10 ms·

>may things improve for you, though I really have no idea how that will happen. I think a good first step would be changing attitudes towards drug use. We shou

by gph 10y ago

>may things improve for you, though I really have no idea how that will happen. I think a good first step would be changing attitudes towards drug use. We should treat users as patients instead of criminals. And waging a 'war' against dealers and smugglers has only made them more violent and dangerous, while driving up prices and making those who survive even wealthier. There needs to be smarter policies.

djsumdog 10y ago
I think America should stop buying drugs from Mexico, shipping them guns and promoting the violence. Garry Webb and Michael Rupert were two amazing reporters that brought to light the reality of the CIA funded cocaine trade from South and Central America, and most people today have either never heard of them or dismiss them as crazy. The reality is the CIA still funds itself with cocaine and still causes violence south of our border for the industries that would benefit. United Fruit, Bay of Pigs, the 1973 Coupe of Chile, School of the Americas... the list is as long as you want to make it. This comic sums it up: http://imgur.com/a/Wtt6H http://imgur.com/a/Wtt6H
- brilliantcode 10y ago
  > “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” That was straight out of Nixon's aide's mouth. Openly admitting that the white conservative establishment sought ways to oppress and commit genocide on "racially inferior" demographic. It's now Mexicans and Muslims turn. They are the new "Japs". It seems like hatred and segregation is constant driving force at unifying this country.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    I've heard that quote before, but I don't really know its pedigree. Do you have a reference? (I also imagine the lack of sourcing is why you got downvoted).
    - iamdbtoo 10y ago
      I'm not sure it's the same source, but this came out last year. http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richa...
    - brilliantcode 10y ago
      If anyone doubts the contents of the quoted text, they can copy paste it into Google and discover numerous websites pointing at it. That will guide you to the right source. Possibly someone downvoted it because they fall under the same establishment or an offspring of that 'Murica generation. edit: I don't understand the downvotes. This comment contains instructions on how to find the desired source of my original comment which was actually published and publicized in printed media. If you have trouble with Googling, I suggest restarting your computer. Otherwise, trying to deny the track record of systematic racial oppression evident long after the end of racial segregation through downvoting, you are going against history of USA.
      - kbenson 10y ago
        > This comment contains instructions on how to find the desired source of my original comment which was actually published and publicized in printed media. Then why is it so hard to include it yourself? It's poor form to make statements from sources and omit those sources. Unless you typed that from memory, you had one of those sources handy when you made the comment, so you could have included it easily, rather than make every person that read it have to determine whether they believed it as even worth researching to see if it is real or something you made up. > I don't understand the downvotes. > Possibly someone downvoted it because they fall under the same establishment or an offspring of that 'Murica generation. > If you have trouble with Googling, I suggest restarting your computer. People aren't denying anything. Perhaps your attitude is the cause of the downvotes. Regardless of why you were originally downvoted, imagining it might be because they aren't acting in good faith or are incapable of assessing your comment on its merit isn't exactly a useful way to move forward.
- hwillis 10y ago
  >shipping them guns This is occasionally obfuscated, but it is utterly true. There are basically two kinds of guns (of the kind you can use to enforce this "war") in the world stage: AK-like (Russian, eastern European, and Chinese included) and AR-like (MXX(X) and modified civilian, from dealers and left over from military/agency operations). The AR-like guns are extremely common in Mexico, and they obviously are all American made. There are also a lot of AK-like weapons, which are... also all American. Bare minimum, they are legally bought in the US and smuggled into Mexico. These facts are often overlooked by claims that you can't be sure where the guns come from- 87% of the 4000 guns we can track come from the US, but that only represents 12% of the 30,000 guns seized. The real fact is the Mexican military has seized over 300,000 guns[1], and very few of those AK-like guns come from Russia or China. The overwhelming majority of those weapons had to have been built or sold in America. In the US there's a huge amount of disbelief that we can actually be the source of these guns. I honestly think that comes from a mistaken belief that guns actually exist everywhere... America is a giant gun store, the biggest on the block, saying they need to keep selling guns because of all these guns everybody keeps buying. [1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20090703011254/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/06/international/i111117D34.DTL&hw=gun&sn=014&sc=1000 https://web.archive.org/web/20090703011254/http://www.sfgate...
  - WillPostForFood 10y ago
    Good argument for better border control between the two countries.
    - hwillis 10y ago
      There are good arguments for border patrol but this is not one of them. These guns are legal in the US and all you have to do to get them into Mexico is load them on a catapult and drive out to the middle of nowhere, or load them in one of the hundreds of small boats that make the trip. It's trivial to find guns illegally coming into mexico from a boat that can cross oceans and nearly impossible for a boat you can make in your garage. Border patrol will not solve gun violence in Mexico any more than it will solve cocaine in America. As an unrelated thing, I find it mind boggling that immigration is still an explicitly national issue in America. Refugees and immigrants would be much better handled if they were done on a per-state basis. If California wants to let in a ton of Mexicans and issue them state-only green cards, why should Texas be able to vote to stop them? Likewise if Texas wants to exclude immigrants, why should California force Texas to give them jobs? State-only green card programs would allow immigrants to be carefully tracked (national green card holders face deportation if their residence is not on file), gives them incentive to go from states where they aren't wanted to those where they are, and allows national money and patrol efforts to be focused where they are wanted. Immigrants can't steal Texan jobs if they live in California.
- NumberCruncher 10y ago
  The US is not the only one promoting violence: http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/how-german-firearms-ended-up-at-the-mexico-student-massacre http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/how-german-firearm... German firearms are also used in the middle east conflict despite of the "strict weapon export regulations". Nothing new in politics since 2000 years: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule
sedachv 10y ago
If you are interested in helping out in ending the drug prohibition in the United States I recommend donating or getting involved with the Drug Policy Alliance: http://www.drugpolicy.org/ http://www.drugpolicy.org/
noonespecial 10y ago
It has always blown my mind that anyone at all was surprised that when governments declared war on dealers that they responded by acting like soldiers.
jtmcmc 10y ago
legalizing drugs would cause the collapse of the cartels and help to end this violence.
- brooklynmarket 10y ago
  And also the collapse of the government. They're totally vested in keeping drugs illegal. It's a profit center for them
  - ggiaco 10y ago
    No it isn't. It's a huge nightmare and this is why even current and former Mexican Presidents are calling for legalization - despite pressure from the U.S. against it. https://qz.com/874497/mexico-is-moving-toward-medical-marijuana-legalization-along-with-us-states/ https://qz.com/874497/mexico-is-moving-toward-medical-mariju... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/former-president-vicente-fox-mexico-legalise-all-drugs-10-years https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/former-preside...
- scott_karana 10y ago
  It would likely end violence, but why can't these highly-organized, powerful cartels simply pivot into dealing wholesale, once legal?
  - ggiaco 10y ago
    Well, then they essentially become above board legitimate businesses competing on their ability to provide a service in the market. Legalization implies regulation of some sort (e.g. like alcohol). You could also have a government-run monopoly. The point is to remove the billions of dollars in black-market profits which give rise to criminal organizations who cannot depend on the law to resolve their disputes and must therefore "make their own law".
  - code_duck 10y ago
    They'd be competing with alcohol and pharmaceutical companies, who could easily arrange supply and wholesale distribution, and have the advantage navigating political and regulatory issues in a legal way. The paramilitary aspect of cartels would become obsolete, or perhaps be focused elsewhere? Like many people in the black market for cannabis in the US, ranging from growers to judges, they probably see legalization as a disruption that is not welcome since the current system is working well for them.
Baeocystin 10y ago
Has there been any discussion of the Portuguese model? Their decriminalization experiment has been running for more than a decade, and the results seem to be pretty stellar. I hope we can eventually get something similar going stateside. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
mirimir 10y ago
What happened to Mexico seems quite clear. Back in the 80s-90s, South American cocaine and marijuana were mainly smuggled via Central America and the Caribbean. Some Mexican marijuana and heroin was smuggled to the US, but quality was low, and there wasn't much money in it. But then the US clamped down on the Caribbean route. And now cocaine was moving through Mexico. Now most illegal marijuana comes from Canada. So Mexican gangs are mainly moving cocaine (and heroin). So yes, it's the US drug problem, and the War on Drugs, that's fucked over Mexico.
FabHK 10y ago
Many current policies are entirely misguided and counterproductive, indeed. Tom Wainwright, former Mexico correspondent of The Economist, has an insightful and entertaining book on this, Narconomics: How to Run a Drug Cartel.

by gph 10y ago

djsumdog 10y ago

I think America should stop buying drugs from Mexico, shipping them guns and promoting the violence. Garry Webb and Michael Rupert were two amazing reporters that brought to light the reality of the CIA funded cocaine trade from South and Central America, and most people today have either never heard of them or dismiss them as crazy. The reality is the CIA still funds itself with cocaine and still causes violence south of our border for the industries that would benefit. United Fruit, Bay of Pigs, the 1973 Coupe of Chile, School of the Americas... the list is as long as you want to make it. This comic sums it up: http://imgur.com/a/Wtt6H http://imgur.com/a/Wtt6H

brilliantcode 10y ago
> “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” That was straight out of Nixon's aide's mouth. Openly admitting that the white conservative establishment sought ways to oppress and commit genocide on "racially inferior" demographic. It's now Mexicans and Muslims turn. They are the new "Japs". It seems like hatred and segregation is constant driving force at unifying this country.
- kbenson 10y ago
  I've heard that quote before, but I don't really know its pedigree. Do you have a reference? (I also imagine the lack of sourcing is why you got downvoted).
  - iamdbtoo 10y ago
    I'm not sure it's the same source, but this came out last year. http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richa...
  - brilliantcode 10y ago
    If anyone doubts the contents of the quoted text, they can copy paste it into Google and discover numerous websites pointing at it. That will guide you to the right source. Possibly someone downvoted it because they fall under the same establishment or an offspring of that 'Murica generation. edit: I don't understand the downvotes. This comment contains instructions on how to find the desired source of my original comment which was actually published and publicized in printed media. If you have trouble with Googling, I suggest restarting your computer. Otherwise, trying to deny the track record of systematic racial oppression evident long after the end of racial segregation through downvoting, you are going against history of USA.
    - kbenson 10y ago
      > This comment contains instructions on how to find the desired source of my original comment which was actually published and publicized in printed media. Then why is it so hard to include it yourself? It's poor form to make statements from sources and omit those sources. Unless you typed that from memory, you had one of those sources handy when you made the comment, so you could have included it easily, rather than make every person that read it have to determine whether they believed it as even worth researching to see if it is real or something you made up. > I don't understand the downvotes. > Possibly someone downvoted it because they fall under the same establishment or an offspring of that 'Murica generation. > If you have trouble with Googling, I suggest restarting your computer. People aren't denying anything. Perhaps your attitude is the cause of the downvotes. Regardless of why you were originally downvoted, imagining it might be because they aren't acting in good faith or are incapable of assessing your comment on its merit isn't exactly a useful way to move forward.
hwillis 10y ago
>shipping them guns This is occasionally obfuscated, but it is utterly true. There are basically two kinds of guns (of the kind you can use to enforce this "war") in the world stage: AK-like (Russian, eastern European, and Chinese included) and AR-like (MXX(X) and modified civilian, from dealers and left over from military/agency operations). The AR-like guns are extremely common in Mexico, and they obviously are all American made. There are also a lot of AK-like weapons, which are... also all American. Bare minimum, they are legally bought in the US and smuggled into Mexico. These facts are often overlooked by claims that you can't be sure where the guns come from- 87% of the 4000 guns we can track come from the US, but that only represents 12% of the 30,000 guns seized. The real fact is the Mexican military has seized over 300,000 guns[1], and very few of those AK-like guns come from Russia or China. The overwhelming majority of those weapons had to have been built or sold in America. In the US there's a huge amount of disbelief that we can actually be the source of these guns. I honestly think that comes from a mistaken belief that guns actually exist everywhere... America is a giant gun store, the biggest on the block, saying they need to keep selling guns because of all these guns everybody keeps buying. [1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20090703011254/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/06/international/i111117D34.DTL&hw=gun&sn=014&sc=1000 https://web.archive.org/web/20090703011254/http://www.sfgate...
- WillPostForFood 10y ago
  Good argument for better border control between the two countries.
  - hwillis 10y ago
    There are good arguments for border patrol but this is not one of them. These guns are legal in the US and all you have to do to get them into Mexico is load them on a catapult and drive out to the middle of nowhere, or load them in one of the hundreds of small boats that make the trip. It's trivial to find guns illegally coming into mexico from a boat that can cross oceans and nearly impossible for a boat you can make in your garage. Border patrol will not solve gun violence in Mexico any more than it will solve cocaine in America. As an unrelated thing, I find it mind boggling that immigration is still an explicitly national issue in America. Refugees and immigrants would be much better handled if they were done on a per-state basis. If California wants to let in a ton of Mexicans and issue them state-only green cards, why should Texas be able to vote to stop them? Likewise if Texas wants to exclude immigrants, why should California force Texas to give them jobs? State-only green card programs would allow immigrants to be carefully tracked (national green card holders face deportation if their residence is not on file), gives them incentive to go from states where they aren't wanted to those where they are, and allows national money and patrol efforts to be focused where they are wanted. Immigrants can't steal Texan jobs if they live in California.
NumberCruncher 10y ago
The US is not the only one promoting violence: http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/how-german-firearms-ended-up-at-the-mexico-student-massacre http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/how-german-firearm... German firearms are also used in the middle east conflict despite of the "strict weapon export regulations". Nothing new in politics since 2000 years: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule

sedachv 10y ago

If you are interested in helping out in ending the drug prohibition in the United States I recommend donating or getting involved with the Drug Policy Alliance: http://www.drugpolicy.org/ http://www.drugpolicy.org/

noonespecial 10y ago

It has always blown my mind that anyone at all was surprised that when governments declared war on dealers that they responded by acting like soldiers.

jtmcmc 10y ago

legalizing drugs would cause the collapse of the cartels and help to end this violence.

brooklynmarket 10y ago
And also the collapse of the government. They're totally vested in keeping drugs illegal. It's a profit center for them
- ggiaco 10y ago
  No it isn't. It's a huge nightmare and this is why even current and former Mexican Presidents are calling for legalization - despite pressure from the U.S. against it. https://qz.com/874497/mexico-is-moving-toward-medical-marijuana-legalization-along-with-us-states/ https://qz.com/874497/mexico-is-moving-toward-medical-mariju... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/former-president-vicente-fox-mexico-legalise-all-drugs-10-years https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/former-preside...
scott_karana 10y ago
It would likely end violence, but why can't these highly-organized, powerful cartels simply pivot into dealing wholesale, once legal?
- ggiaco 10y ago
  Well, then they essentially become above board legitimate businesses competing on their ability to provide a service in the market. Legalization implies regulation of some sort (e.g. like alcohol). You could also have a government-run monopoly. The point is to remove the billions of dollars in black-market profits which give rise to criminal organizations who cannot depend on the law to resolve their disputes and must therefore "make their own law".
- code_duck 10y ago
  They'd be competing with alcohol and pharmaceutical companies, who could easily arrange supply and wholesale distribution, and have the advantage navigating political and regulatory issues in a legal way. The paramilitary aspect of cartels would become obsolete, or perhaps be focused elsewhere? Like many people in the black market for cannabis in the US, ranging from growers to judges, they probably see legalization as a disruption that is not welcome since the current system is working well for them.

Baeocystin 10y ago

Has there been any discussion of the Portuguese model? Their decriminalization experiment has been running for more than a decade, and the results seem to be pretty stellar. I hope we can eventually get something similar going stateside. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal

mirimir 10y ago

What happened to Mexico seems quite clear. Back in the 80s-90s, South American cocaine and marijuana were mainly smuggled via Central America and the Caribbean. Some Mexican marijuana and heroin was smuggled to the US, but quality was low, and there wasn't much money in it. But then the US clamped down on the Caribbean route. And now cocaine was moving through Mexico. Now most illegal marijuana comes from Canada. So Mexican gangs are mainly moving cocaine (and heroin). So yes, it's the US drug problem, and the War on Drugs, that's fucked over Mexico.

FabHK 10y ago

Many current policies are entirely misguided and counterproductive, indeed. Tom Wainwright, former Mexico correspondent of The Economist, has an insightful and entertaining book on this, Narconomics: How to Run a Drug Cartel.