AND
The meeting is located within the framework of the 32nd anniversary of the Zapatista uprising in 1994 and is being held at the Cideci-Unitierra in San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas, starting on December 26 to conclude on the 30th. The Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) reported that more than a thousand attendees from 40 geographies are present, in addition to 500 Zapatista indigenous people of different Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Ch’ole, tojolabales, zoques, mames, calchikeles and mestizos. I clarify that this collaboration, due to its regular calendar, only includes the interventions of the first three days. On December 31 and January 1, 2026, a popular party and dance is scheduled in the Oventik caracol.
Participation in all sessions of the Sixth Zapatista Commission is significant. He insurgent deputy commander Moses and the Captain Marcos. They inaugurated the so-called seedbed. He captain Mark He explained that they asked their guests for an “analysis of the pyramids and the management of stories in the economic system, bad governments, laws and the judicial structure, resistance movements, the left and progressivism, human rights, the feminist struggle and the arts.”
He pointed out that they were asked to present their ideas so that they help the critical thinking of the attendees, as well as in the formulation of actions of resistance and rebellion, in addition to ensuring that their interventions do not subscribe to current situations. “We ask you for medium and long-term seeds that resist and rebel against the avalanche of the immediate.” For their part, he said, the representatives of the EZLN will try not to repeat obvious things that abound in the media.
In his initial intervention, he showed central elements that support the disappearance of national states in neoliberal contexts. He pointed out that this imposition of ideas includes the theft of half of the Mexican territory by the United States in 1848, the Spanish Conquest and other moments of transformation in Mexico, including the 4T. And he asked: “Do you think that the Mexican government will demand an apology from the president of the United States, Donald Trump, for the so-called War of ’47? Wait seated.” And he added that when the Zapatistas communicate their thoughts, “we speak to you, but we are looking far away in the calendar and geography.”
He insurgent deputy commander Moisésin his various interventions, addressed the context of the definition of the project of the common, especially the axis of non-ownership and the complexity of strengthening the conviction in the whole of Zapatismo about that project, its practices from the new structures created with the disappearance of the good government boards that in previous meetings have addressed linked to the formation of the pyramid not only in the states, but also in those spaces. It is, I consider, about locating the dynamics of power.
I do not know if they have planned a political declaration for next January 1st regarding the 32nd anniversary, but for now in the seedbed they located and recognized its history and its horizon. The distinction raised by the Subcommander Moisés between the struggle through violence and the greater complexity of a peaceful political struggle such as that entailed by the definition of the common.
The second session revolved around the use of history as a strategy of the political class.
Raúl Romero pointed out the use and abuse of history by the dominant classes to subjugate the dominated classes. Given this, “oppressed peoples fight to recover their history,” and he abounded in examples of a kind of official counterhistory in serious cases. For his part, in that same axis, Carlos Aguirre Rojas distinguished between history based on specific true facts and the very different interpretations of them that seek to erase those facts. He proposed a radical critique of currents, especially academic ones, of coloniality, decoloniality and postcoloniality, since these approaches finally place the source and origin of current problems within countries in external factors.
The third session had human rights as its axis and in it both Tamara San Miguel and Eduardo Almeida, from the Human Rights Node (Nodho), addressed their persistent violation and reconstructed their defense strategies, always supporting the victims and the dilemmas of continuing to demand through legal means. Lawyer Bárbara Zamora focused her intervention on the analysis of the discriminatory content that promotes the dispossession of the laws located in the Salinist counter-reform to the 27th constitutional, the agrarian law, the hydrocarbon law, the mining law and the civil code, and concluded with the impact of the recent reforms regarding the amparo trial. In short, the Zapatista seedbed is a political sharing that has been an active concern throughout its history.
