correspondent.
> Part 3/3
> 
> 
> La Realidad, Chiapas.   It has been said that the Puebla 
Panama Plan is
> a
> counterinsurgency instrument, but, in Subcomandante Marcos' 
opinion,
> it's
> more than that:  "The problem isn't just us.  It's about the 
destruction
> of
> a nation.  We have spoken of three Mexicos, and the 
businessmen have
> spoken
> about three Mexicos:  the North works, the South sleeps and 
the Center
> consumes what the North produces, they say something like 
that.  We
> said:
> the North is being absorbed, the Center is being fought over, 
and the
> South
> has been forgotten."
> 
> In this third and last installment of the interview conducted 
by "News
> Image" broadcasters - Carmen Aristegui, Javier Solo'rzano and 
this
> correspondent - the spokesperson for an important group of 
Mexican
> indigenous demonstrates what he considers to be the 
stratification of
> the
> economy and national geography:  there is "the upstairs, the
> downstairs,
> and the basement, which is what we are."
> 
> He adds that the Puebla Panama Plan is an expression of those 
policies
> which are leading to the fragmentation of the nation:  "If 
there is
> anyone
> who wants this country to be fragmented, it's this process of
> globalization, and they're going to do everything possible to 
achieve
> it."
> He said that the great world interests would be delighted if 
the
> zapatistas
> were to ask to separate from Mexico, because they would 
prefer to deal
> with
> banana republics, which they can control better.
> 
> Marcos refers, for the first time, to this project which is 
being
> promoted
> by Fox, which, according to important analysts, such as 
Carlos Fazio,
> is
> concealing transnational corporate interests, in a desire to 
try and
> control important social processes, such as migration to the 
United
> States,
> and to exploit available biodiversity resources and the 
region's
> geographic
> advantages.  "The trans-isthmus project," the interviewee 
continues -
> "is
> transferring the functions of the Panama Canal to the 
Republic of
> Mexico,
> but cutting the country effectively into two or three parts.  
One has
> to
> ask oneself why the secessionist policies have been coming 
precisely
> from
> Yucatan and from Tabasco over the last few months. And it's 
not
> zapatistas
> who are proposing it.  It's separating us from the rest of 
the nation.
> That's the program."
> 
> "Mexico City is going to be the 'switcher', a signal box 
between the
> two
> country.  And it will be even worse for the indigenous who 
are north of
> Puebla.  What the Americans are doing is renouncing the 
control of
> conflicts in this part of the continent.  They recognize now 
that it's
> impossible to defeat the indigenous of the Southeast, or, 
rather, they
> recognize that they can't incorporate their skills into the 
free
> market,
> and they are ceding them to Central America.  Then they are 
going to
> move
> the border from Guatemala to Puebla, they'll lower the border 
from the
> Rio
> Grande to the Federal District and the State of Mexico.  That 
entire
> part
> is in order to cushion the migration of 'illegals', or, at 
least, of
> those
> who aspire to be 'illegals'.  And then, like that, moving the 
border,
> the
> Northern states will be 'North Americanized', those in the 
Center
> [sic/South] will be 'Central Americanized', and the buffer 
will be in
> the
> middle:  Mexico City, Puebla, Morelos and the State of 
Mexico."
> 
> "What globalization is doing is re-drawing the world.  If you 
look at a
> world map prior to the Cold War, and after the Cold War and 
the fall of
> the
> Berlin Wall, there aren't fewer nations, but more.  It's not 
a global
> village, rather more and more split up.  Then they are re-
drawing
> lands,
> what neoliberalism, globalization in North America, is doing 
is defining
> a
> new border between Central America and North America.  It's 
moving
> Mexico's
> southern border towards the center of the country, and 
lowering the
> United
> States' border towards the center of the country.  In this 
way the
> Northern
> states of the Republic will be incorporated into the 
productive
> process,
> circulation, even cultural, of the rest of the states of the 
North of
> the
> country.  The Mexican Southeast, from Puebla down, will be 
incorporated
> into the market logic and policies of the Central American 
countries. 
> And
> the Center, Mexico City and the State of Mexico, will 
function as a
> buffer,
> like a customs point between the two countries."
> 
> Marcos believes, nonetheless, that this policy is going to be 
a
> failure,
> because in the North of the country, "they're aren't only the 
big
> businessmen.  There is an indigenous population, there are 
workers,
> there
> are neighbors, there are teachers, there are students, who 
will disturb
> the
> process of "North Americanization', and who, in addition, have
> historical
> and cultural ties and all that with the rest of the country.  
Finally,
> no
> matter who it upsets, Mexico continues to be a country, a 
nation.  And
> I
> say that the Center of the country is for buffering what the 
North
> Americans want buffered.  They want to turn them into the 
police of the
> Southeast.  The country's Center is going to be turned into 
the police
> of
> the Mexican South-Southeast in order to be accountable to the 
North, but
> no
> longer the North of Chihuahua, but the North from Zacatecas 
to Canada.
> It's going to fail, what's at stake is this:  we are going to 
be two
> national projects.  The nation from here, up, from Puebla up, 
the
> political
> and customs center.  And from the Center to the North the 
process of
> North
> American development, and from Puebla to Panama, Central 
America.
> 
> "I don't believe Cervera Pacheco, but I do believe that it's 
convenient
> for
> globalization to negotiate or to establish relations with 
small
> republics.
> It would be convenient for them to recognize the Mexican 
Southeast as a
> banana republic.  They want to turn not only the indigenous, 
but also
> the
> poor in the rest of the country, into a great reservation.  
And there
> is
> going to be a fight to try and cross to where there's 
employment and
> better
> living conditions.  But, instead of the trouble being at the 
border
> crossroads of the Rio Grande, it's going to be in Mexico 
City, in the
> State
> of Mexico, in Puebla, in that entire area.  It's going to be 
completely
> on
> this side, but they're going to lose."
> 
> Opening of Borders?  Only For Money
> 
> Marcos defends the resistance action in the country's 
South.  "The South
> is
> already reacting.  It's having its march in order to say:  we 
want to
> be
> part of this country, that is, they would be willing to give 
us the
> autonomy we are not asking for.  Really, if we asked for the 
Mayan
> state,
> the Mayan nation, we would immediately be recognized by the 
UN, the IMF
> and
> the World Bank.  Doubly simple!  'Yes,' they'd say to 
us, 'Look, we
> recognize you, we'll finance you, we'll give you weapons and
> guerrillas,
> and whatever you want we're going to give you, because it's 
what suits
> us'."
> 
> He insists:  "Yes, that's what's happening.  It's going to 
fail
> precisely
> because what they expect the wounded, the 'globalphobes', as 
they call
> them, to do is to assume those losses.  But this country has 
a history,
> what's happening is that it's being forgotten, but as soon as 
they
> remember
> it, this is going to take another route.  The hope is, above 
all, that
> the
> space is open, believe me, it's in dispute.  Those people 
there are
> still
> willing to listen to another national project.  If there 
isn't any
> other
> project for the nation, then we aren't going to be able to 
blame the
> people, because if we don't offer them something else, just 
the
> neoliberal
> program - have we offered them anything else? - we've just 
told them it
> wouldn't do.  That's a responsibility of the left."
> 
> "Marcos," this correspondent asked, "You've described the 
general ideas
> of
> the Puebla Panama Plan.  Then there's an economic program 
that's
> probably
> more unpopular and savaged than the previous ones.  But you 
suggest
> that
> peace is closer than ever, that it might even be achieved 
this year,
> but,
> under these conditions, isn't that a contradiction?"
> 
> "No.  This globalization process and this economic program is
> happening,
> but people are also waking up.  We are saying:  we can offer 
a better
> resistance, more organized, and, in addition, contribute to 
the building
> of
> an alternative.  That's why they don't want us to leave.  
It's not
> because
> they're jealous of our popularity ratings.  It's because 
we're going to
> be
> able to engage in politics, and we know it, that's why we 
want to
> leave.
> We're going to be able to engage in politics in many ways.  
Because
> we're
> in ski-masks and armed and here and all that.  That is, they 
are indeed
> afraid of the people organizing and destroying that project.  
But that
> program hasn't brought anything but adversity in other parts 
of the
> world.
> The world isn't a global village, nor is NAFTA an opening of 
borders,
> except when it's for money, not even for merchandise.  Ask 
the truckers
> in
> the North how often they can cross there, or ask the dead 
migrants, or
> the
> migrants from Africa and Asia in Europe what's happening to 
them in the
> European Community.
> 
> He continues:  "The world is becoming more and more closed, 
and it's
> becoming increasingly intolerant, and it's causing absurd
> fundamentalisms
> to proliferate.  They're absurd, it's nothing else.  And 
look:  the one
> promoting it is not a Muslim, an indigenous, a Jew, an 
Israelite or
> whatever you want, but the one promoting it is the man with 
the money,
> who's in a big office, saying: that's what suits me, because 
that
> fragmentation works for me.  We are saying:  what's operating 
here is a
> world war.  They are destroying lands like never before, 
riches like
> never
> before, they are eliminating populations like never before.  
What's
> happening is that if they win it, forget it, there won't be 
any way!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nettime-lat mailing list
> nettime-lat@nettime.org
> http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-lat
> 





_______________________________________________
nettime-lat mailing list
nettime-lat@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-lat