No one of consequence.

  • 211 Posts
  • 2.03K Comments
Joined 2 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年6月16日

help-circle






  • Of course there are legitimate problems and real tensions. When the US wants regime change, it never starts from scratch. It always leverages whatever fissures already exist.

    Moving the conversation to what the US wants and keeping it there is rather dismissive. What the US wants is irrelevant. There are real issues that have nothing with what the CIA may or may not want. Simply saying that the CIA is a destabilizing force is a way to dismiss constructive criticism of what Mexicans want out of their representatives.






  • There are a lot of reasons why mexican institutions are weak. Does that mean we should dismiss grievances at their lack of transparency and accountability as the CIA because Morena happens to be in power? Cartel violence has infact terrorized Mexicans for decades now and have killed many other politicians before as well. Mind you the killing of a mayor and feeling that Morena is soft on cartel violence are some of the grievances of these protests. You and the article are deflecting on this and trivializing the pain of those who live there as just another CIA op (which note that I never said the CIA wouldn’t try and do something in some chaos). It is rather patronizing that westerners on this comm are trying to dismiss the whole thing.




  • When the US wants regime change

    And statements such as those are trivializing and minimizing what they are saying. The institutions in Mexico are very weak and Morena has not done that much to fortify them. They now have even more judicial and legislative power too. People feel the influence of cartels is still too strong and government accountability too low. People don’t talk about the 43 anymore, but I don’t remember any clouse coming from it. But the main point is that simply being dismissive and saying the CIA is behind this is lazy and gross. I don’t even doubt that they are there, but still there are real issues here.