i leave shortly for gabacho, home, the united states.  in preparation i’ve been having as many one-on-ones with Oaxacan organizers as possible (in colorful apartments, on bedroom floors, in bars with mezcal on the walls), trying desperately to learn what i know can’t be learned in a short four months. 

tomorrow we facilitate our “dialogue across borders” to discuss how movements for immigrant justice in the u.s. can be strengthened by and support social movements in Mexico.  besides a reportback from this, “to gabacho…” might be my last post.  as the last few weeks have passed i’ve become more and more confused, twisted and unsure – of what these last few months have meant for me, and mejor dicho, how to share with others what i’ve seen and felt.  i am looking forward to time at home with friends and family that know me, and will help me process…so that i can better follow up on my reasons for coming here to begin with.  in the meantime, here are some notes from three of the one-on-ones i’ve had in the last few days, in no particular order:

two organizers from VOCAL reflect on last year, the APPO, and looking ahead:

·        many saw the APPO formal structure and leadership become too centralized, imposing decisions on folks at the barricades (less likely to be associated with a non-profit or formal organization, and more likely to be working class or poor). 

·        while working for change that would require a fundamental overall of – or at least independence from – the oaxacan political and economic system, there’s no problem in working with folks that promote basic judicial or legal reforms, as long as they respect autonomous actions, and alternatives to negotiating with the government.

·        most of the divisions and tensions between activists was/is about an inability to self-criticize, or ego.  when tactics were called out as “too combative” or “violent,” it was less often about being in the moral right, and more about strategically achieving an ability to negotiate with the government.

·        many see the teachers of section 22 as having betrayed the movement for having accepted a bargain from the government after nov. 25^th last year, rather than continuing the struggle – people would have been supportive of a still very influential teacher’s union.  however, they have not put their weight behind getting political prisoners out of jail, and now it’s evident that they never saw themselves as part of the APPO, or wider movement goals.  the megamarches don’t convoke as many people as before.  it’s time for something more, for work in communities outside of oaxaca city, the marches have lost importance.

·        many feared (primary reason for VOCAL formation) that the APPO’s decision to enter electoral politics would be divisive at best.  one of the primary voices, from the communist Frente Popular Revolucionario, for the APPO to enter the elections at the beginning of the year, is now the only “movement” elected official.  it’s not hidden that pacts to control less reformist elements of the movement were made to allow for his candidacy.

·        internationals tend to prioritize giving money as acts of solidarity.  but more real political connection and exchange is needed, we are in this together, our countries are connected intimately.  and in fact, money isn’t always helpful as it can create dependency;the movement(s) last year didn’t run on funds, but human connection and effort, and access to resources from the land we stand on.

·        activists are still processing…last year was a glimpse of an amazing potential, of communities working together in ways the state for centuries has prevented.

an organizer from section 22 on affects of migration:

• a fear exists that if life were made easier for immigrants in the u.s. than even more people would migrant from Mexico…further reducing the number of potential activists here, and leaving behind communities, and land to work.
• mostly white folks and non-profits control the immigrant rights movement in the u.s. (i’ve heard this assumption from a number of people).
• when Oaxacans leave for the u.s. they are no longer active in social movements in Mexico, and focused on making money only.

[these last three comments were challenging, and i have had some contradictory experiences. but they were similar enough to thoughts i’ve heard from others that i thought they were important to post, i’d love to hear people’s thoughts, especially if anyone has analysis to offer around the first bullet-point.]

i thank everyone for taking the time to read this blog.  it has served as a useful place of reflection for me during my time here.  i feel the ability to respond to the challenge of these words…made real by how i act, and how comfortable i can be with the discomfort often present in engaging…to gabacho,

patrick