Narco-traffickers of Mexico and the R-C Church

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

This is very serious. Felipe Calderon’s military-led, U.S.-backed war against organized crime is failing. Due to drug violence there are more than 35,000 civilians dead as well as 2,300 police and soldiers. Unstoppable momentum of narcotrade violence has rattled the political class.

Not only is this a failure of the government to solve the problem, but it's a failure of all authority throughout Mexico. Authority such as the Roman Catholic Church, which address`such social issues like birth control and marriage. But this drug war is something that seems to be affecting everyone and seems ideal topic to be addressed by the church.


Perhaps the best hope for this problem is Javier Sicilia, who has been organizing grass roots protests ever since his son was killed by narcotraffickers. He is certainly catching media and public attention. But I'm not sure such a protest offers a solution.

Way back when a long time ago "July 11, 1926, Catholic bishops voted to suspend all public worship in response to the Calles Law. This suspension was to take place on August 1. On July 14, they endorsed plans for an economic boycott against the government, which was particularly effective in west-central Mexico (the states of Jalisco, Guanajuato, Aguascalientes, and Zacatecas). Catholics in these areas stopped attending movies and plays and using public transportation, and Catholic teachers stopped teaching in secular schools." This protest helped push the people to move the issue forward and issued changes.

As Javier Sicilia demands end to the bloodshed he reaches out with only the authority of a citizen. I really feel that the R-C church could and should participate in putting this demand out there. For the church has authority over moral matters of which this drug war surely is about. And as the government has already proven itself ineffective in the way it's been addressing the bloodshed.

Comments

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

They really should. So many so-called Catholics in Mexico act as if murder is okay as long as it's done on a weekday. It's obscene how quiet they are.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I don't think the Catholic Church can end this particular Mexican Civil War. Too many other issues wrapped up in it for that to have much effect. I might also note that Mexico's about as anti-clerical as Latin America gets so too much influence by the Church could actually strengthen the cartels, not weaken them.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

While it's encouraging that the people of Mexico seem to be supporting this movement, I have to wonder if it will be enough. There's a lot of money in drugs, money that goes a long way towards easing any kind of official crackdown on druglord activities. As long as the demand is there, someone will always step in to fill it.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's not like they just kill people, they do that terrifying shit like cut your head off and put in the front seat of the car. And that's what they do to the cops. God help anyone else :-X

[msretro.livejournal.com]

It has been many, many years since the Church ceased practicing liberation theology. And, the current Pope is virulently opposed to it.

I agree with you that the RC Church could have an effect, but I do not expect them to step up in this, or any other, matter.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

35,000

Not to diminish the violence in Mexico, which is horrific, but how many of those "civilians" were gang members killed by other gang members? Too many truly innocent people are killed and I think it diminishes them if they are lumped in with their killers.

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

I'm seeing numbers that are as high as 45,000 killed by drug violence. But I don't know how you separate them into guilty and truely innocent... like it matters.

If it's only the bad guys killing each other then I suppose that's one thing, but on such a scale of tens of thousands it needs to stop. You see when all the bad guys kill each other off it would be nice if that was the end of it, but it's not. Unemployment is high and guess who has a job opening? For every narcotrafficker killed I'm sure at least two more get hired on.

It's not black and white. Who's innocent? Everybody is guilty of something at some point.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

like it matters

I think it does matter. Very, very much. The two sides in the fight are not equivalent. While it is a very easy thing to say "everybody is guilty," I think it is also morally wrong to not distinguish between a criminal dying at the hands of another criminal or at the hands of the police and an innocent person callously murdered by gang members. Don't get me wrong, the violence is very troubling and must be addressed and stopped. I think the problems in Mexico have progressed beyond the traditional law enforcement stage. Rule of Law in parts of Mexico is non-existent. It is a war and I don't think we should view the narco-traffickers lives in the same light as we do their victims. Who is innocent? The innocent are innocent. A person who picks up a gun and defies the law is not innocent. They have put themselves outside the law and must take the consequences if their confederates turn on them.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I highly doubt that criminals of this sort would give much of a damn. I mean, the Sicilians always paid lip-service to Mother Church but it never got in the way of their means and ends.

[lai-choi-san.livejournal.com]

Legalize drugs. Problem solved.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

Legalize drugs.

Yeah. We need an unregulated drug based economy just south or our border because Afghanistan isn't close enough.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

south or our borde

I meant "south of our border"

[lai-choi-san.livejournal.com]

Once drugs are legalized in Mexico, for sure, the US will have to take measures. Why not an harmonization of drugs policies on both sides of the frontier ? Laws adopted in Australia, Portugal, Switzerland and Netherlands didn't result in an explosion of drug addicts. All the contrary. Why could not the US (and the rest of the world) adopt similar laws ?

Your comment leads to this question : is Mexico forced into this war on drugs because of the US ?

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

is Mexico forced into this war on drugs because of the US ?

In part. Mexico became a drug based economy because it is lucrative. And it is lucrative because of the American drug market that feeds it.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Organized crime is a lot more complicated than that.

Drugs may be a greater profit for them right now but anything illegal is fair game. If you legalize drugs it just means they need to push sex trafficking or other harder drugs.

The only major benefit to legalization is it reduces sympathy due to the product. In Prohibition a lot of people looked the other way because they thought that the law was stupid.

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

Same thing today. Unless we're talking about the USA, where everyone is paranoid about everything, everyone turns blind eye to weed, even the cops for the most part. Cops really only worry when it's in "fuck-you" quantities, or otherwise in their face.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

Drugs may be a greater profit for them right now but anything illegal is fair game

Yeah.  They can abandon the drug market now.  They have a new business model (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/drug-cartels-muscle-in-to-piracy-business/2011/05/28/AG93GLEH_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage).

[lai-choi-san.livejournal.com]

In other words, there is no solution to drug trafficking in Mexico without a radical change on US side.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

without a radical change on US side

If you mean by "radical change", legalization of drugs, I don't think you're going to see it for several reasons:

1. We would have to admit that the "War on Drugs" was an abject failure.  Although it was, it would be internationally embarassing and politically embarassing for the administration that legalized it.
2. Allowing Americans to medicate themselves for their own entertainment would be like giving razor blades to a baby.  We are a nation of voluptuaries.  An enormous portion of our culture is part of an eating disorder epidemic.  Despite the economic downturn we have an incredible amount of consuming power compared to other countries and we indulge in it.
3. The pharmaceutical industry wouldn't put up with it.  Currently, illegal drug production is done predominately outside the US.  Remember we are spending over 700 billion over 10 years to pay for Medicare part D because seniors figured out that they could save tons of money by getting their prescriptions filled in Canada or Mexico.  I believe this was done to protect the American pharmaceutical industry.
4. Although there would be some government revenue from taxation, I'm sure the FDA would be regulating it heavily.  Also, this would export a large amount of American's disposable income which would further drain America's equity.

This last item is particularly important because Mexico is a good example of what can happen if a nation doesn't safeguard its economy.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

No, it became one because its agriculture was undercut and there was an economic collapse in the 1990s. Organized crime provided services the government was obviously unable to, the government did not like the competition but lacks the brute force to displace the cartels.....and so Mexico looks to become something like Colombia. With the socialists being Indians in Yucatan who don't like the Cartels, which is at least an improvement over FARC.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

In one sense, yes. NAFTA undercut Mexican agriculture and people need *some* way to make money. In real life, as opposed to fiction, drugs are an extremely lucrative business and provide much more wealth than farming used to. I think that legalizing drugs might actually be quite vehemently resisted by cartels as threats to the Holy Peso and would provoke a much larger-scale civil war than already goes on there.

And at least some of that civil war's blending in with already-existing civil war....

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/world/article_145d7ab2-81d5-11e0-8ca1-001cc4c03286.html

And the Zapatistas are better at fighting a civil war than the narcoterrorists are.

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

Zapatistas fighting in the 1990's in the south, mostly in Chiapas and Oxaca. Never heard of any as far north as Michoacan back then.

I fear the EZLN in the north are inexperienced and without grassroots support. EZLN was born with one enemy to fight... the gov't. This new inexperienced Michoacan EZLN has to fight two fronts, both gov't and the cartels. The army isn't going to trust Zapatistas to fight along side them. And many of the peoples would rather live with the violence/killings rather then remove the best source of income flowing their way.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Er......the Zapatistas have been fighting for since the 1920s. They're the pros at this, the cartels are the new kids on the block. If they try to challenge the Zapatistas, they'd be given the equivalent of the titantium crowbar in the nuts.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

Do you really want a titanium crowbar? I mean, it'll be strong, but it's not like you're going to bend a steel bar, but it would also be light, which would effect the centripetal force, resulting in a lighter nut blast.

[lai-choi-san.livejournal.com]

This means that the Mexican government should elaborate a strategy in order to avoid this « much larger-scale civil war », like for instance declaring an emergency state. A brutal and not very democratic trick but at least it would allow the government to get a jump on cartels.

You also mention NAFTA, which is very relevant (and clarifying). Maybe some amendments incidental to a new drug policy should be done.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

At the price of reverting right back into a PRI/Porofiriato system. The problem of Mexican democracy is that after all these years Mexico still has yet to find a viable non-dictatorship system of government, and dictatorships in the present day aren't a guarantee on anything (you can ask Hosni Mubarak about that sometime).

The drug problem is only part of it, to really solve the matter requires addressing deeper issues. The Church can't do that. Finding some means for Mexican agriculture to be worth something is much simpler and more enduring a solution. I doubt we'd want a Catholic Rios Montt.

[raichu100.livejournal.com]

Agreed - I don't think it would be that simple, but it's DEFINITELY a step in the right direction.

For the church has authority over moral matters

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

This is the same Church that just issued a report about their priest-sex scandals that recommended that if the victim was over the age of 10 it shouldn't be considered pedophilia.

I think they're too busy being evil and covering it up to do things like help people.

Let's not forget this:

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/top-advisor-to-pope-on-pedophile-priests-arrested-in-pedophilia-sex-ring/news/2011/05/26/20865

Pope Palpatine has as much moral authority as his fictional look-alike does.

Re: For the church has authority over moral matters

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

In Mexico the church has to redeem itself for it's seen alot of scrutiny over the sex scandals.

But it's still one of the largest diocese in the world (2nd only to Brazil). As the Mexican gov't has proven useless and corrupted by narcotraffickers, what other NGO has the breadth to reach out? This is just my suggestion. I don't have answer. Nobody else does either. R-C have been strangely quiet but I feel they have the power, breadth and ability... now, if only they had the will.

Re: For the church has authority over moral matters

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Er....in Mexico the Church has been a political target since the Revolution a century ago. It's an extremely anti-clerical society and has been for a century and that means that the Church's involvement will wreck more than it helps. I realize it's a strange thought, but in Mexico the Church doesn't have the ability to do moral suasion after a century of harsh anti-clerical practices.

Re: For the church has authority over moral matters

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

The more I think about it, the more your comment bothers me. It suggests a few bad apples make all apples bad. Furthermore, it sugggests that bad people can't be trusted ever to do good things. Have you given up on all society or just Catholics?

I'm not a Catholic or even a Christian. I don't have much love for religion at all. But I do recognize religion as the moral/spiritual authority for many people here and abroad. Even if it is the "do as I say not as I do" kind of moral authority.

Re: For the church has authority over moral matters

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

I'm suggesting that the bad apples running the catholic corporation still haven't gotten little things like accountability. This isn't some vague interpretation of Scripture thing but instead very real and ongoing problems with child rape and the most recent guidelines make suggestions about things like reporting crimes to the police but don't make it required action.

So do I expect the organization that can't even properly protect children from their priesthood to take positive action? Not so much given their track record.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

Sandwichwarrior made an excellent post on the topic awhile back.

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

it is in my personal opinion that individuals whom categorize themselves as roman-catholic do so out of tradition and complacency. what we see in mexico nowadays are good amounts of mission work being done by the mormons, and even more so by the jehovah's witnesses. this newer missionary work has been successfully in influencing people groups to genuinely alter lifestyles. there has been a spiritual revival on the prowl there in mexico for some time but by no means it is being led by the roman catholic church.