Discussion Drug Cartels do not Exist

[assclass]

Drug Cartels Do Not Exist – Vanderbilt University Press

Through political and cultural analysis of representations of the so-called war on drugs, Oswaldo Zavala makes the case that the very terms we use to describ...

www.vanderbiltuniversitypress.com

"
Through political and cultural analysis of representations of the so-called war on drugs, Oswaldo Zavala makes the case that the very terms we use to describe drug traffickers are a constructed subterfuge for the real narcos: politicians, corporations, and the military. Though Donald Trump's incendiary comments and monstrous policies on the border revealed the character of a deeply depraved leader, state violence on both sides of the border is nothing new. Immigration has endured as a prevailing news topic, but it is a fixture of modern society in the neoliberal era; the future will be one of exile brought on by state violence and the plundering of our natural resources to sate capitalist greed.

Yet the realities of violence in Mexico and along the border are obscured by the books, films, and TV series we consume. In truth, works like Sicario, The Queen of the South, and Narcos hide Mexico's political realities. Alongside these examples, Zavala discusses Charles Bowden, 2666 by Roberto Bolaño, and other important Latin American writers as examples of those who do capture the realities of the drug war.

Translated into English by William Savinar, Drug Cartels Do Not Exist will be useful for journalists, political scientists, philosophers, and writers of any kind who wish to break down the constructed barriers—physical and mental—created by those in power around the reality of the Mexican drug trade.
"

 

[Vastness]

Sounds like an interesting perspective although my first instinct is to say that it doesn't sound true. I know this is anecdotal and not exactly evidence but I've personally met someone who was a part of a cartel, a while back now, but I had no reason to believe they were fabricating anything about their lives.

Slightly less anecdotally, I believe there are and have been many other people who have self-described themselves as being part of a cartel, either publicly or in the context of privately aiding law enforcement agencies with information that later became public. One might argue that they don't use that phrase outside the context of an interrogation room, ie, the loosely defined (however loose they might be) groups that are generally understood to be cartels, but the fact is it does refer to something (typically groups of people that practice a particularly violent flavour of organised crime - not necessarily substance oriented, but obviously including substances) that frankly IS a real phenomenon.

I guess the title is intended to be kind of hyperbolic, and that the argument is something along the lines that "both sides" might be equally considered to be cartels, although I find that an inherently slightly problematic way of thinking, as ever the absence of a paragon of moral virtue on one side doesn't mean both sides are equally culpable, and even if both sides are equally culpable by some metric, it doesn't mean that the present realities on both sides are equally morally defensible, and again, the title itself kind of nonsensical since frankly drug cartels do exist and it would be naive to think that they wouldn't as long as drugs are largely illegal. BUT I haven't actually read the book so maybe I should read it and reserve judgement until then. Have you read it? (Anyone who has please do comment!)

 

[assclass]

Sounds like an interesting perspective although my first instinct is to say that it doesn't sound true. I know this is anecdotal and not exactly evidence but I've personally met someone who was a part of a cartel, a while back now, but I had no reason to believe they were fabricating anything about their lives.

Wow, your three paragraphs were the perfect rebuttal for an academic book you haven't read. Absolutely brilliant takes!

 

[Vastness]

Not a rebuttal. Just a criticism of the title. I thought that was pretty clear. It does sound interesting and I probably will read it, although it's hard to gauge since as far as I can tell your original post did not contain even a single word that was your own.

I did ask...

Have you read it?

If so, please do share something.

 

[Jerry Atrick]

Not a rebuttal. Just a criticism of the title. I thought that was pretty clear. It does sound interesting and I probably will read it, although it's hard to gauge since as far as I can tell your original post did not contain even a single word that was your own.

I did ask...


If so, please do share something.

lol. Don't worry, he probably copied his three paragraphs from the dust cover and hasn't read it either.