Drugs and cartels

Your anecdote about Mexico doesn't fit either, since you're talking about warring cartels with state support.

Sounds great in theory. But in practice, the smaller gangs are often more violent because (a) you have 5,000 gangsters in 10 gangs instead of 5,000 gangsters in one gang (b) those 10 gangs are now at war with each other because you messed up the big gang that used to run the place.

Let's say you're now in charge of a fictional country called Narcopolis and you send in the army into an area and round up the local gangsters (including the local police, who are corrupted) and summarily shoot them and throw them in a ditch. Problem solved? Not quite if those gangsters' rivals then move in after the army leaves, or if the survivors then band together to fight over the scraps. And the first thing they do is attempt to extort / bribe the politicians who were previously bought off by the last cartel – and then the new gangsters shoot them if they don't agree. Or worse, the army screws up the job (say, they're fed intelligence by a rival gang without their knowing) that creates just enough chaos to allow the gangsters' rivals to move in and you get a big multi-sided drug war and bodies being hanged from overpasses several times a week.

I'm trying to complicated the picture the OP presents. It's not that the cartels "have contacts in political circles and even the police itself" but they *are* the political circles and police in these countries. Again in theory it all sounds great to go round up the mobsters and shoot them, but who is going to do the shooting? The army? The police? You're trying to fight gangsters with gangsters. It doesn't work.

lmao Joan knew a bunch of mafia types. She started her career in the mob-run nightclubs in the 60s.

...

Shoot them too.

That's defensible.

Agree with you, OP.

The cartels profit from drugs but would still exist without them. The cartels would still use violence and coercion to make money so long as the state fails to eliminate them.

The drug cartels are not entrepreneurs. They create organizations based around the use of violence and forced labor. They acquire property via violence and the threat of violence. The "business" they operate is the exploitation of people and property they hold at gunpoint.

I agree with you, but would point out that the root of the problem is that the police and security forces never, at any point, had adequate control of the situation. This led to the development of organized cartels. When they attempted to eliminate the cartels, like you said, it simply fractured the organizations. So the crime still happens but it's split into local gangs.

It is a serious problem in Mexico. It is a failure of civil society itself. The only communities managing to avoid this breakdown are the smaller indigenous ones which still have "organic" bonds. I can tell you that in the big city no one trusts police since they are seen as most likely "bought" by the criminals. So people are very unlikely to report crimes. It is also unfortunate that many local neighborhoods protect their own criminals out of tribal stupidity. Meanwhile, the government is incompetent and rarely catches criminals due to an ineffective justice system & poorly paid/organized police.

Drug cartels are first and foremost a social inequality and bad living condittions problem. The great majority of cartel members are poor people (commonly raised by single mother) with bad oportunities who get lured in to living an "intense" life and getting some guaranteed money and respect. Emphasis on guranteed because being a cartel thug usualy pays less than the avarage job but they pay on time. they also accept anyone and usually at any age unless you are gay and maybe based on your religion(that's how it is in RIO atleast).
The only realistic way of stopping drug cartes is cutting them short of new manpower ie. Poor unemployeed people and out of school teens. All other methods are either too expensive, temporary or genocidal. Legalizing drugs would also help quite alot since it is one of the main sources of income. Some cartels can still survive on "security taxes", illegal light, gas, water, and prostitution still all those sources of income can be dealt with by having social reforms, and organized state intervention in poor comunities.

Rio de janeiro is considered to be way more dangerous than são paulo because there are a bunch of smaller factions constantly at war and São paulo's crime is dominated by the strongest/largest criminal faction in the country, it is by no means a safe city but you are less likely to be killed by a stray bullet.

Drug dealers can afford all of those other operations because of their monopoly on the selling of drugs, which in turn is only possible because they are illegal.

Also, sure, the left should foccus their efforts on fighting an endless war that would affect the poor more than the bougie.

I swear to god, this chan was taken over by Zig Forumsacks that got bored of fascism.

It was long ago. So many reactionaries here. Classic psychadelics is one of best to get legal since it opens people up to new perspectives and helps treat alcoholism.

Attached: Joanrivers blowjob.gif (360x288, 669.39K)