The Zapatista leader’s title is “Subcomandante” – doesn’t that imply he’s under a boss who is the real commander? When he first hit the news that’s what I assumed: he’s a spokesman for Mr. Big. But it seems Marcos himself is Mr. Big. So what’s with the “sub-” prefix?
I recall an interview with him years ago. He said he did not wish to seem too elevated above the popular will and therefore chose this name. This decision seems refined, humble and lacking in arrogance. I doubt too many Americans understood his logic. 
“This decision seems refined, humble and lacking in arrogance. I doubt too many Americans understood his logic.”
or he’s got a PR man more sophisticated than the average American.
Well, since most of us are used to dealing with Generals and Colnels of third world sand kingdoms, with no apparent actual work behind the rank (at least as portrayed by the media) it would make sense to pick something both humble and obscure…
Me, I’m a lesser noble… hehehhhe
IIRC, Colonel Qadafi kept his – colonelship? colonelhood? coloneldom? – which he earned, instead of increasing his rank to general.
Though I don’t suppose Qadafi is especially refined or humble.
And I doubt too many Americans understand Qaddafi’s logic either.
But your policies on Khadafy are changing now. Khaddaffi has oil.
Unless proven otherwise, Subcomandante Marcos IS “subcomandante” in the CCRI of the EZLN. There are, I think about seven Comandantes in the CCRI.
http://www.ezln.org/MARCOS.html
XicanoreX
Viva Zapata, Cabrones!
http://www.ezln.org