3 ms·

This is a direct consequence of US government policy: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/dec/08/mexico-war-on-drugs-cost-achievements-us-billions https://ww

by hedora 3y ago

This is a direct consequence of US government policy: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/dec/08/mexico-war-on-drugs-cost-achievements-us-billions https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/dec/08/mexico-war-on-d... I picked a story from 2016, so you can read with the benefit of hindsight, but it’s been the same story since the 1970’s (and arguably since the tail end of the prohibition days, when the US made the Mexican government choose between destabilizing itself or not having anesthesia for its hospitals). Since the US’s continuous morally-reprehensible actions created and then propped up Mexico’s narco-state for about a century, and people keep voting in the US politicians that perpetuate the cycle, I can only assume things are working as intended.

SenAnder 3y ago
> This is a direct consequence of US government policy Which policy do you mean? Not legalizing drugs? Because the US is no exception in that regard.
- heavyset_go 3y ago
  You're right, prohibition funds organized crime all over the world.
- hedora 3y ago
  The US forced countries to criminalize the export of drugs to the US, even though though no country (the US included) has the resources necessary to enforce those laws. The result is shadow economies, then corruption and finally narco states. This profits corrupt actors in the US government, so they perpetuate the cycle. There are basically two sides in the war on drugs: almost everyone (non-users, users, small-time producers), and para-military syndicates that control distribution, enforcement agencies, and government policies. If you read the article I linked, and also the one this thread is about, it is clear that the US decided to back one of the cartels with military aid and support in the local election. That caused a transfer of power that left 100,000’s dead, including the 43 students that were murdered by US-backed Mexican government officials.
  - SenAnder 3y ago
    > The US forced countries to criminalize the export of drugs to the US Are such laws outliers? In how many countries is the manufacture and/or export of drugs (to any country) legal?

by hedora 3y ago

SenAnder 3y ago

> This is a direct consequence of US government policy Which policy do you mean? Not legalizing drugs? Because the US is no exception in that regard.

heavyset_go 3y ago
You're right, prohibition funds organized crime all over the world.
hedora 3y ago
The US forced countries to criminalize the export of drugs to the US, even though though no country (the US included) has the resources necessary to enforce those laws. The result is shadow economies, then corruption and finally narco states. This profits corrupt actors in the US government, so they perpetuate the cycle. There are basically two sides in the war on drugs: almost everyone (non-users, users, small-time producers), and para-military syndicates that control distribution, enforcement agencies, and government policies. If you read the article I linked, and also the one this thread is about, it is clear that the US decided to back one of the cartels with military aid and support in the local election. That caused a transfer of power that left 100,000’s dead, including the 43 students that were murdered by US-backed Mexican government officials.
- SenAnder 3y ago
  > The US forced countries to criminalize the export of drugs to the US Are such laws outliers? In how many countries is the manufacture and/or export of drugs (to any country) legal?