“Study of the dialogue process between the zapatista social movement and latinamerican intellectuals and their contributions in a common political-educational praxis of ‘Other Education’”
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. María Isabel Belausteguigoitia Rius (UNAM)
The principal objective of the investigation consists in studying the relation between certain latinamerican intellectuals and the zapatista social movement, exploring the characteristics of the dialogue construction process that has producen a common political-educational praxis of “Other Education”.
My starting point is the supposition that toward the zapatista social movement we can find new practices, networks and intelectual sociability forms from which a specific articulation between knowledge, power, education and politics has been produced.
I assume that the zapatista social movement is an educational-political subject. This, under the definition made by the that the brasilian researcher Lia Pinheiro (2013) who has defined regarding certain social movements, like the zapatista movement, like spaces of building an episteme understood as a historical project of knowledge, a knowledge generator and pedagogical alternatives responsible for strengthening political projects born from the struggle of these movements.”
The zapatistas have been a bridge that has made posible the networks deployment between and with intellectuals, including national intellectuals as well as transnational ones; through epistolary exchanges, press releases, seminars, festivals, the “ School (Escuelita) of freedom according the Zapatistas” (each level) and where a large spectrum of discursive profiles have converged: Marxists, Anarquists, feminists, decolonials, literaries, philosophical, journalistics, artistic, that come from social movements and Indigenous resistance struggles.
Considering the above context, my study centers in the critical analysis of specific moments that are considered as decisive ones throughout the zapatista social movement history, in order to give rise to a singular relationship between the zapatistas with certain latinamerican intellectuals. It is about moments where transformations and investments have been produced, from where the initial functions of intellectual-advisors, today we are in front of the zapatistas assuming themselves as producers of “other theory” and the intellectuals as students of the zapatista’s initiatives such as “The School (Escuelita) of freedom according the Zapatistas”. It also appears with intellectuals that are “partners (compañeros) zapatistas non indigenous” ( as an example we have the recently deceased philosopher Luis Villoro) and even “ collective intellectuals” that come from social movements (example: MST) and of indigenous resistance struggles articulated in the Nacional Indigenous Congress.
I want to emphasize the projection of an organized and collective bet, but also a complex and contradictory one, where work has been done in order to build a dialogue in which the relation of intellectual subordination doesn’t exist, but instead, a relation of equity and contribution where the intellectual does not assume himself as the one that knows and its interlocutor as the one that ignores, but in a relation where together they contribute to a new form of political-educational praxis.
In the sense of the above statements, I consider it is important to warn that one of the premises with which it is discussed in a radical way is the idea that the zapatista social movement has been “devised” by groups of intellectuals to whom the bases loyally obey.
The investigation situates itself in front of imaginaries that, nourished by a racist and patriarchal matrix, have looked at the zapatismo of before and the present one (keeping all the differences) as movements of indigenous, local, traditionalists, communities guided/subdued by a leader: Emiliano Zapata or Subcommander Marcos and articulated by an intellectual elite that thinks for them.
So, the investigation has three purposes: 1.To determine in which senses, the zapatista movement, in its historical meaning and dimension as a social movement, is set as a political-educational actor. 2. To problematize the “Latinamerican intellectual “ category and 3. To analyze and ponder the dialogue between latinamerican intellectuals and the zapatista movement regarding the following aspects: a) The difficulties and conditions for the structure of this dialogue. b) Aspects and significant moments in the exercise of this dialogue and c) the articulation of the dialogue in a common political-educational project.
In summary: my investigation questions are addressed to the deep study, from a historical perspective, of the dialogue between the zapatista social movement and its relation with particular latinamerican intellectuals and the turning points that have produced transformations in the said relation that permit us to undersea an alternative form of social hegemonic order of conceiving the social function of the latinamerican intellectuality seen from a political-pedagogical horizon.