Mexican Citizens Topple Cartels And Are Rewarded With Government Retaliation

There is one rule to citizen defiance that, in my opinion, surpasses all others in strategic importance; and it is a rule that I have tried to drive home for many years. I would call it the “non-participation principle” and would summarize it as follows:

When facing a corrupt system, provide for yourself and your community those necessities that the system cannot or will not. Become independent from establishment-controlled paradigms. If you and your community do this, the system will have one of two choices:

1) Admit that you do not need them anymore and fade into the fog of history, OR...

2) Reveal its tyrannical nature in full and attempt to force you back into dependence.

In either case, the citizenry gains the upper hand.

Mexican Citizens Topple Cartels And Are Rewarded With Government Retaliation

50,000 die in Mexico because of the drug violence. Armed citizenry protects themselves. Government sends in the troops to disarm the citizenry. Violence ensues.. Zero hedge has made the important comment :
I am hard-pressed to think of a better recent example of the non-participation principle in action than the rise of Mexican citizen militias in the Western state of Michoacan.

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

reply to post by R_Clark

I'm wondering when the cartels will hit the growers and distributors in Wash and Colo. Their production levels must be pretty low or their prices too high. That, or 'the absence' of reported violence must speak to honest limitations on illicit distribution.

I've actually been fairly surprised by the lack of spin on the subject.

Sad thing is, if people rose up against the aggressors in gang infested areas in the US the same way, the same would probably happen as well. We would see SWAT being sicked on them I am sure.

Mexican citizens topple cartel? lol Oh the misconceptions. Are you sure those are "citizens"?

TKDRL
Sad thing is, if people rose up against the aggressors in gang infested areas in the US the same way, the same would probably happen as well. We would see SWAT being sicked on them I am sure.

Of course. Gang-bangers gotta live too.

reply to post by R_Clark


When citizens do a job better than the government, when it is the government's job to do, the government gets embarrassed. Governments don't LIKE being embarrassed! Do you think all the secrets revealed by Edward Snowden are really crucial to our safety? Quite a lot of them are made Secret or Classified simply because they are an embarrassment to the government. Rather than take a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" approach, the government is trying to stop the citizens from fighting the cartel. And even if, as it has been reported, the "citizens" may be representing a different cartel in the battle for supremacy, who cares? As long as cartel members are being eliminated, that's a good thing! Let them kill each other off as long as their numbers are being reduced. Now, if the Mexican government could do a half decent job of taking back control of their own country........ I mean really, just shoot up any convoy of gun toting black suburbans and get it over with! Trace back to find who is buying all the bullet proof Mercedes! Cartel leaders live like Kings.... surely they leave a trail to follow? Live very well with walled compounds?

reply to post by R_Clark

This is a front on the marijuana battle... Fortunately, Co and Washington state have woken up to the cause of this violence. It is spreading through the states... 700,000 arrests related to Marijuana a year... untold costs.. Time to change the paradigm...

Since those two states are going to the Super Bowl this year maybe it would be fitting to call it the Ganja Bowl XLVIII.

The war on drugs has cost way too much and has had too many ill effects with little positive resutls to show of. Maybe it is time for a change.

ATTENTION

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

16e.) Illicit Activity: Discussion of illicit activities, specifically the use of mind-altering drugs & substances, engaging in computer hacking, promoting criminal hate, discussing sexual relations with minors, and furtherance of financial schemes and scams are strictly forbidden. You will also not link to sites or online content that contains discussion or advocacy of such material. Any Post mentioning or advocating personal use of illicit mind-altering drugs will result in immediate account termination.

i) Narcotics and illicit mind-altering substances: Due to abuse of the subject matter by some (promoting various aspects of personal use, and discussing actual personal use), no new topics on this subject are allowed in any form.

ANY further such posts will be removed and the poster warned

Lost of posting privileges are next

You have been advised

reply to post by R_Clark


First of all, lets make sure we understand what this thread is, and is not about. This thread appears to have been authored on the specific topic of a government going after a militia, which has made a better job of protecting its territory from cartel action, than has the government in question. It is not a thread about the wider issues of narcotic abuse, laws in the US pertaining to the same, or any other related issue.

I think there is more than enough subject matter, pertaining to the actual circumstances of this specific incident, to be going on with, without infringing the T&C of the site in order to explore issues which orbit this incident, especially since this circumstance could be applied to any kind of citizen action, against any kind of crime, not just narco-terrorism.

On the matter at hand then, I think it is utterly appalling, that in a nation like Mexico, where the cartels, by the admission of several government figures, are insanely powerful, and are better funded and resourced than the government itself, a militia which battles odds like that AND SUCCEEDS can be curtailed by the police force. I could understand, if a local cartel boss bought himself a police garrisons worth of cops, and asked them to fight the militia on his behalf, but this action seems more like a direct order from an actual government figure.

This is yet another example, of a government which is more interested in its own position and power within its borders, than the safety, security, and well being of its law abiding citizenry. March against war? Maced in the face. March against banking? Maced and kicked in the head, or shot in the face with a tear gas canister launcher. Tool up and frag the ever loving hell out of coke dealers, GET SHOT DEAD!

Lets be honest shall we? When the cartels run the country, law enforcement officials and gun toting citizens ought to be on the same damned side, not working against each other, and the cartels all at once. Yes, the militias may not be legally supportable, but considering the alternative, it is the only way that they can maintain justice for themselves or their loved ones, and since the legal system there cannot produce justice (which is the only actual reason to have a legal system) then it is only right that SOMETHING come to fill that need for justice, until such time as the law starts to work for the innocent, rather than protecting the guilty.

The Mexican government needs to grow up, accept that it is ineffectual and riddled with corruption, and allow the people to be their own guardians, distribute the responsibility for citizens security, amongst people that they know, love and trust, members of their own communities. If all good people were permitted by law to act in the interests of justice and security, then dangerous and evil people would have no where to turn, no alley down which they could escape, without being met by a wall of lead and death. That is how it needs to be in Mexico, if the cartels are ever to fall for good, and the people be freed of not only the oppression they have experienced under their auspices, but the stigma which attaches to them by association with a country which has been the seat of narco-terror and the Black Market, for decades.

In my view, any action which allows the people of Mexico to clear out the organised criminal elements from their society, is a just action. Until they succeed in doing so, they will not even begin the work of mending Mexico's international reputation, addressing the crippling poverty in the country, make good choices about who to elect to seats of power... Nothing good can begin, until the way has been cleared, and the government should accept the help.

reply to post by TrueBrit


The mexican government are corrupt cowards and should help the civil militias against the cartels.

Governments these days are as usefull as a full diaper

TKDRL
Sad thing is, if people rose up against the aggressors in gang infested areas in the US the same way, the same would probably happen as well. We would see SWAT being sicked on them I am sure.

In my neighborhood this is the very question being asked. The answer is the fight would spill over from citizen vs gang member citizen, to citizen vs SWAT/LEO. Its that bad in this part of Nashville, and people think Memphis is bad.

Evil exists because good men do nothing........
I Fear for these people.....Yet i would be ready to stand with them in a heartbeat.
The Mexican people have a much prouder and long standing tradition of revolution than the USA......
They have fought to remove the yoke of oppression from their shoulders and rid themselves of tyranny many times.
From the beginnings of these armed Militias i hope to see a revolution spread across the world....
One can look in any direction to see the people of many countries attempting to throw off the parasitic overlords who
ride their backs as a man sits astride beast of burden......
If i were to pray for anything, it would be the destruction of the hegemony that great wealth has placed in control of our world.
Be it the Cartels, The Bankers,The Government, or the Military Complex.....
It is time for the people to regain a measure of their own destiny........

TKDRL
Sad thing is, if people rose up against the aggressors in gang infested areas in the US the same way, the same would probably happen as well. We would see SWAT being sicked on them I am sure.

It really is a sad situation. The police fear armed law abiding citizens as much, if not more, than gang members, drug dealers, robbers, rapists, and murderers. When an armed citizen foils a crime, the police do not come out and say "thank you, excellent job, appreciate the help". Their first comment is "we don't recommend citizens do this, since they are not trained to handle such situations". I don't care how well trained police are, if they don't show up until AFTER an incident, they are useless.

I am proud of the citizens, militias, or whatever term one chooses to use, for standing up and protecting their families, friends, and communities from these cartels. Americans should support them. They are our neighbors, families, and friends too. If we don't support them, our own government will see, and continue to believe we will never stand up for anything.

reply to post by StratosFear

What is the difference between citizen vs gang and citizen vs swat/Leo?

Both in Mexico or here in the u.s.?

Nothing

They are all one thing

Cartels by different names are still cartels

Eta they are all tied together. Gangs fund cartels .cartels fund various alphabet agencies .alphabet agencies provide guns and support to cartels who provide guns and drugs to gangs.etc etc

Its all a war against the citizen

Time we all stand up

reply to post by Another_Nut


Well, there is still some differences. For one, the cronyism in different police branches is not geared to 100% upset their constituents. Drug cartels aren't doing a darn thing to appease the masses.

Chief of Police and their ilk in a big city (New Orleans, Nashville, ect.) tend to lean more towards taking the power out of the citizens hands for 2 reasons:

1. They live in an artificial powder keg. We're not well made to put up with millions of people in our back pockets.
2. This is where the more "liberal" live. People who live in cities tend to want the cops to take care of everything and are even often willing for the masses to be disarmed and leave it up to the enforcers.

Chief of Police and their ilk in a smaller more rural area tends to lean more towards keeping their constituents armed because:

1. They don't have the presence to go police BFE in under 5 minutes, and BFE tends to take care of their own.
2. The people that voted them into office are often hunters and outdoorsman, ect. People that have every intention of staying armed.

Which is really no different than the people themselves. City folk don't tend to like guns. Country folk don't tend to like talk of theirs being taken away.

A article about that type of behavioral differences...

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


I get your point

To me though

Just different fingers on the same hand

Reading your link now