Hector Gomora
Rebellion
March 11, 2009
Nine years of breaking the strike at the UNAM
On 6 February, met Nine years after the invasion of the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM) from the unconstitutional portion of the army, disguised as police, which is the Federal Police. Thus the strike broke months earlier (April 20), triggered by an attempt by the power system to privatize UNAM shims from increased fees. Of course, as always happens in history, the trigger was one, but the resulting movements grow and reproduce various grievances on which they seek justice.
There is much to say about it, but it can now address the main points, which once were discussed in the media, and where was sufficient to find the bias and half-truths that made the media lynching that served as a pretext to break the strike. In this part incluso plumas afines a la izquierda, pero a la izquierda parlamentaria (o sea, el Partido de la Revolución Democrática), ésa que aceptó las reglas del sistema y que cuando surgen movimientos de base, que no buscan negociaciones para beneficio, siempre terminan dándoles la espalda. No es de extrañar que tanto el Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional como el Consejo General de Huelga (columna del movimiento estudiantil de 1999-2000) marcaran su distancia respecto al PRD.
Por el contrario, existen otros intelectuales y organizaciones que se niegan a aliarse con esa facción pragmática y utilitarista y trabajan para rescatar el verdadero legado histórico izquierdista, que concibe una sociedad integrada from below and not driven by elites borreguiles. Most of these voices are hardly heard when the CGH was presented in the media as intransigent.
met Now that nine years of breaking the strike, echoed in the media-even in some rather linked to the left-memories that are more characteristic of historical revisionism of information to preserve the memory: very biased reviews, which particularly important facts omitted while ranged in comments on the "undeniable" failures of the movement, but presented in a way that outline the CGH as a small group of bullies inept and incapable of understanding much. Admittedly, there were factions that fell on it, but to call a movement as complex as simplistic as it is, to say the least, ignorant.
Here are some of the things that were said. You'll notice that some were common to virtually all media, others were characteristic of the left press.
1. There was a marked polarization in the CGH and a natural attrition of the movement.
This was true in part, also omitted the polarization was a more of the system, for example, with various "proposals" of solution that really solves nothing. That helped create a division between those who were undeceived and who, eager to resume classes, wanted to see in those desired solution. It's a classic maneuver of power, less secure minds bust. The wield so insistently that division within the movement had inoculated the idea that the University was in the hands of people without direction. Finally, speaking of attrition of the movement is not easy and requires many elements to secure. Of course, when it comes to honesty and accountability reporting.
2. The invasion of University City was censored by many university sectors, including many who had been handed down to conclude the work stoppage.
That's true ... and in the case of the latter was a great hypocrisy, because everyone knows fairly understood that statements such as "it is necessary that this strike ends" are always used by the government as a pretext for repression. More than a supposedly left-wing intellectual contributed to making the false idea that CGH had won and it was time to deliver the facilities. Carlos Monsivais again is a good example. When the system propaganda invented duo vs ultras. moderate, this writer published an article called "Ultra: hysteria will absolve me," where related, without proof, to sectors that did not accept CGH the "generous" offers Rectory with the wings more intransigent and aggressive movements of earlier times. It was a classic article that makes use of the prestige-built by the power system, to make statements that carry weight not only among supporters of the person, but as propaganda for the system, so that it "proves" that even most lucid minds of the left are against it.
course, when the crackdown came, Mosniváis immediately published an article called "The ultras par excellence", which saddled the government divided the qualifiers before the CGH ... as if there been possible to foresee that it was not to tell who had no force or means at their disposal, who has all that and the monopoly of legal violence. It's the classic maneuver of the organic intellectual: first contributed to the political lynching and repression when it comes do the shocked me to keep my image with the clueless.
3. The intention to amend the General Rules of Payments (RGP) was canceled in June, but students did not want to end the strike because they argued that other five remained unfulfilled demands.
Indeed, the trigger was the passage, quite dirty, amendments to Regulation General Payments (RGP), which looked especially a sharp increase in quotas. And indeed, the movement demanded, in addition to the cancellation of such reforms, the following: repeal of the 1997 reforms for which canceled the automatic pass to graduate high school at UNAM, to eliminate the only exam National Evaluation Center (Io) for admission to secondary school; convene a university congress democratic and decisive, dismantling of the police and cancellation proceedings and sanctions against those involved in the movement, and tour the school calendar to make up the days lost during strike.
Again we came across the suggestion that the movement was uncompromising. First, the alleged "cancellation" of the new RGP Dean did not mean to abandon its plans to raise fees, only subtly changed the way they originally wanted to impose (as I'll explain later). Second, indeed, the movement had other demands, and this paper suggests that the only thing that was under discussion were the quotas.
If not ill intent, if at least claim ignorance in a way, because history shows that social movements are often born for a specific trigger, but recaptured the accumulated grievances. Y in previous years the UNAM authorities had made clear actions that were assaults against students and against the whole project of public universities, including the following: remove the automatic pass to graduate high school and apply test-memorable as the rector Javier Barros Sierra had called "aberration" -; incorporate the consideration of Ceneval UNAM, in clear violation of university autonomy to accept evaluation forms designed in the neo-liberal private sectors, and implementation of an administrative apparatus of repression.
But for the ignorant and the wicked, the fees were the only thing of which had to worry. It is as if the intention is to study the movement of 1968 in Mexico only from the beating that some students handed riot, or gang prior litigation. Let this form of deception for people like Octavio Paz, and distorted the analysis of '68.
4. Rector Francisco Barnes de Castro bowed to proposing that the fees were voluntary, but the movement did not accept that as a solution to the conflict.
Without mentioning the reasons for the CGH and many analysts to reject the measure, it is building a picture of intransigence. But there are two very important. First, although voluntary, such fees were illegal because the Constitution provides that public education should be free, and that means it will be even for those who can pay, equal rights for all. Second, and more importantly, taking as a basis for the story, the supreme master, it was hoped that such contributions, even if it was implemented and thus, would become mandatory at any time there is the example of the tax on auto ownership , which was supposed to be just to fund the Olympics in 1968 ... and still pay. With a historical adversary can not be so naive as to rely, if one leaves a door ajar gets sooner or later. It is a postulate elementary social left, which preserves the historical memory, and that is not understood by lovers of the left "dialoguera" inflating his speech precisely for that word, but always avoids the undeniable fact that when dealing with an enemy the dialogue history can not be a good faith, but with strategy, because the enemy always hit on the weak parts found.
5. In July, researchers emeritus of the UNAM, supported by 41 teachers from various disciplines, called the CGH "to terminate the strike and submit their proposals in the discussion forums on the understanding that the proposals that emerge will be carried to relevant decision makers. " The strikers rejected the proposal.
Again we encounter a selection of facts that does not give space to the reasons for the striking students, they understand that the proposal did not meet any of the claims. It was a typical strategy "to specific demands, ambiguous answers." Repeal the fees requested, untie the Ceneval and so on., And offered emeritus (fanfare please) ... discussion spaces. Moreover, "Emeritus"-not all were, but named in his time was part of the propaganda strategy, raised the same as the authorities: to bring particularly decision-makers ... controlled by them.
If one gets to investigate how the adoption of the regulation of payments that triggered the conflict, will find that there was precisely where the dirty work of the corporate machine linked to the federal bureaucrats who control the UNAM. How to endorse a proposal that made the decision in the hands of the same groups that triggered the conflict? Imagine that some workers go on strike and ask for 20% increase in salary and benefits 10% ... so clear, and in return receive and offer "discussion forums" where leave proposals were discussed between the employer and the representation union ... that workers know they are corrupt. Would we accept the proposal if we were the workers? "We seem intransigence?
6. Over time they had sharpened the contradictions and conflicts within the CGH and lived a climate of revenge and lack of self-criticism.
This is not true. This case is based precisely on the notes biased media. Is the strategy of selecting the facts that communicate to build a certain image, then do brainy analysis based on that false image. Even the press focused on the left fell into it.
arose While these notes, not necessarily invented, but selected from among others that contradict the desired image, people like Thomas Mojarro was aware of other activities and situations with groups politically educated and better organized ... while criticizing them as an ally their strategic failure. Moreover, these divisions and problems are inherent in any movement, but by chance only emphasizes those things at times.
7. There was pressure from radical groups to keep unemployment in schools where communities were pronounced to resume activities.
This is copied almost verbatim from a publication linked to the left, yet they are perceived use of language for ideological ends. Do not hesitate to label as position: those who speak for continuing the strike were "radical groups" and who wanted classes were "community" of course, the reasons for the "radicals" to remain vigilant unimportant. It reinforces the image of intransigence by suggesting-without evidence-that the majority of students wanted classes, while for the "other" uses the term reductionist "groups." Here it is asking one thing: even if it was really a significant majority to end a strike that was to abolish illegal fees, since when the voice communities is crucial to see if they fight for respect for the law? The legitimacy of the struggle is not measured by the number of people that support it.
Apparently, the basic idea of \u200b\u200bdemocracy as the voice of the masses is wielded only when convenient, if not, that everything is decided by group leaders.
8. In November, Francisco Barnes de Castro resigned as rector of the UNAM, passed by the conflict.
Actually the "resigned" President Zedillo, as part of a new strategy, which was in charge of the new agent in the UNAM, Juan Ramón de la Fuente. Not that Barnes was overtaken by the conflict, but changed its strategy. To terminate the authorities of the UNAM the image of intransigence and pass the CGH, was used to Leopard: change everything to change nothing. De la Fuente came with a conciliatory image, with the offer of dialogue, but as always happens with a historical adversary, such dialogue was just a ploy to gain time, they finally breached the agreements and progress on a demonization in the media. Overall, the same strategy used years ago against the Zapatistas.
Meetings between students and representatives of Dean were in the Palace of Mines in late 1999. After reaching some agreements authorities unilaterally cut off talks in January and presented something that was known as the Institutional Proposal to end the strike.
9. The governing Institutional Proposal contemplated definitely leave without effect on RGP.
is a half truth, and therefore untrue to say that the proposed fees expunged. What he proposed was that would be repealed if they so chose bodies controlled by the authorities. Do not rinse this is another way to build a picture of intransigence, and now the vast majority of media-including some linked to the left, as well outlined. They merely say that the CGH rejected the proposal without mentioning his reasons; and these were, again, they really did not involve any solution. He was being asked to CGH to give up his only weapon of pressure-making facilities, and disarmed and trust that corporate bodies are controlled by the authorities to settle their claims. In short, it was essentially the same thing months before the so-called proposed emeritus.
The chancellor held a plebiscite on January 20 to vote on the proposal Institutional among the university community.
10. The referendum initiative was supported by intellectuals and academics.
objective information would have added "and strong rejection and criticism of others. " But if they are not mentioned, much less be mentioned reasons. And there were two good-sized. First, that the plebiscite the authorities broke their word, they violated the agreements Mining December 1999, which recognized the CGH as the only valid interlocutor to resolve the conflict. Second, that the proposal implied stewardship ask the community their views on the assessments (for suggesting that they be repealed only if so decided, and law enforcement is not subject to public consultation or review of any organ. The Constitution provides in Article III that "all education that the State shall be free. " All means exactly that.
11. As a result of the plebiscite, 87 percent of the 150 000 participants supported the proposal and called for the resumption institutional activities.
These figures were released with great enthusiasm nine years ago and again a few weeks ago. Happened to be omitted-and-miss to mention what percentage of the total COMMUNITY COLLEGE 150 000 were those who, by bad faith or lack of understanding-legitimized the Rectory dishonesty. According to figures provided at the time by Mitofsky Consulting, which may be anything but a leftist organization, "the pattern of the UNAM was about 400 000 members. Go representativeness of the plebiscite. This would have been a failure for the authorities ... if not because the media turned to hide things like that to give the impression that the vast majority of the university community was against the strikers, they were a handful intransigent.
12. The strikers were confined to disavow the results of the plebiscite.
illegitimate They highlight what he and his lack of representativeness. Not to mention their arguments and use the verb "to discredit" it reinforces the image of intransigence.
addition, which was limited distribution for nine years and no now (or for many of the feathers of "left") is that in response to the referendum of the authorities, the CGH made his own parallel query, the results did not even bother to analyze.
13. As a prelude to the operation which came to University City, on February elements of the Federal Preventive Police entered the premises of the Preparatory 3, following a clash between members of the Directorate General of the Commonwealth of the UNAM and Student members Justo Sierra Front.
So it was said a few weeks ago, ignoring that there were complaints that it was a provocation to PFP give the pretext to invade.
14. The strikers were divided and engaged in long meetings.
Very true, and is one of the things that "good faith" is to question the move, but what the heck does that have to do with the fact that they were betrayed by Dean, subject of a fierce campaign to discredit and attacked in a brutal and illegal? Again he wanted to "justify" and wants to strike suggesting that UNAM was in the hands of people without direction. On Saturday February 5, 2000 some two thousand 260 soldiers entered the University City. A lot of students and teachers as well as people who supported the strike were charged nothing Unless terrorism and riot. That stopped the most "daring" review last February. None of the allegations of legal irregularities that occurred with it, or on signs in the sense that the operation of University City invasion involved several serious legal violations. All this was almost entirely censored at the time and now can be easily erased from history ... unless we do something.
That is the importance of preserving historical memory, because otherwise years later, we prescribe a version of "revisionist" as before, and will remain easy prey to the manipulations and conceptual information we will launch from the media when they arise the next-and insurance-social protest movements.
This is especially important now that the present government is taking the criminalization of social protest to extremes rarely seen in recent times. We must learn to distinguish allied feathers which are not. It is grown by ourselves, have more options (which are not in the commercial media, but they exist), to define our own position on things and learn to discriminate trial.
is that, or continue to say that students are criminals, that is, following hot on ourselves without realizing it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment