On January 1, 1994 an indigenous army of some 3000 Mayan peasants emerged from jungles and canyons of southernmost Mexican state of Chiapas and declared war on federal executive and Mexican army. On New Year's Day 1994, an insurgent guerrilla army calling itself Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) made its existence publicly known by seizing several towns in highlands of Chiapas including colonial city of San Cristobal de las Casas and declaring Ya Basta!, Enough!, to 500 years of genocide, colonialism, racism, slavery, and, most recently, neoliberalism embodied by North American Free Trade Agreement. Invoking constitutional right Mexicans to alter their form of government and laying claim to a legitimacy rooted in 500 years of indigenous suffering and resistance as well as legacy of Emiliano Zapata and Mexican Revolution, EZLN called a national uprising to topple corrupt government of President Carlos Salinas and Institutional Revolutionary Party which had ruled Mexico over 70 years.In days that followed New Year's Day uprising, several things would become clear. First, there would be no national uprising to topple government. Second, there would be no military solution sanctioned by national or international public opinion. Third, legitimacy of Zapatista insurgents and their demands would not only find acceptance throughout Mexican nation and even world, it would resonate with demands of others. Fourth and finally, indigenous Zapatistas had managed to catalyze and inspire a broad front of social opposition to longest-ruling dictatorship in contemporary world. One of most significant actors to support Zapatista struggle was independent labour movement in Mexico. In this paper I seek to illuminate bases upon which two movements, one of them and class-oriented, other rural and indigenous,-the labels themselves require unpacking-are able to find common ground and engage in a politics not only of solidarity but of accompaniment A politics of accompaniment is a relationship hulit upon mutual respect and support which reaffirms rather than denies autonomy and difference. The linkages which emerged between Zapatista movement and independent labour movement did not foment revolution in Mexico nor were they always effective or successful in terms of promoting interests of each of these movements. What makes these linkages significant, however; is fact that they occurred in absence of pre-existing links, direct channels of communication, or organizational infrastructure, and in face of a revolutionary history troubled by inability of urban workers and peasantry to articulate their struggles as a common one. In this paper, I examine how this intersection emerged, grounds that make it possible, and significance of such an intersection both Zapatirtas and independent unionism in Mexico. This is also an attempt to explore political relationships and possibilities and to begin to imagine new relationships and ways of envisioning and practising politics that may allow realization of new political spaces and practices.This paper is not an attempt to engage once in well-worn debate of class versus identity politics either as organizational and mobilizing principles or as analytical frameworks. As both Marc Edelman (2001) and Charles Hale (1997) note, not only has this debate become increasingly dated, it has also become decreasingly useful both in terms of evaluating recent scholarship as well as analyzing social themselves. In this respect, this paper responds to Kale's call for intellectuals to develop methods and analytical categories that engender constructive engagement with multiple inequalities that organize worlds we hve in and study (1997:584). Some recent work by social movement scholars has sought to materialize spirit inspiring Male's call, stressing a multilayered view of social movements capable of highlighting the interplay between collective identities, political opportunities, and culture (Whittier 2002:289) and even invoking need a more dialogic analysis of cultures of power and contention, ways in which they are mutually constitutive of each other and consequences this implies infusion of meaning into collective action (Steinberg 2002:224). …