Language

Reporter's Notebook: Cindy Lou Wilmore

Another View of Conflict within the APPO

The reporting on Narco News has generally been biased towards the anarchist groups.  I think this is because they call themselves anarchists, although many of them claim to be uninterested in ideology so one wonders if they know what anarchy means.

Propaganda has appeared in the international and national media recently claiming that Marxist groups control the Asamblea Popular de los Pueblos de Oaxaca, the APPO.  They are a significant presence in the APPO, as are CIPO-RFM, the Consejo Indigena Popular de Oaxaca-Ricardo Flores Magon, and CODEP, Comite de Defensa de los Derechos del Pueblo, who are Magonista (Flores Magon was an anarchist who influenced Zapata and inspired the Mexican Revolution) groups, members of the PRD, Partido Revolucionario Democratica, the party of Lopez Obrador, teachers, and representatives from the communities.  No one group controls the APPO. The FPR, one of the Marxist groups, with a sense of desperation, with no weapons, faced with constant harassment and death, attempted in the assembly the 10th and 11th of February to get the APPO to run political candidates.  They maintain that this was only for the purpose of outreach to the communities, in order to educate more people to what the APPO represents.  They said they think it is very unlikely that they would win the elections.  Other groups, including an indigenous anarchist group thought that the APPO should either enter candidates or endorse candidates.  At the present time only one FPR member is a candidate in the election. He is also a member of the congress of the APPO and is resigning from the APPO in order to conform to the position of the APPO to not participate in the elections.    

 The Mexican people are cynical about elections and political parties (reasonably), and the APPO when it was first organized told people it was not a political party (it is not).  The proposal to run or endorse candidates was fought virulently by most of the anarchists, and particularly David Venegas, the representative of one of the barricades, Brenamiel.  They were successful in resisting this proposal in the assembly of the 10th and 11th of February, however in the process David alienated some people with his aggressive tactics of interruptions and disruptions, and one member of both the congress of the APPO and the FPR, the Frente Popular Revolucionaria, a Marxist group, Guadalupe García Leyva, accused him of being a police agent.  Evidently there had been some suspicion of this previously as there were rumors that members of his family are police

After this conflict in the APPO some anarchists and barricaderos (the name given to the people who protected the barricades during the uprising) began forming a group called VOCAL.  One of the first organizational meetings was in February in the CIPO house.  This organization was to operate within the APPO but autonomously, which seems to mean that “we will cooperate when it suits our purposes, but don’t count on us.”

The CIPO and CODEP until this time had been conforming to the positions of the APPO and were an important part of it.  CODEP was very important in the initial foundation of the APPO.  Both CODEP and CIPO participate in VOCAL to some extent.

Some history of the movement in Oaxaca would be helpful to understand what happened subsequently.  The teachers for 26 years had occupied the Zocalo (central park) while negotiating pay with the state government.  Last year their planton (tent city) was attacked in the early morning of  June 14 by state police.  This had never occurred before.  The teachers, along with University students, organizations like CODEP, and community people fought back and went on to take over the entire city of Oaxaca, putting up barricades and essentially bringing state business to a complete halt.  The APPO was formed and its primary demand was and still is the removal of the governor and his staff.  They refuse to recognize the present state government and have no communication with it.

They held the city until November 2.  During this time there were attacks on the barricades and on individuals associated with the movement and many people were killed, beaten, and disappeared.  When Bradley Will, an American photojournalist with Indymedia, was killed on October 27, and Rueda Pacheco the head of the teachers union pulled the union out of the APPO (thousands of teachers still participate and at the state assembly this action was denounced), the death of Will was used as a pretext to send in the PFP the Federal Police.  The police tore down all the barricades except the one protecting the last APPO radio station at the University, and forced the movement out of the Zocalo to the church of Santa Domingo where they established a planton.

The planton in Santo Domingo was destroyed probably by local police the night following a demonstration which turned violent when the Federal Police attacked after being insulted by some of the participants.  The police were repelled at this time but the planton was burned during the night.  The situation continued with marches and demonstrations.  The people were frustrated and unsure how to bring the movement forward.  On the 20th of November the congress of the APPO had a meeting to decide the action of the 25th.

There had been a proposal from the federal government, including elements of the PFP, that on the 25th the PFP would retire completely from the Zocalo to the Parque de Amor which is on the pereferico (loop) that circles the center of Oaxaca.  The APPO would enter the Zocalo (the central park) in the march but would not put up a planton (a tent city to occupy the Zocalo) and would retire from the Zocalo at the end of the day.  The PFP would not return to the Zocalo.  This plan was probably intended to benefit the businesses in the Zocalo who suffered more from the presence of the PFP than the presence of the teachers.  

The barricaderos from Brenamiel, who had actually operated from the barricade a little closer to town at the Pitico because there had been conflicts with the teachers at Brenamiel over drugs, alcohol, and extortion, proposed that they instead circle the Zocalo where the PFP were camped, and remain for the night.  The FPR wanted to march through the Zocalo and have a rally at the Santo Domingo Church.  

The plan of the barricaderos from Brenamiel was accepted with the support of CODEP, CIPO and the Maoist group, however with the stipulation from those in dissent that the APPO would remain one block out so as to avoid direct contact with the PFP.

With an action this provocative it would have been prudent to have come prepared to fight with everything you have at the moment, remained prepared to fight, and have a plan of escape.  Instead, after a couple of hours in which there was no confrontation, the majority of the participants, community people who are not on the council but support the APPO, unaware of the danger of the situation, went home to eat.  

The areas dominated by CIPO did not remain one block out, and the demonstration was attacked in that location first (it more than likely would have been attacked regardless as the PFP were in Oaxaca to crush this movement.)  The only people who had a plan were the Marxists, who retreated to Santo Domingo to regroup in order to defend the APPO.  Many of the people who had left, and even some other sympathizers who hadn’t been there previously, ran back to defend, but it was too late, with the APPO sandwiched between local police thugs with guns and the brutal PFP with bigger guns.  Hundreds of people were arrested, tortured, and disappeared, and a small number killed.  

The APPO moved to the right in the time following the tragedy of the 25th of November and attempted to attribute all violence to provocateurs, which of course is untrue.  The barricaderos and anarchists are a very small element of the people willing to fight if necessary.  One mason had not been in the demonstration but heard the APPO had been attacked and ran to the zocalo to help.  I asked him why and he said, “Because my neighbors are teachers.”  

The APPO prohibited wall painting and masks for the first march after the 25th on December 1, because the APPO had assurances from the federal government they would not be attacked if they did not do graffiti and did not wear masks.  This was an event for which the barricaderos, CIPO, CODEP, and their sympathizers failed to appear.  They were not present in any of the days immediately following the 25th.   For this their prestige in the APPO was diminished, although they are still an important force.

The APPO is no longer enforcing the rule about face coverings, as talks with the federal government have been suspended.  However the suspension of face coverings, while protecting the genuine APPO spray painters, also made it more difficult for the infiltrators who would follow behind the marches with either left wing provocative (painting collaborator across Flavio Sosa’s face) or anti-APPO slogans.    

There was a meeting on March 12 to plan actions for March 15, the international day against police brutality, and an obviously important day for Oaxaca, given the extreme police brutality they have suffered since the movement began.  The members of the APPO knew that the new group VOCAL was planning a march for this day, but VOCAL did not petition for the support of the APPO on the 12th, which would have been necessary in order for the APPO to appear as a group, and did not even formally notify the APPO of the march until two or three hours before it was to begin.  This was probably because VOCAL was to be introduced that day and the participants did not want to be overshadowed by the APPO.  Consequently there were 30 people present.  With the police presence of about 200, the participants decided to suspend the march.

A letter was sent to the local newspaper, “Noticias de Oaxaca” on the morning of the 15th    of March denouncing VOCAL as priistas (referring to the PRI), police agents, and thugs, supposedly from a member of the congress of the APPO named “Jennifer.”  No such person exists and none of the people I have questioned within the APPO know anything about the source of this letter.

David Venegas (nicknamed alebrije which more or less translates as nightmare) the representative to the congress of the APPO from the Brenamiel barricade, was kidnapped by armed men on the 13th of April, beaten, accused of holding drugs (probably planted) and sent to the Santa Maria Ixcotel in the city of Oaxaca.  Since then the APPO has been accused of failing to support David, and the FPR has been accused of collaboration with the government and the members of the FPR have been accused of using the APPO for personal advancement.

Perhaps the APPO did not turn out in huge numbers for the demonstrations for David’s liberty, but there have been two or three demonstrations (perhaps more) for David and only David.  This number of demonstrations has not been held for any other single prisoner (or really any other demonstration for a single person except one demonstration for the teacher that the police grabbed near the University.)  The demonstrations are usually mass demonstrations for all the political prisoners, with thousands of people, many carrying signs showing the picture of a political prisoner.  David was mentioned specifically at the mother’s day event of the APPO at which CIPO and CODEP did not appear.  

On May 15th David sent a letter to the paper that denounced specifically several members of the APPO, including the most frequently seen designated speaker, Florentino Lopez.  There was also a big march of teachers as it is international teachers day.  CIPO and CODEP were distributing this letter at the march, and David’s father read it in the rally.  In the letter David says that the FPR has been circulating a video that is supposed to be proof that he is a police agent.  He had supposedly been seen and filmed several times exiting the offices of Heliodoro Diaz Escarraga in the SEPROCI, the Secretaria de Proteccion Ciudadana (the chief of police).  The FPR members I have talked with deny knowing anything at all about a video, and Florentino Lopez had told me a few days before that he did not believe David was a police agent.  

David said in the letter that Florentino Lopez has been detained two times, the first time was on February 20, when Florentino Lopez and two other people, one a retired former director of the teachers union, were detained for three hours and beaten and then released.  One of David’s jailers informed him of the other time, in which the jailer claimed to have detained Florentino and released him under directions from his superior.  Florentino denies this ever happened.  There was an attempted detention of Florentino at the bus station, in which he and his friends fought off the police.  Florentino is certainly more believable than David’s jailer.

David attributes an action to Guadalupe García Leyva, the FPR member who denounced him the 11th of February, that was committed by Ezequiel Rosales Careno.  Careno, the secretary of the teachers’ union, denounced the youth who showed up at the May Day march with their faces covered as being provacateurs and thugs and all members of VOCAL.  Careno is not a member of APPO and again tried to remove the teachers union from the APPO unsuccessfully in the recent state meeting.  

David also says in the letter that there are many members of the both the FPR and the congress of the APPO who are candidates in the elections, but several members of the FPR have told me that there is only one.  

This action by David, disorganized and factually incorrect, either intended to fracture the APPO, or a reflection of his desperation, has boomeranged, and probably will destroy VOCAL.  May 17th this message was posted after his letter on the internet:

“Las barricadas de  5 señores, colonias Reforma, infonavit, Ricardo Flores Magon, Simbolos patrios,Col. Santa Maria, Montoya, Sta. Rosa, El rosario, Gomez Sandoval, Volcanes, Siete Regiones, Yalalag, San Juanito nos deslindamos publicamente del Mencionado David Venegas a) alebrije mejor conocido ya como POLIBRIJE.
Las sospechas sobre el, que lo señalan como policia al servicio de URO no son nuevas, sino vienen de tiempo atras. Con esta actitud no hace mas que confirmarlo.”

Translated (as well as I can) this is: "The barricades of colonias Reforma, infonavit, Ricardo Flores Magon, Simbolos patrios, Col. Santa Maria, Montoya, Sta. Rosa, Elr rosario, Gomez Sandoval, Volcanes, Siete Regiones, Yalalag, San Juanito separate ourselves publicly from the mentioned David Venegas a) alebrije, better known as POLIBRIJE. The suspicions about him as being in service to the police are not new, they come from before. With this attitude he has done nothing more than confirm these.”

David’s action will also inevitably damage the APPO as some people who are peripherally involved will be confused by it and give up, and some will believe the letter.  And then somewhere out there are some who know exactly what they are doing.

The hope is that CIPO, CODEP, and the youth from the Brenamiel barricade will remain active in the APPO, because although their influence is not without errors, no group’s influence is without errors; we all make mistakes.  They are a valuable part of the movement both theoretically and physically.  The CIPO is the one with which I am most familiar, and they are promoting organic gardening.  Most of the local vegetables are produced without synthetics because of economics, but it is good to reinforce this and make it conscious.  Theoretically they are promoting an anti-authoritarian position, which is an extremely important strand in the APPO, and empowering the indigenous communities (although sometimes in practice it appears to be the reverse).  

The FPR members I have come to know are sincere and dedicated.  I do not agree with their positions all the time.  I think it is a mistake to run candidates and I don’t uphold Stalin or, for that matter, Lenin, although neither one should be ignored.   However the FPR is often correct in tactical issues because they study history and theory, and I have seen no one in the movement appear to be as loved as Florentino Lopez

The FPR do not have the gift of media manipulation that is displayed by CIPO, with their dramatic, visually effective demonstrations.  CIPO out of all the groups has also done the best job of presenting itself to the international community, although in a little less than straightforward way, as partying pacifists who “only want to be left in peace.”

The correct way forward is going to come from all the voices of the APPO, not from any single group.  International support can go to the APPO and there will soon (within a few days) be a link in order to contribute to COFADPPO the political prisoner support group on the web site www.asambleapopulardeoaxaca.com.

About Cindy Lou Wilmore

Comments

Re: Another View of Conflict within the APPO

      I posted the open letter written by David Venegas Reyes, in English and Spanish, at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oaxacastudyactiongro up/message/2793

The posting begins with some introductory remarks, as follows:
--------------------------------------------
Rompiendo el silencio,
por David Venegas Reyes
Versión original en español abajo

      An ugly situation within the APPO recently emerged with an open letter titled, "Breaking the silence" by David Venegas Reyes, a council member of the APPO who was abducted by state agents on 13 April in a park near downtown Oaxaca City. My sense at the moment is that he is an idealistic and forceful person whose opposition to the political system is so strong (as is mine) that he may be too condemnatory of some of the people within the APPO who believe they should try to gain political leverage through entering electoral politics. In his letter he says several times that he respects those honest compañeros and compañeras who believe in trying the electoral route, but he holds in utter contempt those who he thinks are doing so for personal gain, and in particular those who have attacked him with the claim that he is a police agent.
      Without any doubt the Ulises mob is doing its utmost to debilitate the APPO, employing its full arsenal of dirty tactics. I believe it's important, especially for those of us who are not Mexican nationals but who are supportive of struggles for social justice, to try to stay away from being condemnatory of differing ideological formations within the Oaxaca movement. As a committed anarchist who is totally opposed to all hierarchical power structures, my beliefs are contrary to those of the authoritarian left parties, but there are surely good people (some of whom I know) who quite honestly hold the views of such parties. It may be that David has been mistaken in some of the things he said (I don't know), but it is a bigger mistake for foreigners to label him a liar, as one recently did. I think we ought to be as respectful as we can of the different elements within the social struggle and leave it to the oaxaqueños to sort out who deserves to be in the APPO and who they have grounds to despise. Unless we are true internationalists and have entered the struggle, assuming the personal risks that entails, it is arrogant of us to try to "tell them" what to do. Their struggle, it seems to me, is magnificent, and puts to shame anything mounted by "us" in the U.S.
--------------------------------------------
      My view of the conflict is not in agreement with Cindy's. David, of course, speaks from his own perspective.
George
     

Alebrija

I've only been in Oaxaca briefly, so I'll leave discussions of APPO politics to Oaxacans and those who have been close to the movement for a long time.   I know both anarchists and stalinists have been imprisoned and tortured, and my role from here is to support the broader struggle and highlight the repression  . ..

But it does strike me as disengenuous to suggest that David Venegas Reyes' nickname, Alebrije, "more or less translates as nightmare."  My understanding is that alebrijes are traditional Oaxacan wooden figrurines.

Alebrije

The term is used as a whole to describe the carvings.  I don't know the reason for this.  But you cannot find the word in the dictionary and I had been told years ago by the artisans that it means nightmare. As you probably know many of the carvings are fantastic creatures.

Other of the movement participants took threatening nicknames.  This is not necessarily a criticism.  

So since it was my understanding of the translation and is probably the correct translation I don't think disingenuous is the word you want.

Also since I'm replying to this I will clarify something else. I do not believe that David is a police agent consciously.  Furthermore as a political prisoner he merits the support of the movement until his release.

However I think his attacks on the APPO are in service to the state.  Obviously some would disagree.

For clarity.

Again not consciously in service to the state.

The Problem with Rumors in Movements

This publication is about providing a platform for free speech and especially authentic journalism: free speech based on fact.

It's frustrating, though, to see some of the claims and counter-claims made within political movements between rival players be repeated so carelessly in this essay above. It is the author's free speech to do so, but it is equally my free speech to contest it.

Specifically, the following statement is beyond the pale:

"The letter goes on to say that the suspicions that he works as police in service to the governor are not new.  With this attitude he has done nothing more than prove it."

Cross-fires of accusations about one person or group or another being police agents are as old as every radical political movement on earth. There is often no solid way of proving or disproving such accusations. In terms of journalism, I don't consider it "news" since it is not "new" when egos, ideologies, and interests conflict on the same side of the barricades, or when small-minded operatives smear others, often stoked by counter-insurgency and disinformation campaigns from above.

There are legitimate matters worth debating in terms of the strategies, tactics and actions of all tendencies. The natural tensions in a wide coalition, such as APPO, mirror societal struggles: whether to be involved in "elections" or not, how to bring support for political prisoners, how some organizations try to maneuver the APPO in their own partisan directions, I  think, are all legitimate matters for public discussion. So is the question of how other groups treat minority tendencies, be it anarchists or stalinists, and how those tendencies relate to broader movements.

Neither VOCAL nor the FPR is "The APPO." And neither, of course, are affiliated with Narco News.

But the "he said vs. he said" accounts of FPR vs. Vocal, or the supposed communique from the barricades accusing another of being a police agent, are simply childish and unproductive. I am tempted to say that they are oh so "high school," but that would be unfair to many high school students today.

And I think it is particularly unwise for non-Oaxacans to repeat these rumors. It is an over-stepping of our role as journalists, or observers or solidarity workers.

I have only just had the chance (being on the road) to read the comment above today. As with all Narcosphere entries, they reflect the opinions of the author and do not at all reflect the editiorial stance of Narco News. That should go without saying, but in this case I wish to use my free speech to say it a bit more loudly, because it is not the kind of discourse that I, or this publication, ever want to be perceived as endorsing.

Repeating rumors about social fighters without any factual evidence serves only the counter-insurgency efforts of the State. If there are factional organizations behind any of the rumors repeated above, let me send them a crystal clear message that Narco News will not be hijacked as a vehicle for counter-insurgency, not today and not ever. Perhaps there are media or organizations that are easily out-maneuvered by such experienced and dogmatic factional fighters. But we have never been that and we will, when necessary, surgically point out that certain statements (like the one highlighted above) are not statements of fact, despite their absurd claims to "proof."

Help yourselves to the free speech here, but those that cross the line between fact and rumor should be prepared for responses by myself and others to make it clear that you do not speak for us. And that we frown upon rumors here. We investigate and report facts. And we offer a free venue for opinion. And our readers aren't stupid; they know the difference between the two!

Al Giordano

your comments

The point of the quotation from  from the barricade groups was to display the turmoil.  However, you failed to notice what was important in this article which was really two things:
  1. VOCAL did not request participation by the APPO in the march on the 15th as stated by Oliver.  
  2. No representative from the APPO sent the infamous Jennifer letter and no one from the APPO has publicly denounced spray painters, etc, or condemned VOCAL at all until recently.
The turmoil within the APPO was not made public by me.  I would call your crazed letter infantile but I wouldn't want to insult infants.  

User login