Calling them cartels is wrong, since it implies its a monopoly, which is not. But drug dealers certainly exist in Mexico and they are armed to the teeth with american weapons.
The “war on drugs” in Mexico was actually an attempt to create a drug cartel, a monopoly, and the result was a disaster that skyrocketed violence in Mexico and other latin american countries that implemented that policy.
Your response isn’t contradicting the book’s conclusions. Not sure if you meant that or if I’m misinterpreting your wording but the author is arguing against cartels as depicted in fiction and the media: that cartels are orgs that exist independently of the state and challenge state power. You’re eloquently arguing part of why that understanding is incorrect.
Calling them cartels is wrong, since it implies its a monopoly, which is not. But drug dealers certainly exist in Mexico and they are armed to the teeth with american weapons.
The “war on drugs” in Mexico was actually an attempt to create a drug cartel, a monopoly, and the result was a disaster that skyrocketed violence in Mexico and other latin american countries that implemented that policy.
Your response isn’t contradicting the book’s conclusions. Not sure if you meant that or if I’m misinterpreting your wording but the author is arguing against cartels as depicted in fiction and the media: that cartels are orgs that exist independently of the state and challenge state power. You’re eloquently arguing part of why that understanding is incorrect.