And what does that have to do with whether or not this could work for the Philippines? Really who gives a shit what works in Switzerland and some other country that isn’t plagued by the sort of drug violence and organized crime that the Philippines is plagued with?
America uses sticks and not carrots and noone seems to be accusing America of corrupt institutions. You sure you’re not hyperventilating here?
What history? Please be more explicit. Its really hard to rebutt your claims when they are so fucking vague.
The bogeyman changes, before it was communism, today is the war on drugs. While there is justification on fighting the former the reality is that, as I pointed out before, on the way of fighting the monsters Marcos became one. As the population has a history of many of them supporting dictators, history points to the current ruler to have a hard time avoiding that fate.
It “helps” that he not only talks like a dictator but also applies solutions like one.
Of course you are right. Despite moderators ignoring GIGOs use this sort of argument more than half a dozen times for over a week before stepping in, I deserve to get modded for parroting him once because that is EXACTLY like what he did. So, I apologize.
How many times do I have to do something before it becomes bullshit and how many times does GIGO get to do it before it becomes bullshit? I’m just trying to figure out what the quotas are here. Your mod note seemed to indicate that it was the frequency of the bullshit argument that made it a moddable offense. If once is enough then why wasn’t he given a warning rather than just get modded? Because frankly I started to find it insulting pages ago, around the second or third time he used it.
I asked for a cite. DO yo actually have a cite that the policed aren’t investigating murders anymore? Because THAT was the inference. That you could settled old scores by saying that the dead guy was a drug dealer. You have ANY cites that the police are just saying “oh, OK, we’ll let that one slide then”
How exactly do you think drugs are being sold in the Philippines? Its not discreet unless the customers want to be discreet.
So he is already a dictator (the dude was literally elected a few months ago and has a 90%+ popularity rating but you don’;t like his methods (which were a central platform of his campaign).
So did Marcos employ death squads to kill communists and stuff before he declared himself dictator? No/ Then your analogy fails entirely. The fact that dictators exist and the fact that they have existed in the Philippines has nothing to do with whether or not a politician fulfills campaign promise to kill drug dealers and to support others in their efforts to kill drug dealers.
In those countries violence and crime were increasing at a fast rate, until a more humane solution was used.
That is the good “shit” we should look at; so yes, we should mind.
I just spoke with a retired marine that expressed disappointment on finding out how the USA was helping move weapons in Central America and other places back in the day.
Today a lot of the government institutions are corrupted in many nations thanks, not to the dirty wars of the past, but to the ongoing war on drugs. (And really, there were a lot of opportunities the Nixon administration must had foreseen to justify intervention in Latin America and many nations of the world thanks to the new war.)
The corruption is cropping up in the USA, just as it took place during the prohibition era regarding alcohol.
Deal with it, if social studies (that includes history) was precise that would happen, but it does not in the real world. One has to look at what usually follows when better solutions are ignored and reprehensible ones are used. And it really looks like if your hypothetical has to dismiss a lot of what has been seen in the real world to make it “work” as you want it.
OK, then according to sentential logic the answer to the question posed in the title is almost definitely yes. So you should be satisfied. Similarly, if pigs have wings, then I am the president of Madagascar.
But presumably this isn’t what you intended by your OP. The problem with not fighting the hypothetical is that we have difficulty coming up with a way in which the policies in the Philippines would work that it is hard to know whether whatever hypothetical miracle allowed them to work well without spiraling into dictatorship in the Philippines would hold in Mexico. It’s like asking, if adding 2 tablespoons of instant coffee to my gas tank improves its gas millage should we also add instant coffee to jet fuel?
We don’t know how to answer that until we know more about how instant coffee was supposed to help my cars fuel efficiency so we can determine whether the same properties would hold for jet engines.
As pointed before that remains an argument ad populum. And as it was also pointed the Filipinos did support Marcos at those levels too. The point was that the elements to lead and to sustain a dictatorship are in place.
And more relevant, just as I saw in El Salvador a lot of the people accused of being Communists were not, their only fault was to demand better conditions for workers and the people.
Again, Ferdinand Marcos was a politician, and he became a dictator by not only targeting the communists, but his political enemies.
And from innocents being killed into getting rid of “meddlesome priests”, there is very little in the way to prevent that step from taking place.
No, he might reason that since drugs still exist, his work isn’t over and he should stay in office, and anyone suggesting otherwise must be working for the druglords.
I mean was that last sentence really necessary or useful for the debate or were you just taking a cheap shot?
If killing those drug dealers leads to lower body counts among the general population, would that make a difference to you or doesn’t it matter? I just like high body counts?
And how bad did they get? Did they get as bad as the US crime rate or had they actually gotten as bad as the Philippines?
So how bad was it in Switzerland? What was the murder rate before they started and what was it after they had it in place? Oh it started out pretty low and it stayed pretty low because there weren’t really that many murders by drug cartels? Then nothing you say about Switzerland is meaningful enough that you should feel comfortable substituting your judgment from the other side of the world for the judgment of 90% of Filipinos that have to live with the results of various policies.
Do you think that sporadic corruption is not the same thing as institutional corruption? Because if not then your post is meaningless, if so then every institution in the world from the catholic church to the US military is corrupt.
I was just asking for examples. You make statements that history is replete with examples of something and then fail to mention any examples. And when you do mention examples it becomes clear that your examples don’t really support your argument.
So you think that the situation in the Philippines and Mexico are similar enough that Dutarte’s policies could work there if they worked in the Philippines?
So you see no conceivable way that drug related violence would be reduced by killing drug dealers? Did I mention the 600,000 criminals that turned themselves in to the police?
This is not what I did, you have to take this back.
Everyone can see that your point here omits the example of what Ferdinand Marcos did with his death squads. Your hypothetical is being made to “work” mostly by omitting good information that undermines your premise, and then the attempt is to undermine it more with poor reasons, your point there is begging that the information provided does not exist.
And yet the video cited already pointed to the sources and one of the links goes here:
You are very wrong by telling us that I did not have any examples. That was shown in the case of the evidence that showed that indeed Marcos did use death squads and against his political enemies, and he was popular too, until much more important political enemies began to be killed. And here is another cite about the crime reduction observed in Switzerland that supports what I said before already:
[QUOTE]
3:27
The prohibition of drugs also led to more violence and murders around the world. Gangs and cartels have no access to the legal system to settle disputes, so they use violence.This led to an ever-increasing spiral of brutality. According to some estimates, the homicide rate in the US is 25–75% higher because of the War on Drugs.
And in Mexico, the country on the frontline, an estimated 164,000 have been murdered between 2007 and 2014, more people than in the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq in the same period, combined.
But where the War on Drugs might do the most damage to society is the incarceration of non-violent drug offenders.
[/QUOTE]
It only helped to get the future marks into a list, Most of those only registered, they were not arrested. As pointed before not all crimes are the same and abuse is a common result, both from the police and the more violent criminals that now do know that they do not have anything to lose.
It is clear that in this case the authorities do know that not all crimes can be treated the same, but as the news article points out, the poor are the ones that are being targeted.
As I expected, the rich are spared the inconvenience, meaning that the drug trafficking continues at higher levels. This usually happens with neo fascists, they do know that the powerful needs to be kept happy so their support is maintained.
Did you read your own cite? Those extrajudicial killings all seem to have been during the period during or following martial law. In other words, AFTER Marcos became a dictator.
So how is Marcos a good example of how extrajudicial killings are a good PREDICTOR of someone becoming a dictator?
Once again, you should read your cite beyond the headline. The extrajudicial killings mostly happened AFTER he became a dictator. So how much predictive value could they possibly have had?
I’m sure you know more about El Salvador than I do.
Do you think a Swiss style policy would reduce your crime and murder levels to a level comparable to Switzerland?
Heck, El Salvador has the second highest murder rate in the world after Honduras (in prior years it had the highest murder rate). Like worse than Iraq and Syria.
Do you still claim you know how dictators gain power? Because you seem to have a lot of that wrong so far. You seem to have a good idea what dictators do AFTEr they have gained power and are trying to keep it. Not something you have to do when you are popularly elected and have a 90% approval rating like Dutarte.
Do you still contend that Dutarte is a crime boss trying to consolidate his power?
Do you still contend that the vigilantes in Mexico are worse than the Knights Templar cartel?
SO other than the fact that this guy does shit you don’t like, What evidence do you have that he intends to become a dictator?
So despite your failure to give an example of a popular politician becoming a dictator because he engaged in extrajudicial killings you still think that a popular politician who engages in extrajudicial killings is proven by history to likely become a dictator?
My cited “popular” point I made referred to Marcos gaining a huge margin of victory in 1981, He was pointed as beginning to be known as a dictator when he declared martial law and did not let it go from 1972. It was also then where his death squads became more active and were already active in 1981 and more.
IOW, I was not talking about my point depending on the death squads being active “AFTER” he became dictator. That point is a straw man. I did not put a timeline on that point, you did, hence very easy to dismiss in what logic tell us is a fallacy move. The point I made was that Marcos became a dictator after being democratically elected, and he did use death squads to consolidate power and he did so with a lot of support from the population.
Most of the people, I hope, did not know what they were supporting; but the reason I pointed at his popularity (in 1981) was that is was a factor that allowed a dictatorship to grow and to remain in power. Duterte just has that card very early on his deal.
As pointed before, yes I did read the cite, the argument you made deals with it by making it a straw man. I did not make a point of putting the death squads before of “AFTER” he became a dictator. Only that the elements are there to make a dictator’s soup, the order of the ingredients was not important in the point I was making there.
A lot of questions are beginning to look a lot like JAQs. But this has to be replied to:
There are already articles that shows who he tries to emulate.
The Time article also does mention how he said that he knew who was making the killings in the city he was a leader before becoming president.
Straw man again, I only pointed that the solution there does not make it better.
As he did show the finger to the Filipinos that revolted against Marcos by burying him in the place of Heroes, I could say that there is not much more needed, but the TIME article does point already at how bogus a lot of the drug war was in that country, and Duterte used the best demagogue moves to convince the people that he was the best person to solve a problem that was not as big as he claimed. Meaning that there are other reasons why he became “the fearless leader”.
The overall point was that it is likely, not that it was proven. When a line goes like “proven by history to likely become” that sounds contradictory. If it is proven already then it is no longer likely, it is certain. IMHO but that “it was proven” was not the point.
The point remains: History points that way, that does not mean that by force it will go that way, it is likely then that we will see a return to dictators in the Philippines during and after this cursed war on drugs continues and even after it stops being a good excuse to keep the misled population in place.