Our Word is Our Weapon (part 1)

Week 9: Our Word is Our Weapon (Part 1)

Our Word is Our Weapon by Subcomandente Marcos was a different reading that our texts thus far, in that it consists of a collection of writings, with some structured as speeches, others as essays, and even some as letters to a specific individual. I thought that by combining these different textual styles, Marcos clearly communicated the villainy of money and that the indigenous peoples are only demanding respect for the rights in both a lyrical and effective manner.

As evident by the title, I thought that Marcos' focus on the word and labelling the Zapatista movement as "the war for the word" was a great representation of indigeneity and an effective term to narrate the battle of indigenous for reclamation of their rights, based on all of our conversations as well as our explorations of pre-colonial texts like the Popol Vuh, which emphasize the value of the spoken word/orality in indigenous cosmovision and therefore indigenous history and culture. All of his connections to history, not just in Mexico but also in the US and US relations with Vietnam, place Mexico in a global context to not only emphasize that the indigenous were here first, before the colonizers that set up the capitalist systems that marginalize indigenous communities, but also that they are the "ones who speak the legitimate word" (157). This combined with his powerful conclusion to the prologue, that we must learn to listen and perhaps later we'll finally be able to understand, highlights his message that Chiapans and all indigenous peoples must be heard through the spoken word, through their customs and understanding of the world, in order for us to understand their position.

What also jumped out at me was Marcos' choice to capitalize Money and Power throughout the text. His continuous emphasis that money is the greatest criminal, backed with Chiapa-specific examples of how being poor is the greatest crime, creates Money and Power as characters and gives them entities throughout the text to explicitly communicate that money is the villain. This combined with his in-depth, individual descriptions of some of the Zapatista women highlighting their role in the war, their physical descriptions, and their personalities humanize the Zapatistas to therefore humanize the Chiapans, other indigenous communities, and indigenous resistance as a whole. Another thing that I thought was especially impactful, that is almost a direct contrast to Menchu's narrative in her book, is that Marcos repeatedly clarified that he is not their spokesperson, he is a single voice among all voices, and the ones who should be there are the zapatista peoples and their persistent shadows, silent strength, and memories. I thought that it was incredibly important that he did this, otherwise the text would've been a bit ironic; he would've criticized power wiping away Mexican indigeneity while wielding the power of Chiapa representation and the narrative of the forgotten indigenous populations. 

Overall, for me this week's reading was one of the more impactful ones we've read in this course. The stories included, writing style, and content clearly communicated that this is an international war of money versus humanity, which destroys cultures, histories, and communities in the process.