The leader of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel had spent decades evading justice. He was brought down in an operation in the mountains of Jalisco that has sparked a violent reaction in various states across the country
While it’s important to note that drugs have always won the War on Drugs, by a similar token there’s just no way out of a failed state that doesn’t involve military action. What is wrongheaded with the ‘kill the bad guys, solve crime’ paradigm is that it hollows out society from within, creating parallel economies within the purview of criminal syndicates. These quasi state orgs are firmly within the control of capitalist oligarchies in places like LatAm as well as their international, often US aligned, contacts - creating incentives that cut through the entire political system. It just doesn’t take that many people to run a crime ring, killing the current soldiers of crime does nothing about the real leaders in the political and financial sectors and Mexico is in a particularly advanced state when it comes to this sort of crisis.
The question isn’t wether the state ‘kills the bad guy’, but with what purpose. Because if some kingpin is in charge of terrozing tens if not hundreds of thousands and extracting rent from them via the drug trade as well as real estate and monopolizing violence then, yeah, they have to be killed. Problem is, why are they being killed. Are they and their subordinates being killed to satiate the public’s need for revenge under the confines of a liberal democracy that has been captured by comprador and criminal interests? Or is it more than just an offering, a part of a larger programme by which the state re-estabilishes territorial control and guarantees public services? Do you just kill drug dealers because you actually think you can solve the issue of drugs, or do you move in to deal with a crime syndicate that got into the habit of closing health clinics, internet services and schools because it wants to make money by taking those sectors over?
While it’s important to note that drugs have always won the War on Drugs, by a similar token there’s just no way out of a failed state that doesn’t involve military action. What is wrongheaded with the ‘kill the bad guys, solve crime’ paradigm is that it hollows out society from within, creating parallel economies within the purview of criminal syndicates. These quasi state orgs are firmly within the control of capitalist oligarchies in places like LatAm as well as their international, often US aligned, contacts - creating incentives that cut through the entire political system. It just doesn’t take that many people to run a crime ring, killing the current soldiers of crime does nothing about the real leaders in the political and financial sectors and Mexico is in a particularly advanced state when it comes to this sort of crisis.
The question isn’t wether the state ‘kills the bad guy’, but with what purpose. Because if some kingpin is in charge of terrozing tens if not hundreds of thousands and extracting rent from them via the drug trade as well as real estate and monopolizing violence then, yeah, they have to be killed. Problem is, why are they being killed. Are they and their subordinates being killed to satiate the public’s need for revenge under the confines of a liberal democracy that has been captured by comprador and criminal interests? Or is it more than just an offering, a part of a larger programme by which the state re-estabilishes territorial control and guarantees public services? Do you just kill drug dealers because you actually think you can solve the issue of drugs, or do you move in to deal with a crime syndicate that got into the habit of closing health clinics, internet services and schools because it wants to make money by taking those sectors over?