One of the communist parties here supports them and their stances, and I do too, the thing is that well, they stopped fighting a long time ago and don’t really consider themselves communist or ML at all, even though they stemmed from a revolutionary ML guerilla army, though they don’t consider themselves anarchist either. Generally speaking I critically support them because of their anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist, ecological and de-colonial positions, but politically they’re kinda weird. Other communists call their stances “postmodern” and I kinda agree as well. It’s a long story and I feel like I should read more about them to understand what they think exactly.

They do well. Highly favorable. From what I understand a lot of the rural relies on local militias for protection and governance. I don’t think the nature of the Zapatistas is unique in Mexico though their ideology is from what I know. They’ve been around for a long time doing their own thing.

I am unaware of much about them aside from the basics – indigenous liberation struggle, anarchist-adjacent policies – but I have read that they distance themselves from anarchism and do not like the label, much to the chagrin of anarchists.

“Zapatismo was not Marxist-Leninist, but it was also Marxist-Leninist. It was not university Marxism, it was not the Marxism of concrete analysis, it was not the history of Mexico, it was not the fundamentalist and millenarian indigenous thought and it was not the indigenous resistance. It was a mixture of all of this, a cocktail which was mixed in the mountain and crystallized in the combat force of the EZLN.” – Subcomandante Marcos