I have a different perspective on this. I think it's pretty clear from Subcomandante Marcos' history that he has a good understanding of Marxism. It's not like the Zapatistas as an organization aren't built out of fundamentally Marxist notions of labor and commodity production. Given the huge amount of indigenous ways of knowing that inform the actual regular people that make the movement exist, why not frame the conversation more around the synthetic indigenous thought than strictly in terms of Western-centric European Marxists? I don't think that's the same as saying that European political philosophy is useless by merit of its whiteness.
I have a different perspective on this. I think it's pretty clear from Subcomandante Marcos' history that he has a good understanding of Marxism. It's not like the Zapatistas as an organization aren't built out of fundamentally Marxist notions of labor and commodity production. Given the huge amount of indigenous ways of knowing that inform the actual regular people that make the movement exist, why not frame the conversation more around the synthetic indigenous thought than strictly in terms of Western-centric European Marxists? I don't think that's the same as saying that European political philosophy is useless by merit of its whiteness.