3 ms·

> justified retaliation I don’t see how it would be justified. Do you think the cartels are in the right here?

by echoangle 7mo ago

djohnston 7mo ago
He probably sees them as marginalised POC bravely feeding their families under the thumb of American imperialism.
- JasonADrury 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  - djohnston 7mo ago
    * Says Mexicans can't be POCs * * Calls me a neo-nazi * fantastic
    - JasonADrury 7mo ago
      [flagged]
      - IAmBroom 7mo ago
        JasonADrury: I mean fuck, the silly European me thought that Mexicans were mostly white. They sure as hell mostly look like Europeans to me. djohnston: * Says Mexicans can't be POCs * DJ really overstated it, but yes: you are a silly European. Most Mexicans have a substantial Native American heritage, and aren't considered "white" by most USians. The richer Mexicans you may have encountered traveling to Europe are more upperclass whitebre(a)d, mostly Spanish bloodlines. djohnston: * Calls me a neo-nazi * JasonADrury: > Is this some weird neo-Nazi trope you subscribe to? You are guilty as charged. DJ's reading comprehension is fine.
  - poulpy123 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    - JasonADrury 7mo ago
      Who is absolving the cartels of their crimes?
      - roger110 7mo ago
        You said something like "nobody is in the right here" and called the cartel response a "justified retaliation"
        JasonADrury 7mo ago
        Government obviously isn't in the right when it simultaneously continues perpetuating policies that ensure the continued existence of the cartels.
        roger110 7mo ago
        Ok, to everyone else this probably sounds like cartel apologia. They make an actual step towards destroying the cartels, and you complain.
        JasonADrury 7mo ago
        This list is pretty telling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Mexico_most-wanted_drug_lords https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Mexico_most-wanted_drug_l... They're all dead or captured, you could make a new list like that every 10 years. Things do not improve. > They make an actual step towards destroying the cartels, and you complain That's a lie. If this was "an actual step towards destroying the cartels" the countless similar instances in the past would have taken us in that direction, instead the cartels keep growing and not shrinking. There's simply no way a reasonable person could conclude that this is a step towards destroying the cartels.
JasonADrury 7mo ago
> Do you think the cartels are in the right here? Of course not, none of the sides are at all in the right here. But from the cartels perspective, they're almost certainly in the right. Drug cartels are entirely the result of poor policies, and the blame for all the harms caused by them rests primarily on the shoulders of those perpetuating those policies. Surely the politicians that vote for laws that directly enable drug cartels to exist in the first place must be worse than the leaders of any individual drug cartel? Any kind of serious analysis of who's more right would end up being a work at the scale of Rising Up and Rising Down, that's probably best avoided. If we oversimplify cartels into innocent businessmen just looking to sell drugs, with governments being the ones that introduced violence into the equation in their effort to stop them? Surely it must be the cartels If we oversimplify cartels into evil criminals just looking to wield power over other human beings, with governments just trying to liberate people from cartel tyranny? Surely it must be the governments
- roger110 7mo ago
  Drug cartels are entirely the result of poor policies, one of which is that the Mexican government has not been punishing the cartels. Maybe they're fixing that.
- echoangle 7mo ago
  > But from the cartels perspective, they're almost certainly in the right. Sure, but so is basically everyone. ISIS is in the right and justified then, too.
  - roger110 7mo ago
    Also, coalition didn't get rid of ISIS by negotiation or something. They used bombs and, in one advisor's words, entrenching tools.
  - JasonADrury 7mo ago
    > Sure, but so is basically everyone. Well, sure! The crucial difference between cartels and ISIS is that the cartels are in it to make money, ISIS is an ideologically motivated nation-building project. The cartels disappear when the activity becomes unprofitable, ISIS does not. The cartels tend to use violence when it's profitable, ISIS will use violence because they believe that an imaginary man wants them to do so. You could legalize and regulate their drug-related business, paying a small amount of taxes will probably be more attractive than maintaining a private military in the long term. Alternatively you can fight like this, barely dent the cartels and instead cause massive amounts of suffering for the regular people who live in the middle of it all? If you actually cared about improving things rather than making a show, surely you'd want to pursue policies that (a) actually help you get rid of the negative influence of the cartels and (b) avoid collateral damage by not forcing the cartels to retaliate.

> justified retaliation I don’t see how it would be justified. Do you think the cartels are in the right here?

djohnston 7mo ago

He probably sees them as marginalised POC bravely feeding their families under the thumb of American imperialism.

JasonADrury 7mo ago
[flagged]
- djohnston 7mo ago
  * Says Mexicans can't be POCs * * Calls me a neo-nazi * fantastic
  - JasonADrury 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    - IAmBroom 7mo ago
      JasonADrury: I mean fuck, the silly European me thought that Mexicans were mostly white. They sure as hell mostly look like Europeans to me. djohnston: * Says Mexicans can't be POCs * DJ really overstated it, but yes: you are a silly European. Most Mexicans have a substantial Native American heritage, and aren't considered "white" by most USians. The richer Mexicans you may have encountered traveling to Europe are more upperclass whitebre(a)d, mostly Spanish bloodlines. djohnston: * Calls me a neo-nazi * JasonADrury: > Is this some weird neo-Nazi trope you subscribe to? You are guilty as charged. DJ's reading comprehension is fine.
- poulpy123 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  - JasonADrury 7mo ago
    Who is absolving the cartels of their crimes?
    - roger110 7mo ago
      You said something like "nobody is in the right here" and called the cartel response a "justified retaliation"
      - JasonADrury 7mo ago
        Government obviously isn't in the right when it simultaneously continues perpetuating policies that ensure the continued existence of the cartels.
        roger110 7mo ago
        Ok, to everyone else this probably sounds like cartel apologia. They make an actual step towards destroying the cartels, and you complain.
        JasonADrury 7mo ago
        This list is pretty telling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Mexico_most-wanted_drug_lords https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Mexico_most-wanted_drug_l... They're all dead or captured, you could make a new list like that every 10 years. Things do not improve. > They make an actual step towards destroying the cartels, and you complain That's a lie. If this was "an actual step towards destroying the cartels" the countless similar instances in the past would have taken us in that direction, instead the cartels keep growing and not shrinking. There's simply no way a reasonable person could conclude that this is a step towards destroying the cartels.

JasonADrury 7mo ago

> Do you think the cartels are in the right here? Of course not, none of the sides are at all in the right here. But from the cartels perspective, they're almost certainly in the right. Drug cartels are entirely the result of poor policies, and the blame for all the harms caused by them rests primarily on the shoulders of those perpetuating those policies. Surely the politicians that vote for laws that directly enable drug cartels to exist in the first place must be worse than the leaders of any individual drug cartel? Any kind of serious analysis of who's more right would end up being a work at the scale of Rising Up and Rising Down, that's probably best avoided. If we oversimplify cartels into innocent businessmen just looking to sell drugs, with governments being the ones that introduced violence into the equation in their effort to stop them? Surely it must be the cartels If we oversimplify cartels into evil criminals just looking to wield power over other human beings, with governments just trying to liberate people from cartel tyranny? Surely it must be the governments

roger110 7mo ago
Drug cartels are entirely the result of poor policies, one of which is that the Mexican government has not been punishing the cartels. Maybe they're fixing that.
echoangle 7mo ago
> But from the cartels perspective, they're almost certainly in the right. Sure, but so is basically everyone. ISIS is in the right and justified then, too.
- roger110 7mo ago
  Also, coalition didn't get rid of ISIS by negotiation or something. They used bombs and, in one advisor's words, entrenching tools.
- JasonADrury 7mo ago
  > Sure, but so is basically everyone. Well, sure! The crucial difference between cartels and ISIS is that the cartels are in it to make money, ISIS is an ideologically motivated nation-building project. The cartels disappear when the activity becomes unprofitable, ISIS does not. The cartels tend to use violence when it's profitable, ISIS will use violence because they believe that an imaginary man wants them to do so. You could legalize and regulate their drug-related business, paying a small amount of taxes will probably be more attractive than maintaining a private military in the long term. Alternatively you can fight like this, barely dent the cartels and instead cause massive amounts of suffering for the regular people who live in the middle of it all? If you actually cared about improving things rather than making a show, surely you'd want to pursue policies that (a) actually help you get rid of the negative influence of the cartels and (b) avoid collateral damage by not forcing the cartels to retaliate.