Introduction
Mexico is a charming land that represents both ancient human civilization and modern global expansionism. The ground was originally inhabited by the indigenous peoples of the Aztec and Mayan tribes; then taken over by Spanish conquistadors during the age of exploration. The combination has lead to a unique culture that is near rather exclusive to the region. The indigenous traditions still flourish alongside the western ideologies brought by the Spaniards. The vibrant colors and atmospheres that have been created as a result are jaw dropping and mesmerizing. When strolling through a typical Mexican town one may experience burst of color through papier-mâché floral arrangements, homemade alters to the dead, elaborately embroidered tapestries, and ornately prepared cuisine. However, in the year 2006, the most vivid colors were red and black; specifically in the region of Oaxaca.
Mexico has been booming with radical and revolutionary thought for centuries. Some specific events and figures have been the Mexican Revolution of 1910 lead by Emiliano Zapata Salazar and the Zapatista Other Campaign spearheaded in 1994 by Subcomandante Marcos. Following in the footsteps of the previous revolutions, Oaxaca City and much of the surrounding region reclaimed by the people as a “government-free zone” from 14 June to 25 November. Instead, the area was ruled from the bottom-up through the birth of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca; a teacher’s union that began with the simple intention of receiving better resources, and ended up being the driving force behind a transition to state-free socialism.
The Institutional Revolutionary Party
In order to be able to understand the Oaxaca revolution, or any other revolution that has taken place in Mexico throughout the 20th and 21st Centuries, it is important to have a decent understanding of the Mexican political system. The Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) has ruled Mexico for nearly 71 years until finally being challenged in the year 2000 with the election of Vicente Fox. The PRI has been considered by many scholars to be the “perfect dictatorship” and/or “Mexico’s official state party.” It was the first to fill the gaps in power left after the Mexican Revolution, and just remained as the nation’s political juggernaut after its founding in 1929.
“The PRI was founded by Plutarco Elías Calles in 1929 as the National Revolutionary Party (Partido Nacional Revolucionario--PNR), a loose confederation of local political bosses and military strongmen grouped together with labor unions, peasant organizations, and regional political parties. In its early years, it served primarily as a means of organizing and containing the political competition among the leaders of the various revolutionary factions. Calles, operating through the party organization, was able to undermine much of the strength of peasant and labor organizations that affiliated with the party and to weaken the regional military commanders who had operated with great autonomy throughout the 1920s. By 1934 Calles was in control of Mexican politics and government, even after he left the presidency, largely through his manipulation of the PNR.”
The revolution led to about a decade of political instability in Mexico. This allowed for Calles to be extremely coercive and manipulative in an attempt to gain power. “Calles expanded the government bureaucracy to enable it to mediate among rival constituencies and to dispense state funds to organizations supportive of the "official" party. Calles also created new umbrella organizations that lumped together disparate groups according to broad functional categories. The newly created interest groups depended heavily on the state for their financing and were required to maintain strong ties to the ruling party. By grafting corporatist institutions onto Mexico's historically fractious political system at a time when ideologies of the extreme left and right were gaining support throughout the world, Mexico's leaders avoided a return to the widespread violence that had engulfed their country during the 1910s and early 1920s. Subsequently, the relatively inclusive nature of Mexican corporatism and the firm foundations of civilian supremacy over the military prevented Mexico from following the pattern of alternating civilian and military regimes that characterized most other Latin American countries in the twentieth century.”
The means taken to “stabilize” the country actually ended up founding the party’s reign through corruption and coercion. The PRI was most notable for being a corporatist party throughout the duration of its reign. The Mexican government ended up drawing major parallels to an “old-boy’s” club. “Corporatism can be defined as a sociopolitical system organized on the basis of functional groups rather than individualism, or one man, one vote; it tends to be top-down, mercantilist, statist, and authoritarian: a mechanism for controlling change and keeping interest groups in line. It is usually anti-liberal, anti-pluralist, and against free enterprise.”
The recent challenging of this ideology has led to the loss of political power for PRI. “The old corporatist Mexican organizations were a source of solid and indisputable support for the PRI. For decades, PRI-dominated unions, peasants, and business groups provided the ruling party with support in every state and federal election. However, since 2000 these organizations have been changing drastically to survive in post-PRI Mexico. In the context of the upcoming national elections, conference participants will analyze the possible consequences and different roles of some of Mexico's vital actors in this new post-corporatist era. The three social groups of Mexican corporatism – worker, peasant and business – have dramatically changed their relationships with political parties. At the same time state governors, the main instruments for implementing corporatism under the PRI, are now divided among the three major parties.” More specifically, the loss of power among state governors is most evident in the case of Oaxaca. But the sentiment of resistance felt towards the PRI affiliated governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz, has roots that reach far deeper than the 2006 rebellion.
March of the Zapotec
The origins of civilization in the Oaxaca Valley date back to nearly 800 BC in a region known as Monte Albán. The area has flourished with art and culture as a result of its occupation by the Zapotec. Artistically, the region became famous for stone carvings, knitted rugs, and funerary urns. The Zapotec also had a vast array of technological accomplishments including a calendar, sedentary agriculture, and a writing system that is one of several to be considered the first in Mesoamerica.
Although these accomplishments are very noteworthy and inspiring, the most essential part of Zapotec culture that allowed for the 2006 rebellion is a custom known as usos y costumbres. Although this custom does not date back to ancient Zapotec civilization, it is built upon the same principles that have lasted through generations. However, throughout the reign of the PRI, it became used as a tool to gain more party support. “The term usos y costumbres refers to a complex of traditional political organization in which the general assembly elects openly and directly the municipal president and other governmental posts without the intervention of political parties. While the system of “usos y costumbres” has existed for centuries, it was normally carried out with the consensus of the ruling PRI party, which would grant an indigenous community a certain amount of autonomy to elect their representatives through the community assembly. Once elected, the representatives were registered as candidates of the PRI. Ballot boxes were stuffed with votes for the PRI and the community officials signed them. This arrangement assured the community an inflow of government funding and enough autonomy to elect its local representatives.”
Recently, the constitution was changed in order to put more autonomy into the hands of the people of Oaxaca without interference by the PRI. “In 1995 the state of Oaxaca modified its constitution to legally recognize the institution of usos y costumbres in indigenous communities, legally giving these communities the right to elect their officials in a traditional manner without having to register as candidates of the PRI. This change was due to a long process of indigenous resistance, especially in the Sierra Norte among Zapotecs and Mixes. Although legal and constitutionally recognized, the struggle for autonomy and self-determination continues as electoral violence is still a common phenomenon with political parties (now not just the PRI but the PAN and the PRD as well) struggling for political power by usurping the right of usos y costumbres.” The struggle peaked in 2004 when public funds and resources were used to elect the PRI candidate Ulises Ruiz Ortiz into the position of governor in the state of Oaxaca. Not only did Ruiz reach office through acts of corruption, his stay in office also followed the same suit.
The Face of Tyranny
Ulises Ruiz Diaz entered into the position of governor of Oaxaca in 2004. The corporatist system that is in place in Mexico works in a way that the individual is extremely deprived of autonomy, and the entire society is to be represented by a handful of interest groups. These interest groups obviously put their own interests in the forefront. One way in which they secure their benefit is through election money; the case of Ruiz is a prime example.
“In an internal oversight effort within the federal government, days before Oaxaca’s 2004 elections for governor, mid-level officials of the Social Development Ministry (Sedesol) documented the systematic diversion of federal funds in favor of the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party). Sedesol officials commissioned a report, prepared by field staff from their Oaxacan Delegation [branch office], entitled, ‘The PRI’s Partisan Political Use of Social Development Programs in Oaxaca, with the Collaboration of Sedesol Officials in the State.’ In excruciating detail, the staff reported that:
…Over the past three years, the state government has consistently used Sedesol programs and funds for political purposes, favoring social organizations and municipal governments linked to the PRI to sustain and extend their captive social base. The diversion of federal public resources not only contributed to the rise of Murat to the governorship, it has also helped to elect state and federal congressmen, senators of the republic, as well as the election of municipal presidents, so that it is no surprise that they are currently being used to support the PRI’s gubernatorial campaign to elect Ulises Ruiz …
The report goes on to document in great detail the specific administrative tactics used by the governor’s network of allies to divert public resources, including the full names and positions of the key operators, which even included officials who had been banned from federal employment because of past malfeasance, but continued to hold high level positions in the state government. According to one of the Sedesol staffers who wrote the report, it was submitted to their Mexico City headquarters, but was filed away without any follow-up action or response from their superiors.”
Although the report gained no attention from the federal government, the people of Oaxaca were well informed of the atrocities being committed by Ruiz. Once in office, Ruiz ruffled a lot of the feathers of the constituency he was supposed to be representing. Already on the hot seat for illegitimately coming to power in the eyes of the public, Ruiz was notorious for his support of a neo-liberal agenda; most specifically the Plan Puebla Panama. While putting this at a forefront, he neglected social programs, made poor decisions for public works, and disregarded the underprivileged condition of education. He was also known for holding an authoritarian police-state in which his police force was blamed for the political killings of 35 civilians.
The Plan Puebla Panama is a proposal to integrate Southern Mexico with Northern Central America. It is similar to NAFTA in the sense that it hopes to simulate investment and trade. It requires many new large infrastructure projects including superhighways and sea ports. “A sore issue is Plan Puebla Panama, which would affect nine states. It is opposed by the indigenous people whose lands and lives would be destroyed by the super superhighway and industrial and commercial development alongside it. There would be no benefit for them; low paid labor in factories cannot compensate for siphoning off natural resources, polluting the southern coastal waters, and pushing people off their land. As one person said to me, we can have development without self-destruction.”
In order to begin embarking on this plan, Ruiz called for public works to start preparing the city for this transition. “The ‘developments’ of Oaxaca follow WTO and World Bank demands; that is, they put profits not social benefits first. The lack of social benefits includes the miserable education most children receive…For those who do live in the city, especially the old wealthy who regard Ruiz’s arbitrary changes to the character of the old colonial city as an affront to their sensibilities and self-importance, Ruiz is hated…Most of the voiced complaints against Ruiz have to do with his “not consulting” before embarking on public works that destroy the city’s quality.” Not only was Ruiz busy with his reconstructive surgery of the city, but he was also using public funds to support the presidential campaign of PRI candidate Roberto Madrazo.
“The wave of revolt we’re seeing is the heritage of seventy years of PRI repression, theft, and neglect. People who may not even know Madrazo’s name can tell you of the bad activities of Ruiz, who embodies his party’s infamy. According to my same rumor source, 80 percent of the state population stands in opposition to the PRI. I don’t doubt it; coincidentally 80 percent of the population lives in extreme poverty”. Most of the poverty is located in the rural areas that are predominately indigenous communities. Not only is the area extremely underprivileged and under funded, but it is also exceedingly undereducated.
Eventually, tolerance of the antics perpetrated by Ruiz wore thin. In 2006, the objection held by the people of Oaxaca sparked a group of teachers from Sección 22 of the Teacher’s Union to take action in a brave attempt for a call of reform.
Oaxaca’s Popular Assembly
In May of 2006, an assembly of teachers began to strike in the Zócalo of Oaxaca City. This came as no surprise being that the strike had been annually held for the past 25 years; only to result in a few small pay raises in the salaries of the teachers. However, the 2006 strikes were pushing for not only more funds to be distributed to rural schools, but also for the resignation of Ulises Ruiz Diaz. The education in Oaxaca is notably poor with an illiteracy rate of about 25 percent compared to the national statistic of 8 percent. Educational infrastructure is also very poor. Teachers are often forced to conduct classes in makeshift classrooms made of cardboard, hindered by a shortage of books. “Miguel Ángel Concha, a spokesman for Governor Ruiz, said the state lacks the money to meet the teachers’ salary demands. The teachers had asked for a pay package that would have cost $150 million, while the state’s final offer in June was about $8.5 million. The teachers also have asked for about a dozen improvements, including new books and more classrooms, for a state school system that serves hundreds of thousands of students.”
After holding numerous marches and protests over the span of about three weeks, the tipping point came on 14 June when Ruiz sent in a police force of nearly 3000 to attempt to disperse the riot. The streets were in anguish as the teachers challenged the authority in order to remain occupying the Zócalo. They were unarmed. Several hours persisted of police torment to the teacher’s occupation in which they destroyed the encampment in the Zócalo, burned belongings, and projected tear gas. A local university radio station acting as a media outlet for the strikers reported that ten civilians were killed, and twenty were injured in the struggle. “Mr. Ruiz’s use of tear gas and riot police in an attempt to dislodge the protesters from the city center on June 14, had made it impossible for the teachers to accept anything less than his resignation. Their demands for more pay are no longer the primary issue.”
Months passed in which the government made strong attempts to bring the teachers back to work, but they would not budge. Their wishes remained unfulfilled as Ruiz kept his power in office. It is interesting to keep in mind that Ruiz’s “office” does not even lay within the region of Oaxaca. Instead, he rules from Mexico City; creating an even stronger disconnect with the people. However, his weekly trips back into Oaxaca had merely vanished throughout the duration of the struggle. Oaxaca’s government had disappeared. But the power structure remained stubborn and reluctant to turning the power over to the hands of the APPO and citizens of Oaxaca. “With seventy-four votes in favor and thirty-one against, the Senate accepted on Thursday afternoon the statement of the Internal Governance Commission not to declare a disappearance of powers in Oaxaca and not to proceed with the removal of Governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz. The thirty-one votes against accepting the report were cast by the PRD, the Labor Party, and the Convergence Party, while the seventy-four votes in favor were cast by an alliance of PRI, PAN, and Green Party legislators.” Once again, the evils of corporatism are unveiled in their true allegiance to money and power as opposed to the will of the people. However, it may also be interesting to notice the party politics that surfaced during the voting as well. The weaker parties voted in favor of getting Ruiz out of power as they were most likely intending to open up the position of rule for their own party candidates…
Agren, David. Mexico’s PRI Stages Political Comeback.
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Article.aspx?id=3157
Daria, James and Dul Santamaria. Other Campaign Volunteer Imprisoned for Distributing Leaflets in Santiago Xanica
http://www.narconews.com/Issue40/article1603.html
Grayson, George W. Mexico, the PRI, and López Obrador: The Legacy of Corporatism
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W5V-4N1SPF3-6&_user=945391&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000048959&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=945391&md5=1895d8d92c92ab91eb59a40d48aca2b2
Fox, Jonathan and Libby Haight. The Electoral Use of Federal Funds in the 2004 Oaxacan Elections
http://www.fundar.org.mx/secciones/publicaciones/pdf/right_to_know/SEC5%20Jonathan%20Fox%20and.pdf
Marcus, Joyce; and Kent V. Flannery. Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in Mexico's Oaxaca Valley
New York: Thames & Hudson, 1996.
McKinley, James. Violent Civil Unrest Tightens Hold on Mexican City
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/24/world/americas/24mexico.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
Fox, Jonathan and Libby Haight. The Electoral Use of Federal Funds in the 2004 Oaxacan Elections
