So the New President of the Phillipines (Dutarte) is getting tough on crime. He is largely responsible for 700 killings by police in the last couple of months. He has identified 300 “dirty cops” He has
The Phillipines are plagued by drug dealers. The drug dealers operate with impunity and contribute significantly to the organized crime that controls the human trafficking that goes on in that country. The criminal own much of the police force as well as many politicians. It was not unheard of for politicians to visit criminal bosses to operate their crimnal empire out of their jail cell in jails populated by convicts that are all loyal to him, where the guards are all on his payroll, where he gets visits from politicians and other prostitutes.
Dutarte is defending the extrajudicial killing of drug dealers in an effort to reduce the out of control crime that is plaguing the country. This has resulted in the police killing 700 alleged drug dealers and vigilantes killing about 1000 alleged drug dealers. About 600,000 drug dealers have turned themselves in to avoid getting killed. If this sort of authoritarian policy works in getting their country’s violence and crime under control, how would you feel about Mexico doing something similar to get their problems under control?
The Filipino President has responded to US criticism by saying that our cops are killing innocent men because of the color of their skin. How much moral authority do we have left? Would it matter if we did?
It’s a bullshit response. If your numbers are correct between the police and ‘vigilantes’ they have killed around 1700 ‘drug dealers’…in a country of less than 100 million. The US, with a population of over 360 million has around 1000 police fatal shootings a year…not all of which are black or hispanic people. Ever if every police shooting of someone of color was simply because of their skin tone you are talking about a disproportionate number there. And, of course, not every police shooting is simply innocent folks killed for their skin color.
I don’t think the US or anyone else has any sort of ‘moral authority’. And no, it doesn’t matter…you don’t need ‘moral authority’ to criticize other countries when they do bad stuff. This is the same dilemma China and North Korea attempt to place the US under when we are critical of them…that we do bad stuff so we can’t criticize them when they do bad stuff.
No. This sort of thing is just rife for abuse and slippery slopes…and it’s not the right way to fix the fundamental and systemic issues that plague Mexico by just allowing the police and ‘vigilantes’ and open season on drug dealers and telling them to go forth and bag their limit. That would be horrific in Mexico, since there is so much corruption there and since the upper classes would game this like you wouldn’t believe. It’s a very bad idea in Mexico…and probably in the Philippines as well.
If you want to defeat an enemy, there are things you can do in addition to engaging it’s violent side. One option is to starve it out by removing it’s ability to support and create more fighters.
In these cases, if drugs were decriminalized, the gangs would loose a lot of income, and a lot of the reason for fighting.
Another big problem that both of those countries have is that the level of corruption throughout the government is extremely high. Corruption is a very difficult problem to deal with, but I don’t think extra-judicial killing and imprisonment without a fair trial is a good plan. This seems to be an invitation for open gang warfare with the hope that they will just kill each other off.
There are other options for a decisive first step… Maybe corrupt people could be fired and locked out of their work places?
To an individual. Not on a grand scale. And happy people are much less likely to turn to drugs.
Heck, there’s that study with the mice. If left alone with water vs. water + opiate, they go for the latter. If put in a community, they go for the former. Just being happy negates the addicting effects.
Turning to fascism–and that’s what this is the start of–is not the answer.
The example of Colombia should prove illustrative. No matter what the government might pay a humble civil servant, a drug lord can easily offer three times as much while offering death as an alternative. You’re going to triple my salary and not cut my head off and leave it in a ditch? Guess I’m on your side now!
The sums of money involved are too vast. The hunger for drugs amongst the world’s population is unquenchable. And it is not just poor people involved. There are numerous rich, influential people involved who have the means to corrupt this process. A literal war on drugs would be fantastic cover for some aggressive gentrification but there will always be people who will put reward before risk, particularly when the sums are as vast as they are.
The hunger for food is unquenchable too, but we don’t have food cartels murdering people in the streets. Same with alcohol - except for that period where it was illegal in the U.S.
Like DagNation said, if you decriminalize the drugs, the vast sums of money disappear.
Who would fire these corrupt people? These cops enjoy the protection of the criminal syndicates that own them. What happens to the whistleblowers?
Assuming that decriminalizing crystal meth (the primary drug we are talking about here) is not an option, what other suggestion do you have for making them wither on the vine?
The Philippines has a long history of a high level of political violence. What’s going on now is a worsening of the trend, but I think it’s just a difference in degree more than it is anything new.
I seem to recall that diego lives in the Philippines. I have not seen him around here in a while, though.