Class notes 9/13/19

Professor Holt began class by congratulating us on finishing our primary source essays before encouraging the class to think about how one can use primary and secondary sources to measure the success or failure of revolutionary movements. 

 

Then, Rita presented her LA in the News article, which discussed squatters* discovering human remains on the property of former Paraguayan dictator Alfredo Stroessener. The article provided much-needed context on the roughly 400 people killed or disappeared during his regime – according to Rita, Stroessener persecuted any and all political opposition – and portrays the contemporary Paraguayan government as disinterested in investigating these atrocities.

 

After the presentation, Holt transitioned us into thinking about the contemporary Zapatista Army of National Liberation (ELZN*) with a picture of an ELZN sign. We were asked to translate it – it warned readers that they were entering upon Zapatista property – which served as a good reminder of the radical armed-group’s focus on self-autonomy and communal land ownership. 

 

This discussion was interesting because it demonstrated how many of the conditions that sparked the Mexican Revolution still apply to the current group resurrecting the Zapata name – the decades-long single party rule of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI*) can be thought of as a similar, more-cosmetically legitimate compliment  to the other Latin American dictatorships and the group are still fighting for land autonomy they’ve been denied for over a half-millennia. 

 

Then, we talked about the ELZN Wikipedia article specifically – first in groups, then as a whole class – and my group was primarily frustrated with the articles emphasis on secondary over primary sources, and its focus on their ideology over the history which much contextualize why such a group came into existence. After showing a picture of hooded ELZN members in front of an Emiliano Zapata mural and talking about their general self-seclusion in rural, we then talked as a class about our aforementioned qualms with the Wikipedia article, which served two useful purposes: (1) it allowed us to think about the potentially negative aspects of preferred forms of “credibility” on the website – and how this makes adding information on women, people of color and other marginalized groups challenging – and (2) it helped to get us thinking about how we might make our upcoming Wikipedia contributions stronger. 


The ELZN page was a good introduction to Wikipedia summaries and the editing process, as its editing history showed the topic to be highly contentious. While Holt assured us that we weren’t likely to face roadblocks this huge as editors, it serves as a reminder that how people talk about the past and present is inherently political and that the power in being able to influence what is or isn’t being written about cannot be overstated. 

 

Questions: 

 

Is there such thing as definite success or failure with revolutionary or counterrevolutionary movements? Even if Zapata failed to achieve his goals in the Mexican Revolution, would you consider a group taking on his name to be a form of revolutionary success? Could the same be said when counterrevolutionary or reactionary groups suffer similar defeats but still impact contemporary politics nonetheless? 

 

Our Wikipedia editing assignments, plus our look at the Zapatista page, show that even seemingly objective mediums are inseparable from politics. If you’re adding onto an existing page, is there anything significant with regards to what the past authors did or didn’t emphasize? If you’re creating a new article, does the topic’s past lack of discussion indicate any flaws with what topics and sources contributors tend to value? 

 

Definitions:

 

Squatters – People living on abandoned property, in Latin America this is widely done to find and loot valuable materials 

 

ELZN – Zapatista Army of National Liberation – contemporary left-wing militia group in Mexico named after Mexican revolution figure Emiliano Zapata. Like Zapata the group prioritize land redistribution and a communal ownership of property through extra-political and militant means. 

 

PRI – Partido Revolucionario Institucional – Dominant political party in Mexico from the aftermath of the Revolution until their electoral defeat in 2000. While Mexico is often thought to be a Latin American anomaly via it’s lack of a long-lasting dictatorial regime throughout the 20th century, the PRI’s single-party rule is functionally similar to these governments. 

 

Links 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/17/mexico-zapatistas-rebels-24-years-mountain-strongholds

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/08/paraguay-alfredo-stroessner-human-remains

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapatista_Army_of_National_Liberation

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *