Mike__Wallace

our overall answer is that the roots of the current mess go back to the establishment of drug prohibition in the states, in the early 20th century, and subsequent efforts by the us to have mexico do what us was unable to do, block shipments of drugs north. but mexico was a co-creator, it had it's own prohibitionists, and, more important, the mexican state turned a blind eye to drug trafficking from very early on, in return for a piece of the action

Just to get the ball rolling, we here post a question to ourself that's often been asked us: why do you say the us had a hand in creating the mexican drug war? isnt it, like the name says, 'mexican'? really an internal affair?

this should be underscored. on multiple occasions, in the 30s, 60s, 80s, 90s and later, mexico has tried to back away acting as agents of us policy. in the 30s, mexico actually legalized drugs, set up clinics, and prepared to treat it as a public health issue. anslinger, back bu us government made it clear that the us would impose an embargo on all medicines unless mexico reversed its policy; and it did. in nixons time, the us demand upping antidrug efforts by having mexicans spray their poppy and marijuana fields, mexico refused, fearing health impact (cf vietnam and agent orange), and nixon, at behest of watergate burglar to be, in effect shut down the border till mexico gave in. in reagan times and after us threatened to cut off access to desperately needed credit, and veto applications to imf, unless they accelerated (militarized) drug interdiction. the problem is the tremendous disparity in economic (and military) power between the two countries. it's only now, that the decriminalizers are inside the gates, as it were, that it may become difficult even impossible to coerce other governments.

tempting to say trump is a clown, which he is, and leave it at that. but he's got the ear of a substantial number of us citizens, and says things they wouldnt say. so mere ridicule isnt enough of a response, facts need to be mobilized. among them, the kinds we assemble in our book, that demonstrate the deep complicity of the us in drug trafficking, partly that we buy the stuff, partly that we sell gangsters the weapons they use.

carmen's right, but there's another dimension to factor in. for a variety of reasons -- some of them resulting from the adoption of neoliberal policies by both the us and mexico, starting in the 70s and 80s, some of them resulting from the intertwined economic and financial crises of those years - there was a devastating impact on the countryside, with vast numbers pushed off the land and into slums of the cities. some of that labor power was absorbed by the maquiladoras, production facilities on the us border, but some of it went into the flourishing drug trade (the cocaine boom of 80s was staggeringly profitable). most of the income furnished drug lords with rococo living style, but there was enough left over to hire desperate farm (and urban) workers. so yes, those policies are partly responsible, tho the drug trade long preceeds them.