The Strength of the Powerless

My favorite part about Enloe’s “Margins, Silences and Bottom Rungs” was that it addressed the main issue I had with international relations theory. I understand that that these theories are merely different methods of seeing the international realm and attempts to understand international relations. However, its apathetic approach to the human situation started to make me question if international relations was the area on which I wanted to focus my education. Enloe’s article reminded me that these theories are not comprehensive and they thoroughly undermine the power that the “voiceless” have in society.

She argues that the main issue with international relations and the general way of understanding them is that there is too much focus on the powerful. As Professor Jackson noted while trying to keep the discussion going, “Shouldn’t we focus on the powerful? Isn’t that where everything happens?” I completely disagree with this. Enloe argues this to be a close-minded approach to politics because in the end, the “orthodox analysts of international politics [will be] caught by surprise” (189). The marginalized have much more power than one would expect because they have unique resources such as immense support amongst themselves and if they are given enough reason to, they have the potential for politically radical revolutions. Most of the best revolutions started this way.

Not only is the Zapatista movement in Chiapas, Mexico an excellent example to reference, but so is the French Revolution. Its immense historical significance further emphasizes the power of the marginalized. The official beginning of the French Revolution is (arguably) Bastille Day, where citizens of Paris stormed the prison in order to gather weapons. However in the countryside, the peasants were attacking the feudal system in which they were imprisoned, known as the “Great Fear,” in order to gain their independence from an oppressive practice. It is examples like these that demonstrate that the more a group is marginalized, the higher risk there is for an unstable nation. However, the powerful should not pay attention to the marginalized merely out of fear. They should do this because that allows a better understanding of the nation itself, and a stronger one in result.