Search

Drawing on a survey of more than 4,000 respondents, this article argues that contrary to claims by the 1994 Zapatista insurgency, indigenous and nonindigenous respondents in southern Mexico have been united more by socioeconomic and land tenure institution variables than by ethnic identity. Based on statistical models, it concludes that in rural southern Mexico, ethnicity alone is less important in shaping peoples' attitudes than whether the dominant land tenure institutions are the 'communitarian' state-penetrated ejidos (communitarian collective farms) of Chiapas or the more 'individualist' so-called communal lands of Oaxaca. It concludes by affirming that--contrary to many analysts of Chiapas's 1994 indigenous rebellion--external influences (here state-established land tenure institutions) can trump ideology in framing social movements. Rural Chiapas's prevalent communitarian attitudes seem to have resulted partly from exogenous land tenure institutions (ejidos) rather than from endogenous indigenous identities alone, as claimed by Zapatistas and scholars. Keywords: indigenous: ethnic identity; social movement; institutions; rural, economic development; property rights: agrarian; land tenure: communitarian; individual rights: corporatism; public opinion; Mexico; Zapatista; Chiapas; Oaxaca