Analysis on “To Die In Mexico”
The war on drugs, as it has developed in Mexico, where supplies to fill a US demand, have led to extreme loss of life, parallel power systems, government corruption, extreme costs to taxpayers and a variety of social woes. Regardless of the argument for or against legalization, or the effects of the controlling cocaine and marijuana has led to numerous undesired consequences. As John Gibler argues in his book To Die in Mexico, the message the governments of both Mexico and the US tell to the general public regarding the justification for the war on drugs, are false and designed to mislead the public from the actual situation. The interrelationship between the politics between the US and Mexico extends far beyond the war on drugs—the war on drugs being just the current manifestation of what in many instances has been a dubious relationship (Gibler, n.p.). This essay analyzes Gibler's assessment and compares it to other writers who have written on the drug issue and the relationship between the US and Mexico.
The 19th century between the relationship between the US and Mexico was defined by numerous territory disputes, which the US, because of it’s more advanced military capability, won by essentially taking what it decided it had a right to take. The 20th century was defined by mass immigration from Mexico do to the US due to economic opportunity that appeared in the US in a labor market that required skills Mexican workers were able to provide. The passing NAFTA in 1994 “paved the way to a closer U.S.-Mexico relationship on security, trade and counternarcotics” (Council on Foreign Relations, n.p.).
Gibler in his book does not claim to be a historian, but he does tell a narrative of wide reaching implications regarding the relationship between the US and Mexico from the perspective of the war on drugs. He connects a variety of issues, such as illicit commodities, borders, the US prison system, and how the US’s military aid given under the justification of fighting the war on drugs has led to a more militarized state. One of the central questions he asks is that if this military aid is actually helping to deal with the problem, why have murders skyrocketed since this aid began? He answers that question with, “Anonymous death needs silence. Names are thus dissolved. Facts vanquished. Times and locations obscured. Who was she? No one says a thing. Why did they kill him? Not a word” (Gibler). This current reality, not the historical interrelation that led to it is Gibler’s focus in his book. While some might criticize this, the historical narrative between the United States, given Gibler’s thesis, is beside the point he is trying to make.
Gibler believes that the US prohibition of drugs is one of the primary fuels feeding the fire of statistics like the murder rate in Cuidad Juarez, where the year prior to his book’s publication there were 3,000 drug related murders, 95% of which were never investigated. There are political agendas that are rarely mentioned in the media in connection with the drug war. Gibler asks, why is it that 90% of people arrested are released later without charges? Why is it, he wonders, that most of the arrests come from the Juarez Cartel and not the Sinaloa Cartel? These are clear-cut signs of government corruption. Gibler claims that Mexican politicians, military, police and narcotraffickers are all sharing the same bed and that the United States if complicit to this. According to Gibler, the war on drugs is not about the public health issue of drug users, it is about power and justification of increased militarization on both side of the border.
There is compelling evidence to doubt the message the public receives from its government. A history of marijuana enforcement in the US has been one of propaganda instead of hard science and the interest of protecting the public. Since the 1930s the United States government has pulled a complete 180 in its reasoning behind why marijuana use should be banned. Originally, marijuana was known as the “Killer Weed,” which would make its users aggressive and violent. According to Jerome Himmelstein, here were two reasons for this classification and message. The first was because, “Marihuana was seen as a drug typically used by Mexican laborers and other lower-strata groups; these groups were perceived as typically becoming deviant in violent ways.” The second reason was because “the entrepreneurship of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics . . . gave the Killer Weed image credibility and legitimacy” (Himmelstein, 26). While it is outside of the scope of this essay to provide a full analysis of this, it is an easy jump to conclude that this image was secondary to a primary goal, to control the poor populations of Mexican laborers. This was a time of systematic racism in the United States, so by attacking the substance, the government was able to control populations it considered deviant.
So now, the same government in the United States, (with different players, but playing the same game) which has misled the public before about the need for drug enforcement is making a claim about the need to channel billions of dollars of military aid in Mexico to outsource a war which, Gibler believes, cannot be won. Gibler in his book makes a compelling argument as to why should anyone trust a government which has misled it’s citizens in the past on this same issue? The toll on human life has thus far been the greatest cost, with 100,000 of people losing their life over it. From a toxicity standpoint, there are no annual deaths from marijuana in the US. Of all the illicit drugs combined, from all sources, there are on average 17,000 deaths associated from overdose in the US. For perspective, 22,000 people die annually from alcohol related deaths (DrugWarFacts.org, n.p.). From 2006-2012, 60,000 people have lost their lives in the war on drugs, not to mention billions of dollars spent that could otherwise be spent treating drug use as a health problem, instead of a criminal offence where taxpayers pay for users to spend time in prison.
Gibler is distraught about the current drug war, the misleading message from government, and the toll on the Mexican society that it brings. While he does not present a rigorous history of the interrelationship between the US and Mexico, for his purpose and his thesis, that is not necessary. What is important to look at the current situation and ask “Is it worth it?” He does not think it and presents compelling statistics and anecdotal evidence to support his argument.
Works Cited
Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations. Web. 4 Dec. 2014. <http://www.cfr.org/mexico/us-mexico-relations-1810-present/p19092>.
"Annual Causes of Death in the United States." Welcome. Web. 4 Dec. 2014. <http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/causes_of_death#sthash.rxhPrhEA.dpbs>.
Gibler, John. To Die in Mexico: Dispatches from inside the Drug War. San Francisco, CA: City Lights, 2011. Print.
Himmelstein, Jerome L. "From Killer Weed to Drop-out Drug: The Changing Ideology of Marihuana." Contemporary Crises: 13-38. Print.
"Mexico Drug War Fast Facts." CNN. Cable News Network, 18 Nov. 2014. Web. 4 Dec. 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/02/world/americas/mexico-drug-war-fast-facts/>.
