To the Divided States of Arabia, Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Oceania;
To all those who struggle with us for liberty, justice, democracy, and human rights in all of Mexico, and the rest of the world;
To all those who struggle against war without end;
To those powers against whom we struggle;
To the national and international press;
The Clandestine Commando "Division of the North" (Villista National Liberation Front) addresses itself to you to say the following:
The month of May is celebrated by both the Mexican people and the international working-class movement as a month of triumph.
On 5 of May, 1862, a Mexican Army smashed a numerically superior, French-led force in the Battle of Puebla, securing Mexican independence from foreign rule.
On May 1, 1886, the struggle for the eight-hour working day began in Chicago: this resulted in strikes, cumulating in the Haymarket Square Massacre on May 6th, and subsequent suppression of the movement in the United States of America. May 1st is commemorated, however, by the international working-class movement as its holiday, as its leaders and organisations chose this as the date to begin that phase of the struggle.
We of the international movement against neoliberalism and for humanity can make these glorious holidays more meaningful, not only by resolving anew to rededicate ourselves to the struggle, but by pausing to reflect on the tragic errors that throw these triumphs into sharp relief.
The triumph of 5 of May, 1862 was foreshadowed by the tragedy of the loss of half of Mexico to the United States of America less than 20 years previously: gringo avarice was fed by the misrule of General Lopez de Santa Ana, who played a dangerous cat-and-mouse game with the rising United States power. Sadly, the army of Mexico was anything but united in its resistance to invasion, and General Lopez de Santa Ana was the Saddam Hussein of his day, making few friends and many enemies. Not only did the Mexican people pay dearly for his misrule: Mexico's loss was the gain of slave-owners of the southern states of the U.S., as Abraham Lincoln predicted (he opposed the war). The results of that war, in which Aztlan, a territory rich in indigenous history, was lost to Mexico, were tragic for both countries: while the question of slavery in the new territories exacerbated the tensions that disunited the states to the north of Mexico, and finally led to war between them, what was left of the United Mexican States looked easier to conquer to European powers, particularly to neo-Napoleonic France. By 1862, both the United States of America and the United Mexican States were at war: both federal republics began to emerge victorious in that year, the United States of America at Gettysburg, the United Mexican States in Puebla. Benito Juarez, who had struggled against the supporters of Lopez de Santa Ana in the War of the Reforms, corresponded with Abraham Lincoln: not only did they succeed in keeping their countries united and independent, but they cemented an important alliance against certain reactionaries. The central injustice of the theft of Aztlan by the United States of America, however, could not be dealt with, and it remains, not only as tragic history, but as an important source of tensions in the states in question.
At the same time, the world's workers, particularly the industrial proletariat, had secured a 10-hour limitation on the length of the working day in Britain and some states of the European continent, and some American states: the results of the struggle were uneven and insecure, however, and, as the world's capitalist economy developed, a need arose to continue the struggle to the limitation of the working day to 8 hours: otherwise, the working class would be divided between overemployed and unemployed workers, due to increasing labour productivity.
The tragedies of the movement of the industrial proletariat didn't arise solely from the viciousness of their capitalist enemy: much was not accomplished because they failed to ally with the more ancient, pre-capitalist working class: the peasantry. The Paris Commune, Russian Revolution of 1905, Mexican Revolution, and Russian Revolution of 1917, among others, saw tragic conflict between proletarian and peasant leaders and political movements, which led to the deaths of millions, and immeasurably aided the rule of the power of money. Neither Marx nor Engels, nor the peasant leaders, such as Zapata, Villa, or Bakunin, foresaw the unfolding tragedy, but some, such as Lenin and Mao, did, and made serious efforts to address the problem. We modern Zapatistas and Villistas seek even more emphatically to bring the ancient, largely indigenous, and modern working classes together, to build a movement that has strong and diverse roots, and therefore, solid foundations.
Liberty! Justice! Democracy! Human Rights!
From the Mexican Northwest, Insurgent Subcommander Angeles, Branch of Liaison, Communications, and Investigations, Clandestine Commando "Division of the North" (Villista National Liberation Front).
P.S. that speaks about roots and branches:
Some of our supporters have asked about our origins. What we can say without disclosing ourselves overmuch to the enemy is this:
We have many roots: from these roots spring our branches.
The root in the soil of Big Mountain, Dineh Nation, which cries: we will never surrender. Insurgent Sub-commander Jeronimo, Branch of Infantry.
The root in the soil of the Sierra Tarahumara, which yells: just by existing, we defy the power of money. Insurgent Sub-commander Teporaca, Branch of Logistics, Transport, and Procurement.
The root in the solidarity of oppressed peoples of the world, which screams: If you kill one of us, ten more will spring up in ten more countries. Insurgent Sub-commander Patricio (portrayed, rather badly, by James Coburn in Sergio Leone's forgettable neo-classic "Fistful of Dynamite") Branch of Combat Engineers.
The root in the example of the Zapatistas, which shrieks: we want a world in which many worlds fit. Insurgent Sub-commander Angeles, Branch of Liaison, Communications, and Investigations.
From these roots grow the Clandestine Commando "Division of the North."
These roots grow in the soil of the impoverished people, which we try to enrich with the political organisation of the Villista National Liberation Front.
We know that this answer won't satisfy everyone: it's not important, the impoverished people are so used to not being listened to that they talk to themselves constantly. What we can do is hold up a mirror, and ask: isn't this you, too? When we hold up our mirrors, don't you see yourselves?
P.S. that speaks about peace and war:
Some of our critics say that "the EZLN-FVLN" (?) is "utopian" and "nebulous" about the armed struggle.
First things first: we are not affiliated with the EZLN-FZLN, nor they with us. We Villistas do try to follow the Zapatista example, but our errors are entirely our own.
What we try not to do is to follow the errors of others.
The Revolutionary Army of the Popular Insurgency exposed its exact social base (the cotton-growing ejidos of the Mayo River, Yaqui River, and Las Lagunas, according to their only manifesto) before it rose up. Where is the ERIP now? Probably dead, in hospitals, and in jail.
Some of our critics remind us that the Mexican State, and the power of money it serves, will attack us as soon as the time is right. That is correct, they will. Because the Zapatistas used their most powerful weapons, their word and example, to totally destroy the political efforts of the Mexican State, the time hasn't been right since January 1st, 1994. The Mexican State simply hasn't got as powerful a weapon in its political arsenal, so it tries to resort to the use of lesser, military weapons, which demonstrates its political defeat.
Our critics say that political weapons aren't enough in the face of these lesser, military weapons. They are correct, that is why the EZLN rose up in arms on January 1st, 1994, and why they don't disarm. This is why the FVLN needs the CCDN. the EZLN didn't bring war to Chiapas: war was already being waged, and the civilian commanders of the EZLN authorised it to arm, equip, and train, and finally to respond to that undeclared war with a declared, open war.
Since then, hovever, the Mexican people have overwhelmingly ordered both the Government and the Zapatistas to wage peace, and the Zapatistas obeyed, while the Government pretended to obey. We Villistas also obey the Mexican people for as long as we can, until war is brought to us. Our critics would be right, however, if we were foolish enough to believe that the Mexican Government was honestly wageing peace, rather than "war by other means," so we must prepare for the day they resort to the use of inferior, military weapons.
Armed struggle, should it be forced upon us, must be firmly rooted in our political struggle, otherwise it becomes an alien thing with its own reason and momentum. We have been challenged to be "pragmatic" and "realistic" in our attitude to armed struggle in general, and to terrorism in particular.
We are well aware that the emotionally-charged word "terrorism" can be abused to cover all forms of struggle: we know what it is and is not, however, and any military commander who doesn't has no business being in military command. We and the Zapatistas have been challenged to get our heads out of the clouds. We respond with the following challenge: We challenge the ETA of the Basque Country to state, unequivocally, that it has never deliberately targeted unarmed civilians, and that it intends to confine itself to military targets, as recognised by the Geneva and Hague conventions. The Zapatistas have so pledged and acted, and we continue to follow their example. Even the EPR, in South-Central Mexico, has thus far confined itself to military and paramilitary targets.
We await the response of the Basque ETA. Let them dispel whatever has been said in the Spanish and international press. We may have our heads in the clouds, according to some supporters of the ETA, but the "fog of war" excuses no-one from their duties.
We have also been criticised for being willing to talk with "fascists." That's correct, we do, not for our own sake, but on the direct orders of the Mexican people. Fascists cannot make fascism by themselves: they need the mistakes of their opponents in order for them to win the "hearts and minds" of those they seek to use as their instruments. Again, we seek not to repeat the mistakes made by those who unsuccessfully opposed fascism in Italy, Germany, Japan, Spain, and Portugal, among other countries, as well as not repeating the mistakes of those who opposed the fascism of Napoleonic rule, or who fell victim to it, in the 18th and 19th centuries.
That's quite a catalogue of mistakes not to repeat! One of those mistakes is mistaking fascism for the political climate that gives rise to it, whether it be neoliberalism or military rule. Neither can mutate into fascism unless a clear majority of the people are mobilised in support of it. That is happening now in the United States of America; that didn't happen in the United Mexican States. Mexicans are overwhelmingly for peace and against war, within Mexico and in the world. We are very aware, however, that the Mexican State wants war, and, like the United States of North America, may try to use war to gather support for more war. The distaste of the British people for war and repression didn't stop the British State in Iraq or the North of Ireland, whatever Governments may come and go in the British Parliament. We must never bring war to Mexico, but must be prepared for war to be brought to us and to Mexico by the Government. We cannot say what we might do in that case, as that would be a gift of information we cannot afford to give the enemy: we can say, however, what we will never do, which is...terrorism. We will be called terrorists by our enemies, but we will expose that lie, as we expose all the other lies of the enemy. We invite the ETA to do the same. The supporters of the ETA point out that our organisation has no experience wageing war. That's right, we don't, but the Zapatistas do, and we challenge the ETA to follow their example, as we do, politically, and prepare to do militarily, if we must. Please don't think that we confine our political and military studies to the EZLN/FZLN: we have many examples before us, positive and negative...including that of the ETA. If we must conduct armed struggle, we intend, as T.E. Lawrence said, "to fight well," having had so many examples before us. Something for those who oppose us to ponder well, should they be tempted to test us.
P.S. That finishes what was begun: The League of Arab States and European Union have reaped the harvest of their disunity. Let us hope that the Brazilian effort to organise South America, and the South African plan to launch an African Union, will result in the improvement of the lives of South Americans and of Africans, rather than the further enrichment of the power of money, as happened in North America: given what happened with the Reconstruction and Development Plan of the African National Congress, we are skeptical, yet still have hope.
© 1997 villista@iname.com