Advertisement

Sliding Doors of Opportunity: Zapatistas and Their Cycle of Protest

  • María InclánEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research book series (HSSR)

Abstract

Using a cross-sectional time-series event-count model, this study analyzes the effects of local, national, and international variables on pro-Zapatista protests across the 111 localities (municipios) of Chiapas over a 10-year period (1994–2003). Protests were more likely to occur in localities with previous protest activity, a closed political system, and a larger presence of the military. Local and national electoral openings, as well as a larger local and national presence of the Zapatistas’ presumed political ally, the Partido de la Revolución Democrática (PRD), had a negative relationship with protest activity. Specific openings to the Zapatistas also worked as protest depressants. International attention did not show any significant effect on Zapatista protest activity. However, these institutional and specific openings were only ephemeral opportunities in that they did not translate into substantive concessions for the movement. They appear to have decreased the strength of the Zapatista protest cycle, while the international attention to the movement did not show any significant effect on it.

Keywords

Mexico Zapatista EZLN Chiapas Cycle of protest PRD 

References

  1. Almeida, P. D. (2003). Opportunity organizations and threat-induced contention: Protest waves in authoritarian settings. American Journal of Sociology, 109(2), 345–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barron, D. (1992). The analysis of count data: Overdispersion and autocorrelation. Sociological Methodology, 22, 179–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benjamin, T. (1996). A rich land, a poor people: Politics and society in modern Chiapas. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bob, C. (2002). Political-process theory and transnational movements: Dialectics of protest among nigeria’s ogoni minority. Social Problems, 49(3), 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bob, C. (2005). The marketing of rebellion: Insurgents, media, and international activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brockett, C. D. (1991). The structure of political opportunities and peasant mobilization in central America. Comparative Politics, 23(3), 253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruhn, K. (1999). Antonio gramsci and the palabra verdadera: The political discourse of Mexico’s guerrilla forces. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 41(2), 29–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Castells, M. (1997). The power of identity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. CIEPAC (Centro de Investigaciones Económicas y Políticas de Acción Comunitaria). (2003). Mapas militares [Military maps]. http://www.ciepac.org. Accessed 7 Jan 2003.
  11. Collier, G. A., & Collier, J. F. (2005). The zapatista rebellion in the context of globalization. Journal of Peasant Studies, 32(3–4), 450–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Collier, G. A., & Quaratiello, E. L. (1994). Basta! land and the zapatista rebellion. Oakland: Institute for Food and Development Policy.Google Scholar
  13. CONAPO (Consejo Nacional de Población). (2003). Índices de marginación [Deprivation Indexes]. http://www.conapo.gob.mx. Accessed 3 Sept 2003.
  14. Cress, D. M., & Snow, D. A. (2000). The outcomes of homeless mobilization: The influence of organization, disruption, political mediation, and framing. American Journal of Sociology, 105(4), 1063–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (1999). Social movements. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Earl, J., Soule, S. A., & McCarthy, J. D. (2003). Protest under fire? Explaining the policing of protest. American Sociological Review, 68(4), 581–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Earl, J., Martin, A., McCarthy, J. D., & Soule, S. A. (2004). The use of newspaper data in the study of collective action. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Einwohner, R. L. (2003). Opportunity, honor, and action in the warsaw ghetto uprising of 1943. American Journal of Sociology, 109(3), 650–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eisinger, P. (1973). The conditions of protest behavior in American cities. American Political Science Review, 67(1), 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Estrada, M. (2005). The ‘Armed Community in Rebellion’: Neo-zapatismo in the tojolab’al Cañadas, Chiapas (1988–1996). Journal of Peasant Studies, 32(3–4), 528–554.Google Scholar
  21. Feierabend, I. K., Feierabend, R. L., & Nesvold, B. A. (1973). The comparative study of revolution and violence. Comparative Politics, 5(3), 393–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foweraker, J., & Craig, A. L. (Eds.). (1990). Popular movements and political change in Mexico. London: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  23. Gamson, W. A., & Meyer, D. S. (1996). Framing political opportunity. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 275–290). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gamson, W. A., & Wolfsfeld, G. (1993). Movements and media as interacting systems. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528, 114–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. García de León, A. (2005). From revolution to transition: The Chiapas rebellion and the path to democracy in Mexico. Journal of Peasant Studies, 32(3–4), 508–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Global Exchange and CIEPAC (Centro de Investigaciones Económicas y Políticas de Acción Comunitaria). (1999). Siempre cerca, Siempre lejos: Las Fuerzas Armadas en México [Always near, always far: The armed forces in Mexico]. Mexico City: Cencos.Google Scholar
  27. Goldstone, J. A., & Tilly, C. (2001). Threat (and opportunity): Popular action and state response in the dynamics of contentious action. In R. R. Aminzade, J. A Goldstone, D. McAdam, E. J. Perry, W. H. Sewell, Jr., S. Tarrow, & C. Tilly (Eds.), Silence and voice in the study of contentious politics (pp. 179–194). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Goodwin, J., & Jasper, J. M. (1999). Caught in a winding, snarling vine: The structural bias of political-process theory. Sociological Forum, 14(1), 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harvey, N. (1998). The Chiapas rebellion: The struggle for land and democracy. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hellman, J. A. (1999). Real and virtual Chiapas: Magic realism and the left. In L. Panitch & C. Leys (Eds.), Necessary and unnecessary utopias: Socialist register 2000 (pp. 161–186). Near Woodbridge: Merlin.Google Scholar
  31. Higgins, N. P. (2004). Understanding the Chiapas rebellion: Modernist visions and the invisible Indian. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hipsher, P. L. (1998). Democratic transitions and social-movement outcomes. In M. G. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), From contention to democracy (pp. 149–167). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  33. Hirales, G. (1998). Camino a Acteal [The road to acteal]. Mexico City: Rayuela.Google Scholar
  34. IEE-Chiapas (Instituto Estatal Electoral de Chiapas). (2003). Procesos electorales [Electoral Processes]. http://www.iee-chiapas.org.mx. Accessed 3 Oct 2003.
  35. IFE (Instituto Federal Electoral). (2003). Estadísticas de las Elecciones Federales de México [Statistics of federal elections in Mexico]. http://www.ife.org.mx. Accessed 3 Oct 2003.
  36. INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática). (2005). Sistema Municipal de Base de Datos [Municipal system database]. http://www.inegi.gob.mx. Accessed 5 Nov 2005.
  37. Jenkins, J. C., & Perrow, C. (1977). Insurgency of the powerless: Farm worker movements (1946–1972). American Sociological Review, 42(2), 249–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jenkins, J. C., & Schock, K. (1992). Global structures and political processes in the study of domestic political conflict. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 161–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jenkins, J. C, Jacobs, D., & Agnone, J. (2003). Political opportunities and African-American protest, 1948–1997. American Journal of Sociology, 109(2), 277–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Katzenstein, M., & Mueller, C. (1987). The women’s movements of the United States and Western Europe. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  42. King, G. (1989). A seemingly unrelated poisson regression model. Sociological Methods and Research, 17(4), 235–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kitschelt, H. (1986). Political-opportunity structure and political protest: Antinuclear movements in four democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 16(1), 57–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Giugni, M. G. (1992). New social movements and political opportunities in western Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 22(2), 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Giugni, M. G. (1995). New social movements in Western Europe: A comparative analysis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  46. Kurzman, C. (1996). Structural opportunity and perceived opportunity in social-movement theory: The Iranian revolution of 1979. American Sociological Review, 61(1), 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Land, K. C., McCall, P. L., & Nagin, D. S. (1996). A comparison of poisson, negative binomial, and semiparametric mixed poisson regression models. Sociological Methods and Research, 24, 387–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Legorreta, M. C. (1998). Religión, política y guerrillas en Las Cañadas de la Selva Lacandona [Religion, politics, and guerrillas in the gorges of the lacandon jungle]. Mexico City: Cal y Arena.Google Scholar
  49. Leyva, X. (2005). Indigenismo, Indianismo, and ‘ethnic citizenship’ in Chiapas. Journal of Peasant Studies, 32(3–4), 555–583.Google Scholar
  50. Leyva, X., & Ascencio, G. (1996). Lacandonia al filo del agua [Lacandonia at the edge of the water]. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica.Google Scholar
  51. Long, S. J., & Freese, J. (2006). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables using stata (2nd ed.). College Station: Stata Corp.Google Scholar
  52. Loveman, M. (1998). High-risk collective action: Defending human rights in Chile, Uruguay, and Argentina. American Journal of Sociology, 104(2), 477–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Luke, D. A. (2004). Multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Mattiace, S. I. (1997). Zapata Vive! The EZLN, Indigenous politics, and the autonomy movement in Mexico. Journal of Latin American Anthropology, 3(1), 32–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. McAdam, D. (1982). Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  56. McAdam, D. (1996). Conceptual origins, current problems, and future directions. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 23–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. McCarthy, J. D., McPhail, C., & Smith, J. (1996). Images of protest: Dimensions of selection bias in media coverage of washington demonstrations, 1982 and 1991. American Sociological Review, 61(3), 478–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Melel X. (2003). Síntesis Informativa, 1997–2003 [Information Synthesis, 1997–2003].Google Scholar
  59. Meyer, D. S. (2004). Protest and political opportunities. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 125–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Meyer, D. S., & Minkoff, D. C. (2004). Conceptualizing political opportunity. Social Forces, 82(4), 1457–1492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Minkoff, D. (1997). The sequencing of social movements. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 779–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Moksnes, H. (2005). Suffering for justice in Chiapas: Religion and the globalization of ethnic identity. Journal of Peasant Studies, 32(3–4), 584–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Noonan, R. K. (1995). Women against the state: Political opportunities and collective action frames in Chile’s transition to democracy. Sociological Forum, 10(1), 81–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Oberschall, A. (1996). Opportunities and framing in the eastern European revolts of 1989. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 93–121). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Oberschall, A. (2000). Social movements and the transition to democracy. Democratization, 7, 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. O’Donnell, G., & Schmitter, P. C. (1986). Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Pickvance, C. (1995). Social movements in the transition from state socialism: Convergence or divergence? In L. Maheu (Ed.), Social movements and social classes: The future of collective action (pp. 123–150). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  68. Pickvance, K. (1997). Social movements in Hungary and Russia: The case of environmental movements. European Sociological Review, 13(1), 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Piven, F. F., & Cloward, R. A. (1979). Poor people’s movements. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  70. Rasler, K. (1996). Concessions, repression, and political protest in the iranian revolution. American Sociological Review, 61(1), 132–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rootes, C. (2002). Political-opportunity structures. In J. Barry & E. G. Frankland (Eds.), International encyclopedia of environmental politics (pp. 375–377). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  72. Rootes, C. (2003). Britain. In C. Rootes (Ed.), Environmental protest in Western Europe (pp. 20–58). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Rucht, D. (1996). The impact of national contexts on social-movement structures: A cross-movement and cross-national comparison. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 185–204). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rus, J. (1995). Local adaptation to global change: The reordering of native society in highland Chiapas, Mexico, 1974–1994. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 58, 71–89.Google Scholar
  75. Schock, K. (1999). People power and political opportunities: Social-movement mobilization and outcomes in the Philippines and Burma. Social Problems, 46(3), 355–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Schulz, M. S. (1998). Collective action across borders: Opportunity structures, networks capacities, and communicative praxis in the age of advanced globalization. Sociological Perspectives, 41(3), 587–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Smith, J. (1997). Characteristics of the modern transnational social movement sector. In J. Smith, C. Chatfield, & R. Pagnucco (Eds.), Transnational social movements and global politics (pp. 42–58). Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Stephen, L. (2002). Zapata lives! Histories and cultural politics in Southern Mexico. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Subcomandante, M. (2000). Comunicado del Comité Clandestino Revolucionario Indígena-Comandancia General del Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional [Communique of the CCRI- EZLN]. http://www.jornada.unam.mx. Accessed 12 Sept 2006.
  80. Taagepera, R., & Shugart, M. S. (1989). Seats and votes: The effects and determinants of electoral systems. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Tarrow, S. (1989). Democracy and disorder: Protest and politics in Italy, 1965–1975. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  82. Tarrow, S. (1994). Power in movement: Social movements, collective action, and mass politics in the modern state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  85. Van Cott, D. L. (2001). Explaining ethnic-autonomy regimes in latin America. Studies in Comparative International Development, 35, 30–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Villafuerte, D., Meza, S., Ascencio, G., García, M. C., Rivera, C., Lisbona, M., & Morales, J. (1999). La tierra en Chiapas: Viejos problemas nuevos [Land in Chiapas: Old new problems]. Mexico City: Plaza y Valdés.Google Scholar
  87. Viqueira, J. P., & Ruz, M. H. (Eds.). (1995). Los rumbos de otra historia [The courses of a different history]. Mexico City: UNAM.Google Scholar
  88. Zdravomyslova, E. (1996). Opportunities and framing in the transition to democracy: The case of Russia. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 122–137). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.División de Estudios PolíticosCentro de Investigación y Docencia EconómicasMéxico, D.F.México

Personalised recommendations