Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Globalización, tierra, resistencia y autonomía: el EZLN y el MST / Globalization, land, resistance and autonomy: the EZLN and the MST

Leandro Vergara-Camus
Revista Mexicana de Sociología
Vol. 73, No. 3 (julio-septiembre, 2011), pp. 387-414
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23075713
Page Count: 28
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Globalización, tierra, resistencia y autonomía: el EZLN y el MST / Globalization, land, resistance and autonomy: the EZLN and the MST
Preview not available

Abstract

Este artículo presenta una comparación de la lucha por la tierra del EZLN en Chiapas y del MST en Brasil en el marco de la globalización. Se postula que las bases sociales de estos movimientos, desde su contexto específico, rechazan la lógica del mercado y adoptan estrategias de resistencia que privilegian la producción de subsistencia. Se postula por fin que la lucha por tener y mantener el acceso a la tierra produce un control territorial que genera un poder popular autónomo que desemboca en estrategias políticas distintas, resultado de las experiencias concretas que han tenido los movimientos con los partidos políticos y el Estado. This article compares the land struggle of the EZLN in Chiapas and the MST in Brazil within the context of globalization. The author argues that the membership of these movements, each within its own context, rejects the logic of the market and adopts resistance strategies that privilege production for subsistence. In addition, the author argues that in both cases the struggle to gain and maintain access to land gives these movements the ability to control territories, thus generating an autonomous popular power, which results in different political strategies that are the product of the concrete experiences that these movements have had with political parties and the state.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[387]
    [387]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
388
    388
  • Thumbnail: Page 
389
    389
  • Thumbnail: Page 
390
    390
  • Thumbnail: Page 
391
    391
  • Thumbnail: Page 
392
    392
  • Thumbnail: Page 
393
    393
  • Thumbnail: Page 
394
    394
  • Thumbnail: Page 
395
    395
  • Thumbnail: Page 
396
    396
  • Thumbnail: Page 
397
    397
  • Thumbnail: Page 
398
    398
  • Thumbnail: Page 
399
    399
  • Thumbnail: Page 
400
    400
  • Thumbnail: Page 
401
    401
  • Thumbnail: Page 
402
    402
  • Thumbnail: Page 
403
    403
  • Thumbnail: Page 
404
    404
  • Thumbnail: Page 
405
    405
  • Thumbnail: Page 
406
    406
  • Thumbnail: Page 
407
    407
  • Thumbnail: Page 
408
    408
  • Thumbnail: Page 
409
    409
  • Thumbnail: Page 
410
    410
  • Thumbnail: Page 
411
    411
  • Thumbnail: Page 
412
    412
  • Thumbnail: Page 
413
    413
  • Thumbnail: Page 
414
    414