Strange Rumblings out of Chiapas: The Contemporary Politics of The Other Conquest

By Eric Edgerton

“I simply wanted people to talk about the Conquest. Historically, Mexico has always been a land of repressed voices. Now, between the Zapatistas and the Popocatepetl volcano, it seems that Mexico can't wait to erupt.” --Salvador Carrasco, “The Invisible Sight”

[1] In his essay “Invisible Sight,” Salvador Carrasco identifies his film as a Zapatista-inspired work. The struggle of the Zapatistas and specifically its relationship with the struggle of the indigenous peoples is so central to this film that it truly cannot be fully appreciated without an understanding of both groups, but U.S audiences know remarkably little about the Zapatista movement.

[2] A militant rebel force, the Zapatistas first entered the public eye on January 1, 1994, the first day that the North American Free Trade Agreement went into effect. Indeed, Zapatista opposition to Mexico’s participation in NAFTA can be viewed as a perfect example of their political ideology. The Zapatistas opposed this move by the Mexican government because it would end the subsidies paid to Mexican farmers (an already impoverished group) without ending those paid to their American counterparts. In broader terms, the Zapatistas generally oppose decisions made by the central government that do not reflect the wishes of the public. As Jeffrey Rubin describes it, “Marcos and the Zapatistas speak also for a new kind of democracy, a democracy that takes procedure and voting seriously.”

[3] The “Marcos” referred to above is Subcomandante Marcos, leader of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN). The largest Zapatista organization, EZLN rallies against any governmental oppression of the indigenous cultures of Mexico and, most specifically, against the oppression of Mayans. Among their many beliefs designed to curb what they see as abuses of power are that governmental officials should have terms of no more than two weeks before needing to be re-elected, that all major issues must be put to a public vote, that sales of natural resources should directly benefit the regions from whence they came, and that all citizens should have a right to bear arms in order to defend themselves against governmental tyranny.

[4] Perhaps not surprisingly, given that both groups began their work at roughly the same time in the mid 1990’s, Carrasco shares with the EZLN the goal of defending the rights and the independence of indigenous Mexicans. Carrasco sarcastically refers to the way in which governmental officials view his film when he writes, “its worst sin was to question the very roots of Mexican culture, which grew out of the clash between the Aztecs and Spanish into the tangle that it is today. . . . The truth is: The Conquest is not over. And it’s not perfectly clear who is doing the conquering” (167). By clearly announcing that his film is designed with the intent to cast the current Mexican government in the same light as the Spanish one that murdered countless scores of indigenous peoples, Carrasco is powerfully condemning the exact same oppressive policies that the Zapatistas struggle against.

[5] Further similarities between Carrasco, his film, and the Zapatistas emerge when one examines the ways in which they attempt to spread their respective messages. The Zapatistas have historically been an extraordinarily vocal organization; not merely satisfied to demonstrate and struggle against oppression, they have reached out to international media organizations, foreign governments, and even rock groups in order to spread their message and concerns. Similarly, Carrasco did not merely make a film demonizing the oppression of indigenous Mexicans, he fought to make that film as accessible as possible, despite tremendous opposition. He describes the forces that tried to stifle the distribution of his film when he states, “three different administrations of the Mexican Institute of Cinema (IMCINE) refused to finance or support The Other Conquest, despite the appalling shortage of films about the fall of the Aztec empire” (169). This attempt at stifling a dissenting voice is quite typical of the Mexican government, especially in regards to the issue of indigenous independence.

[6] Perhaps in recognition of the aforementioned manner by which the Mexican government stifles the indigenous population, the Zapatistas have made it a point of emphasis that they will never seek election to public office as those offices are structured now. To them, the national government’s systematic oppression of the natives and the poor (as demonstrated through burdensome trade tactics and oppressive land laws) is so egregious that nothing short of a full-fledged overhaul of the government is required. They began attempting to reach this end back in 1994 when they armed themselves and seized many small towns in their home region of Chiapas, releasing prisoners and confiscating arms along the way (OnWar.com). Once more, swift condemnation and response came from Mexico City; the very next day a massive military force descended on Chiapas and slaughtered virtually every EZLN member who resisted them.

[7] Ever since this first, violent attempt to remove Mexican control from their region, the Zapatistas have conducted their protests peaceably. As Carrasco notes in “The Invisible Sight,” in 2001 the EZLN and thousands of indigenous Mexicans marched on the capital to “extend mass support for the demands of those sections of the Mexican population who have suffered most from the world capitalist offensive -- the indigenous peoples” (Socialistaction.org). In “The Invisible Sight,” Carrasco specifically mentions this march as an event that makes his film “all the more poignant today” (168). Such demonstrations clearly announce to the world that the struggle between capitalistic ambitions and indigenous values in Mexico is far from complete.

[8] In fact, bringing that very message to the forefront of international attention was one of Carrasco’s primary goals in making The Other Conquest. The title of his essay speaks to the fact that this population, this culture, is not seen by mainstream Mexicans, not even when placed directly in front of their faces. Carrasco describes an event at which he and the star of his film Damián Delgado had arrived at a television studio in Mexico City only to be told by the guard that “You can go in, but your chauffeur has to wait for you outside” (172). Carrasco informs us that the guard said this “without so much as glancing at Damián” (172). What this, and several other anecdotal stories Carrasco tells in his essay to the same effect, show is that though the conquering Spanish are long gone and the majority of the populace feels quite comfortable identifying themselves as “Mexicans,” there is still the indigenous population left on the outskirts of society, ignored by all.

[9] From this example one may truly see how The Other Conquest is a Zapatista film. Both Carrasco’s film and the Zapatistas want, more than anything else, for indigenous peoples to be seen and acknowledged. For hundreds of years after the Spanish conquest, the native populaces were content to relish their anonymity, given that all the attention paid to them by the dominant culture had been by way of death and destruction. Today things have changed. No longer are the indigenous cultures going to passively allow the national government to strip away their subsidies and land rights while the wealth gap expands. The Zapatistas are demonstrating and making demands on their behalf in order to insure that the natives fall victims to the “invisible sight” no longer. Carrasco, in his way, has done precisely the same thing with his film. He has created a work that makes it quite impossible to forget the victimization of the natives and has thrown down a gauntlet before the Mexican government by painting it as the newest oppressor.

Works Cited

Carrasco, Salvador. "The Invisible Sight." The Zapatista Reader. Ed. Tom Hayden. New York: Thunder's Mouth/Nation, 2002. Print.

"Mexico Chiapas Zapatista Rebellion 1994." OnWar.com - Wars, Military History, International Relations. On War. Web. 31 Mar. 2010. http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/mike/mexico1994.htm.

Rubin, Jeffrey W. "From Che to Marcos." Dissent Magazine Summer 2002. Print.

"Zapatistas March on Mexico City." Socialist Action [Oakland] Mar. 2001. Web. 31 Mar. 2010. http://www.socialistaction.org/.