Blog Post 8 – Outline

The Mexican Government vs. The Mexican Drug Cartels

1. Background
   1. The Mexican government… Who are they? What are they trying to accomplish?
      1. Enrique Pena Nieto is the president of Mexico, who is working with the United States to stop the epidemic.
      2. They want to put a stop to the drug trafficking from Mexico to the United States.

• “Mexico has suffered staggering levels of violence and crime during the country’s seven-year-long war against the cartels. The fighting has killed 90,000 people so far, a death toll larger than that of the civil war in Syria” (Asfura-Heim & Espach, 2013, pg.1)

1. Main goal is to put down drug related violence that has been going on since the 1980’s
2. The Mexican drug cartels… Who are they? What are they trying to accomplish?
   1. Drug cartels are several gangs, who are in an ongoing war with the government for regional control of the trafficking routes.
   2. They are trying to become more successful in their acts by being more violent.

• “…drug gangs in Mexico grew more independent and began fighting for more control and larger territories” (Kellner & Pipitone, pg.30, 2010).

1. Their efforts
   1. Mexican Government
      1. They have been using the military to help stop this ongoing conflict.

• State that they are increasing the salaries and dispatching military to stop the problem

1. Claimed that their primary focus is to dismantle the powerful drug cartels
2. The cartels
   1. Control 90% of the cocaine entering the United States
   2. Bribe political officials
   3. United States Government
      1. Seems like they are doing a better job at stopping the cartels than Mexico

• “…the United States spends an estimated $40 billion a year trying to stop the drug traffic and pursue and punish offenders” (Warner, pg.23, 2012).

1. The Violence
   1. In the community
      1. The citizens are terrified and want to put a stop to the conflict themselves.

• “In communities across the country, groups of men have donned masks, picked up rifles and machetes, and begun patrolling their neighborhoods and farmland” (Asfura-Heim & Espach, 2013, pg.1).

1. Cartels have been trying to scare everyone and, basically, show that they mean business

• “…narco thugs in Michoacán dumped five severed heads onto a dance floor in Uruapan, one of the state’s main cities” (Flannery, pg. 181, 2013).

1. As a whole
   1. Many people has died due to the reckless acts of the drug cartels

• “As the death toll rose, so did the level of alarm in Washington. On top of mounting evidence that parts of Mexico were under siege from organized crime and drug traffickers came rising fears the violence would spill over the 2,000-mile shared border with the United States” (Bussey, pg.1, 2009)

1. People are worrying.

• “6,000 people died in gangland-style slayings, gruesome torture-killings and full-scale massacres, the violence had crept into the public consciousness and Mexicans began referring to the carnage as simply “war.” (Bussey, pg.1, 2009)

1. Direct cause of the conflict
   1. Miguel Angel Felix Gallardo (“the godfather”)
      1. A federal agent, who founded the Guadalajara Cartel in 1980 and controlled all illegal drug trade in Mexico and the trafficking corridors across the Mexico-USA border throughout the 1980s

• “Patronage relationships between political authorities and drug trafficking organizations existed starting in the 1940’s…” (Dube & Gacia-Ponce, pg.400, 2013).

1. There were no cartels at that time in Mexico. Félix Gallardo was the lord of Mexican drug smugglers. He oversaw all operations; there was just him, his cronies, and the politicians who sold him protection

• “That the concept of law entails the idea of justified violence and that this is the formula of a problem, not of a solution” (Menke, 2010, Pg.1).

1. Possible solutions to the conflict
   1. Legalizing drug production and shipment, starting with marijuana
      1. Marijuana is one of the cartels main products, legalizing it would cut their revenue in half

• “The biggest step in hurting the business operations of Mexican cartels would be simply to legalize their main product: marijuana” (Luhnow, pg.1, 2009).

1. The government will simply give up in all attempts to stop the drug cartels
   1. The government is fighting the battle, but they are weak. The army is useless and the police are not doing their best to put a stop to the drug cartels. (Castañeda, pg.1, 2010) If Mexico was prepared, the war would have already ended.

References

Asfura-Heim, P. & Espach, R. (2013). The rise of Mexico’s self-defense forces. Foreign Affairs, 92(4).

Bussey, J. (2009). Frail state frayed relations: Mexico the United States and the drug war. Unknown, 17(2).

Kellner, T. & Pipitone, F. (2010). Inside Mexico’s drug war. World policy journal, 29-37.

Dube, A., Dube, O. & Gacia-Ponce, O. (2013). Cross-border spillover: U.S. gun laws and violence in Mexico. American political science review, 107(3), 397-417.

Flannery, N.P. (2013). Calderon’s war. Journal of internal affairs, 66(2), 181-196.

Menke, C. (2010). Law and Violence. University of California Press, 22(1), 1-17.

Warner, E. (2012). Border battleground: Mexico’s drug violence is state-sponsored. The American conservative, 20-23.

Luhnow, D. (2009). Saving Mexico. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704254604574614230731506644

Castañeda, J. (2010). Mexico’s failed drug war. Economic Development Bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/mexicos-failed-drug-war

Blog Post 7 – Mexican drug cartels

Blog Post 7

Conclusion Claim: The government will fail in every attempt to stop the drug cartels and in the end, will lose the battle.

Premise 1: The government is fighting the battle, but they are weak. The army is useless and the police are not doing their best to put a stop to the drug cartels. (Castañeda, pg.1, 2010) If Mexico was prepared, the war would have already ended.

Premise 2: A senior Mexican official stated that the war is not winnable (Luhnow, pg.1, 2009).

 

Sources:

            Luhnow, D. (2009). Saving Mexico. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704254604574614230731506644

            Castañeda, J. (2010). Mexico’s failed drug war. Economic Development Bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/mexicos-failed-drug-war

Blog Post 6 – Mexican Drug Cartels

Blog Post 6

Conclusion Claim: The government will legalize the production of drugs, starting with marijuana.

Premise 1: The biggest step in hurting the business operations of Mexican cartels would be simply to legalize their main product: marijuana (Luhnow, pg.1, 2009). Marijuana is the most popular and will hurt the cartels revenue by cutting it in half.

Premise 2: Legal marijuana is among the fastest-growing markets in the United States, and it’s growing at a rate poised to outpace the expansion of the global smartphone market, according to a new report obtained exclusively by The Huffington Post (Schwartz, pg.1, 2013).

 

Sources:

            Luhnow, D. (2009). Saving Mexico. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704254604574614230731506644

            Schwartz, C. (2013). Marijuana market poised to grow faster than smartphones. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/04/marijuana-market_n_4209874.html

           

Annotated Bibliography

Precious Cornier

Mexican Drug Cartels

The Mexican government versus the Mexican drug cartels has been an ongoing conflict since 2006. In the article, Cross border spillover: U.S. gun laws and violence in Mexico, several authors, such as Adrindrajit Dube, Oeindrila Dube and Omar Gacia-Ponce, discuss gun laws and homicide. The article states a lot of statistics about homicide and how 90% of the crimes pertaining to guns have been traced back to the United States. The government is concluding that the drug trade more serious than civil war violence. The authors state, “Our focus is not on civil war violence, but on criminal homicides, many of which are connected to the drug trade” (Dube & Gacia-Ponce, pg. 399, 2013). The article, also, discusses how the Colombian’s are part of the drug trafficking.

Cross border spillover: U.S. gun laws and violence in Mexico has not been much of a helpful article when it came to an overview of the conflict, but it has gave underground information. Underground information includes how politics are involved in such a crime chain. The source quotes, “Patronage relationships between political authorities and drug trafficking organizations existed starting in the 1940’s…” (Dube & Gacia-Ponce, pg.400, 2013). This article relates to my overall topic by giving the specifics, meaning the politics, the statistics, the weapon violence, etc.  The source contains many graphs to demonstrate gun sales and homicides as well as other things, which is somewhat helpful if I was researching the effects that guns have on violence.

In the article, Inside Mexico’s drug war, Tomas Kellner and Francesco Pipitone discuss several cartels, such as The Gulf Cartel, Los Zetas and the Sinaloa gang. The authors describe what the Mexican as well as the United States government is doing about the situation. The government has been giving their utmost effort in stopping the violence by increasing salaries and dispatching military to take care of the problem. In addition, the amount of deaths due to the violence of the drug cartels is stated and status of the gangs in Mexico, which shown as growing more independent. The article states, “…drug gangs in Mexico grew more independent and began fighting for more control and larger territories. A decades-long war, which has claimed some 20,000 lives…” (Kellner & Pipitone, pg.30, 2010).

Inside Mexico’s drug war gives a broad overview of the conflict, the Mexican government against the drug cartels, as well as gives specific examples of the different cartels and what they are known for. This ongoing war has caused many deaths and helped the cartels gain more. The article constantly mentions the Colombian and Mexican drug wars to be similar. I picked this article because it contained many examples and facts, such as the similarities between the Colombian’s drug war and Mexico’s and how they help each other in the trafficking process. The article states, “…the Colombian and Mexican trafficking groups established a new deal allowing the Mexicans to receive percentage of the cocaine in each shipment as payment for their transportation services” (Kellner & Pipitone, pg.29, 2010). This specific article was very helpful in researching the conflict, but the author’s could have discussed more of the effects that this conflict has on citizens.

In the article, Calderon’s war, Nathaniel Parish Flannery discusses Felipe Calderon, the elected president at the time. Calderon directly confronted the cartels, in which he sent troops into Michoacán to put a stop to the trafficking. The article, also, discusses the brutal and gruesome acts of the cartels. The article quotes, “…narco thugs in Michoacán dumped five severed heads onto a dance floor in Uruapan, one of the state’s main cities” (Flannery, pg. 181, 2013). Throughout the article, it is stating instances where the cartels are sending threats, such as letters and body parts. On the other hand, the article also states the success that the government because of their endless efforts in trying to put a stop to this conflict.

My last article is a little more specific. Calderon’s war demonstrates the positive side, where the government is winning instead of the cartels. The article states, “Over the last twelve years, under the leadership of mayors from the leftist Party of the Democratic Revolution (PDR), Mexico City has achieved a miraculous reduction in crime” (Flannery, pg.183, 2013). This is a victory for Mexico, whose main conflict is the cartels. Calderon’s war relates to my overall topic by giving inside evidence of an actual cartel and what there process is in getting the drug trafficking routes.

The law can contribute a big deal to how crime is just, simply, ignored. The government and/or the police do not put all effort into stopping crimes and, sometimes, actually contribute to breaking the law. In the article, Law and Violence, author, Christoph Menke discusses how the law is supposed to put an end to crime, but it, merely, does not. The article states, “Law is justified violence” (Menke, 2010, Pg.1). Law is power and too much power could be taken advantage of. Many political figures ignore the violence that takes place in their cities, but avoiding a situation does not make it better. “Law is about power, its own power” (Menke,  2010, Pg.1).

My conflict, the Mexican government vs. the Mexican drug cartels, relates to the article in many ways. The article states that the law is not doing its best to stop crimes and that is, also, what was stated in another article about the Mexican government. Enrique Pena Nieto is the president of Mexico and believes that should work closely with the U.S. in terms of the drug war, but has so far failed in that effort and actually distanced himself farther from the U.S. Nieto’s effort is not what is expected from a president that is supposed to care for the well-being of his country. Menke (2010, Pg.1) writes, “That the concept of law entails the idea of justified violence and that this is the formula of a problem, not of a solution” (Menke, 2010, Pg.1). The law is not doing their best in order to prevent the crimes that are committed, but they are not trying hard enough.

In the article, Border battleground, Ed Warner discusses the decrease in illegal immigrants and the increase of drugs crossing the border. Drugs are a growing issue in Mexico as well as the United States. Throughout the article, Warner states how drugs are, basically, taking over. In addition, the article discusses what Barack Obama is doing to help put a stop to the Mexican drug trade. In the article, George Grayson writes, “…the United States spends an estimated $40 billion a year trying to stop the drug traffic and pursue and punish offenders” (Warner, pg.23, 2012). The United States is doing their best to assist and cater to the ongoing issue of drugs, but the U.S. is taking Mexico for granted.

Border Battleground was not much of helpful source. It seemed to be lacking much information, such as more information about the Mexican government who are also involved. The article constantly mentions, basically, the conflict more based on the issue of drugs more than the violence aspect.  Warner writes, “Fewer illegal immigrants are entering the United States these days, but more drugs” (Warner, pg.20, 2012). Drugs are a big issue in Mexico and the United States, which creates violence. Violence, such as murder, counterfeit, and fraud, are spreading throughout rapidly.

References

Kellner, T. & Pipitone, F. (2010). Inside Mexico’s drug war. World policy journal, 29-37.

Dube, A., Dube, O. & Gacia-Ponce, O. (2013). Cross-border spillover: U.S. gun laws and violence in Mexico. American political science review, 107(3), 397-417.

Flannery, N.P. (2013). Calderon’s war. Journal of internal affairs, 66(2), 181-196.

Menke, C. (2010). Law and Violence. University of California Press, 22(1), 1-17.

Warner, E. (2012). Border battleground: Mexico’s drug violence is state-sponsored. The American conservative, 20-23.

Law and Violence

IDIS: Information Literacy

14 October, 2013

Law and Violence

            The law can contribute a big deal to how crime is just, simply, ignored. The government and/or the police do not put all effort into stopping crimes and, sometimes, actually contribute to breaking the law. In the article, Law and Violence, author, Christoph Menke discusses how the law is supposed to put an end to crime, but it, merely, does not. The article states, “Law is justified violence” (Menke, 2010, Pg.1). Law is power and too much power could be taken advantage of. Many political figures ignore the violence that takes place in their cities, but avoiding a situation does not make it better. “Law is about power, its own power” (Menke,  2010, Pg.1).

            My conflict, the Mexican government vs. the Mexican drug cartels, relates to the article in many ways. The article states that the law is not doing its best to stop crimes and that is, also, what was stated in another article about the Mexican government. Enrique Pena Nieto is the president of Mexico and believes that should work closely with the U.S. in terms of the drug war, but has so far failed in that effort and actually distanced himself farther from the U.S. Nieto’s effort is not what is expected from a president that is supposed to care for the well-being of his country. Menke (2010, Pg.1) writes, “That the concept of law entails the idea of justified violence and that this is the formula of a problem, not of a solution” (Menke, 2010, Pg.1). The law is not doing their best in order to prevent the crimes that are committed, but they are not trying hard enough. (P.C)

    In the Colombian Drug War, rebels and guerrilla members have united over the past several decades based on the idea of not following government law.  They have been very successful in their very violent and illegal activities.  Menke states in this article that “law is justified violence” however it is through the greater cause of this violence to enforce the law.  Violence is the opposite of law, in the Colombian Drug War it is clearly seen that the violent members of the cartel are acting primarily to overthrow the law that has been established.  “And I say this as the president of the country that has suffered more deaths, more bloodshed and more sacrifices in this war, and the country that has also achieved more results in the fight against this scourge and the mafias that underpin it.”  Colombia’s current president, Juan Manuel Santos recently shared this statement with the press.  He shows his determination to end this ongoing conflict, and has two ways to do so.  He is allowing the guerrillas to decide if they would like to accept Colombian law, or it will be forced upon them through violence.  This is one of the main idea’s of Menke’s article.  (D.G.)

    This article relates to the Trayvon Martin case in many ways. One of the things that stand out the most about it is the quote “Law, so its critics say, does not show a way out of violence; it only continues it in a different way,” (Manke, 2010, pg 1). I relate this quote based off of the reaction that arose after the reading of the verdict. There were many protests and press conferences that were saying that Zimmerman being found not guilty if a form of injustice. Manke is saying that even though the law is here to “help”, it doesn’t always do the good it was supposed to, sometimes doing the exact opposite and in the end, the law will always be a contradictory system. (D.B.)

This article relates to my conflict City gang violence “Chicago” because it is dealing with violence in general. In the article it says “law is itself a kind of violence; because it imposes a judgment that determines its “subject” like a curse” (Menke, 2010, para. 3). This is showing how laws and violence is like a curse because you can never get rid of it. Being in a gang is like having a curse because there is no way out of it. (B.J)

My conflict, The BART shooting of Oscar Grant, relates to the article because in paragraph 2, the article focuses on the comparison of the two statements. It reflects on how the law is supposed to reduce violence and be so against it, yet they bring it into the world themselves. The writer states that the law itself is a kind of violence and that the decision making could exert violence both physical attacks and inner violence which reflects back to my conflict. The officer who shot the victim in my conflict made a decision along with a judgment, a judgment who most define as a racial thing. The purpose that the officer gives about even confronting the victim was because he was bringing violence to citizens however, was it right to fight violence with violence? No. in an end result, there was a dead body on sight, Oscar Grant. Because of the incident, there then were riots, protests, many which ended in violence and plenty of deaths. The law doesn’t grasp the fact that their actions and decisions that they make will have an effect on future events. If the one officer of the “law” genuinely wanted to follow the law and make the streets a better and safer place, he would have played that incident out differently. This just goes to show how much the “law” is being valued or just human rights in general. It appears to me that the law is being less and less valued as time goes on.   (T.B.)

This article relates to my conflict, gang violence, because it shows how the law effects what happens to the gangs and the gang members in terms of how they are brought to justice because the law is the deciding factor in what happens to them after they commit these violent crimes “law is the opposite of violence, since legal forms of decision-making disrupt the spell of violence generating more violence.”(Menke, 2010, Pg.1). Law and violence always seem to go together because violence always seems to follow the gangs and the law. The police or the law are always trying to find the gangs or gang members that terrorize certain neighborhoods of Washington D.C. and in order to do this it ties back to how you can’t really completely get rid of the violence with the gangs because it constantly follows them. (F.C.)

 

References

Menke, C. (2010). Law and Violence. University of California Press, 22(1), 1-17.

Primary Source – Mexican Drug Cartels

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=14f_1279854373

In the video, it shows the beheading of a member of a rival cartel (The video is very explicit).

Purpose: The cartel made this video in order to scare everyone. They wanted to demonstrate that they (the cartel) are very serious about getting what they want. In addition, they wanted to show that they are heartless. The cartels will kill anyone for control.

Value: The video tells me many things about my overall conflict, such as the affect that the cartels have on people and what they are willing to do in order to be in control. I can’t learn much about the video, but the circumstances are horrible.

Two Articles about Mexican Government vs. the Drug Cartels

Both articles, “Drug war apparently has Mexican’s president attention” and “Mexican drug cartel activity in U.S. said to be exaggerated in widely cited federal report,” include the Mexican drug cartels as a major issue. The difference is that the issue in the first article stated occurs in Mexico, while the second one occurs in the United States. Damien Cave discusses the Mexican president, Enrique Peña Nieto, and how he is trying to put a stop to the drug trafficking. The Mexican government and the United States are working together on this matter in order to defeat the endless and reckless acts of the drug cartels. In the second article, several authors, discuss how the cartels are now operating in the U.S. and there are many criminal cases in the United States concerning the Mexican drug cartels. The article quotes, “The cartels, the Arizona Republican said, now maintain a presence in over 1,000 cities” (Higham, Horwitz & Rich, 2013). In both articles, they maintain the same point of view, which is that the Mexican drug cartels are polluting their cities and are impacting their communities in a negative way. In addition, these articles are prominent. They show a great deal of importance because it is a growing issue that is no longer affecting only Mexico but it is affecting the United States.                        

 

 

References

Cave, D. (2013). Drug war apparently has Mexican’s president attention. NY Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/19/world/americas/drug-war-apparently-has-mexican-presidents-attention.html?ref=drugtrafficking&_r=0

Higham, S., Horwitz, S. & Rich, S. (2013). Mexican drug cartel activity in U.S. said to be exaggerated in widely cited federal report. The Washington Post. Received from http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-08-25/news/41446484_1_cartels-dea-drug-trafficking

 

Mexican Drug Cartels Summary

The Mexican government, which includes President Enrique Peña Nieto, versus the Mexican drug cartels, has been an ongoing conflict since December 2006. The Mexican government claims that their primary focus is to dismantle the drug cartels. “President Enrique Peña Nieto’s administration has pledged to reduce violence in Mexico.” (Fox News Latino, 2013) On the other hand, the many Mexican drug cartels, such as Beltran Leyva, Gulf Cartel, Juarez Cartel and many more want to control the trafficking routes to the United States. Mexico, to be specific the drug cartels, control 90% of the cocaine entering the United States and are also the main supplier of marijuana and meth. Due to this conflict, more than 60,000 people have been killed. In addition, there have been many court cases against members of the cartel, gun control debates occur and elections are full of threats which impact the results.

References

• Fox News Latino. (2013). Mexican government softens drug war language as cartels spread to Europe. Fox News. Retrieved from http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2013/04/16/mexican-government-softens-drug-war-language-as-cartels-spread-to-europe/
• The CNN Library. (2013). Mexico drug war fast facts. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/02/world/americas/mexico-drug-war-fast-facts/index.html