I wish Mexico had a better system, this sort of shit is a tragedy. I don’t know how or even when this will change, but I’m hopeful it will one day in my life
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
213 points (99.1% liked)
World News
38188 readers
1978 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If Mexico and America used the same firepower on the cartels, that they do on the middle east, cartels would be a thing of the past.
They don't want to get rid of the cartels. The DEA has a vested interest in staying relevant, as it's part of the whole law enforcement industrial complex. Hell, one of the deadliest cartels' soldiers were previously trained by American special forces back in the day ( https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2010/11/3/us-trained-cartel-terrorises-mexico ). Guess who trained Taliban? You got it, the US. Who trained many of the guerrillas that would turn into tyrants in South America? Correctomondo, the US once again. We love to destabilize regions for corporate interests.
Not just the DEA, we've built a whole economy around drug offenses staying illegal. Drug testing companies, technology firms that develop law enforcement gear, law enforcement seminars, to say nothing of the thousands of companies that profit off of prison labor for what is effectively free, and the fact that a lot of the nonviolent offenders wind up turning violent because nobody will hire or rent to someone with a drug conviction.
we even have dowsing rods for cops
Who is "they"? Names, pls.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The problem is systemic. You kill one cartel, another one pops up. It's because there's a demand for their products. Get rid of the demand and you'll dry up the supply. Do it in a smart way, not by destroying people's lives which inevitably throws them back in the cartels' hands.
I bet it isn’t all sunshine and roses but hasn’t El Salvador quite a bit of success by going absolutely crazy against the cartels?
Well, last time I checked El Salvador was 93 times smaller than Mexico. Besides that, the cartels are part of the civilian population, hiding in civilian dense areas. Do you really recommend Mexico going scorched earth on their own people or what? Are you also aware of the dire human rights violations in El Salvador? When all you've got is a hammer everything starts looking like a nail.
Do you really recommend Mexico going scorched earth on their own people or what? Are you also aware of the dire human rights violations in El Salvador?
Unfortunately, that's what's necessary when you let your nation be run by gangbangers.
There is no perfect solution when things get this bad. At some point, they'll have to ask themselves if it's preferable to live under gang members who rape their children as intimidation, or take a more heavy-handed approach like El Salvador so they don't have to live in fear.
Results speak louder than any ideology. Right now, El Salvador's results are something Mexico should be learning from.
I don't think they will, though.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
We've tried that under previous administrations. Doesn't work. Lending Mexico a hand is just playing whack-a-mole so long as the conditions for the cartels (including the massive corruption in government, police, and military) remain.
The best thing the US can do for Mexico is reduce demand for cartel products domestically.
Weeding out FARC and Shining Path actually did teach valuable lessons which habe been repeatedly reapplied successfully during modern counter-terrorism.
Both where heavily invested in organized crime but are nowadays toothless or non-existant due to coordinated goverment and civilian efforts.
The Best example might be "The Sons of Iraq" who helped to pacify Iraq quite well. The Coalition literally hired local people suffering most from extremists to fight the extremists and it worked like a charm. FARC and Shining Path were pushed into insignificance by roughly the same methods.
Yes, there were "revenge" killings by the "somewhat good guys" against the "really bad guys". But in hindsight it was necessary to show the "really bad guys" that the tables had turned. As long as the overall violence decreases - deal with it.
Oh, by the way, did you know that the Mafia once was an organized military organization fighting for Sicilian independence? Over the last 200 years they slowly degraded into a bunch of sometimes wealthy oligarchic stock market fraudsters, but mostly pick pockets and low level fraudsters, at most bribing officials for construction jobs, if at all. 40 years ago they killed judges and police officers in the dozen. Nowadays they get beat up if they show up in Palermos shops and demanding the Pizzo (protection money). And the police stands by and collects the beaten gangster afterwards without minding the locals doing local justice. Works fine.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yes just like Al Qaeda and the Taliban…
It is changing. Not as fast as almost every Mexican would want it to, but it is clearly changing for good if you take a look at the numbers.
I hope so! I'd love to really explore the heart of Mexico, but the cartels worry me.
I don't believe you.
load more comments
(8 replies)
As a mexican living in Mexico, the struggle is real. What is not real is the OP in bold letters. The so called "specialists" are usually a bunch of so-called activists campaigning in the election against the party in power.
There's also the magnitude of the election not being accounted for. These elections are the biggest in history. It's only logical that, assuming the high homicide rate in the country, the absolute numbers will be higher. It really sounds like another article trying to tie our president with the organized crime, something that has been shyly thrown at the average citizen several times now. If there was any evidence of this "blurry" line between government and cartels, the opposition to the President and his party would have already use it, since there's only one month left for campaigning. Instead, we have a paid bot campaign in X/Twitter, a millionaire one, financed by who knows whose money, trying to portray the president as a cartel boss or something. A failing campaign, if we look at the numbers.
I agree on your comment about the current situation. It is very violent. Either it’s getting more reporting than previous years or it actually is as bad as it seems. But I might be misunderstanding the tone of your comment here, it reads very apologetic of the current government to me:
It really sounds like another article trying to tie our president with the organized crime, something that has been shyly thrown at the average citizen several times now.
Maybe because it’s true? As another mexican, I have absolutely no doubt the government is working with cartels in different regions in exchange of more control, both ways. And I’m not saying it happened just in this administration, it’s been happening for at least 20 years.
My take is that some regions where the government wants bigger control are currently controlled by rival cartels where the government currently has bigger control in.
I also find it a bit cynical so write that this fact is being “shyly thrown around”, why are there so many articles about it then? The current president –the face of the government– had been seen multiple times visiting el Chapo’s mom. Very shy of him.
Is the president having dinner with El Chapo's mom enough evidence for you? It might not be straight up evidence but it does point towards it
I don't know enough about the situation to make an informed opinion, but let's make a hypothetical:
A government regime cannot be complicit in crimes because if they were then an investigation would have found them complicit in crimes?
That sounds insane. That sounds like a crazy person's opinion. These deaths and kidnappings aren't natural. Who stands to benefit from all of this? The answer from where I'm standing seems pretty clear.
It's late so don't mind me, but I didn't get your point. They're killing candidates from all factions, all parties. Perhaps different people are killing independently for different reasons. Mega corporations killing the candidates that want regulations on their use of water, deforestation, etc. Nestlé, Coca-Cola, and others are devastating the lands and I'm sure they're profiting nicely from that and don't want to stop. Organized crime. Corrupt politicians. It's not simple (or clear) to me, why do you say it is?
Again, you're claiming that these killings are spontaneous and only coincidentally helps the incumbents or the party leadership positions maintain authority. That doesn't track. This isn't normal. This doesn't happen in other places of the world. For this to not somehow be organized or orchestrated would be completely illogical, because then it would be occurring elsewhere as well.
I get it now. I don't agree with your points.
you're claiming that these killings are spontaneous and only coincidentally helps the incumbents or the party leadership positions maintain authority.
I don't believe it benefits the party that today is dominant, not only because they are getting killed too but also because they are being accused of making Mexico violent and it is super important for them to prove that things are getting better.
This is not the same as saying that the killings are spontaneous, on the contrary, it is an unstable game of power grabbing because of very special circumstances in Mexico that allow this uncertainty of who is getting what in 2024. This in itself lets us see that there are powerful groups fighting and not a tyranny from the current government nor them only silencing opponents.
This isn't normal. This doesn't happen in other places of the world.
I don't know about normal; it isn't desirable, but perhaps it was to be expected. Why Mexico and not other countries? I think this is an oversimplification.
First, it does happen in other countries, but differently. Some have coup d'États, revolutions, extremist terrorism, etc. Of course if you compare Mexico to Germany, Germans are playing chess under the table. Compare Mexico to Arab countries, African countries, and even violent Latin American countries. Violence exists in many other places. Yet, secondly, you can only see similarities when comparing social circumstances, never mirrors. You won't find another Mexico in its details because no other country has Mexico's history. I repeat: it does happen in other countries, but differently. And that's why what you said was too simple.
For this to not somehow be organized or orchestrated would be completely illogical, because then it would be occurring elsewhere as well.
Following the last part, no, this can perfectly be complex. 'Heterogenous' is the word that is coming to my mind.
To me, it's more illogical to believe a single force is orchestrating this violence (which, again, is getting people from different groups killed) than to believe it is power grabbing from many sources. The first option even sounds a little conspiracy-theorish or paranoid, if I'm being frank.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Being reported due to being from El Pais, but they have a VERY high credibility rating:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/el-pais/
Not sure what the beef is here, someone mind explaining?
The answer is racism.
Against whom? I'm not being facetious, I am just uninformed to the motivation.
I have no idea about the back story here but being mexican, there racism against indigenous Mexicans, and darker skin mixed Mexicans. Mexicans that are light skinned are seen in a better light by our own people.
That's not uncommon for non white populations (groups?) I've read the same thing about Japanese people, Chinese and Indian people. Darker skin people are subjected to more discrimination than their lighter skinned countrymen.
Had a young adult local Egyptian explain this to me, even with their already colored skin, darker people among their own experienced more racism. Nature is amazing.
Jesus.
I checked the wikipedia list and Jesus is just about the only candidate name that hasn't been murdered.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_politicians_killed_during_Mexican_elections
No point in murdering Jesus. Three days later he comes back and starts campaigning again.
And potentially hunt you down and try and make you eat some of his flesh to prove you failed.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I'm constantly reminded of that one Ad Campaign for some kind of alcoholic beverage where they offered to fund the next revolution or civil war or something. I can't find anything about it online anymore, sadly.
I'm starting to think that maybe the same advertisement wouldn't be so controversial if it happened today.
view more: next ›