Jesse Walker | August 1, 2005
The U.S. consulate has closed in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, as the city's ongoing drug cartel war heats up. Meanwhile, the cops don't have enough guns to go around and are only patrolling part of the city. Here's a snapshot from the San Antonio Express-News:
By most accounts, the recent attack was particularly brazen. According to media reports, more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition were fired, turning quiet Mexicali Street in the tony Campestre neighborhood into a virtual war zone.
Using rocket-propelled grenades, assailants tore three big holes through the blue outer wall of a once-charming house. Windows a full block away were shattered. A 15-minute shootout ensued between those inside the house and the attackers.
No one was believed killed in the battle, and no one has been arrested, though [police commander Jesus Muro Garcia] said several people at the home may have been kidnapped. He did not know who lived there.
An enormous chunk of the old police force was fired en masse earlier this summer, following a corruption investigation and a shootout between local cops and the federales. Hundreds more were taken off the job temporarily:
In all, 460 city police officers have been cleared to return to work six weeks after 700 of them were yanked off the street in a massive anti-corruption probe....
But only those whose weapons have been delivered are back on patrol, Muro said. Others mill about the downtown substation in their pressed black and white new uniforms, filled with a restless nervousness.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Um...the heavy presence of government, and of illicit trades made profitable by the government's prohibitions?
1,000 rounds of ammo and three RPGs(!) fired in a 15-minute gun battle, resulting in . . . no deaths and no arrests? Cue the ethnic jokes!
Well, just to play devil's advocate here, I would say that what
we have in Nuevo Laredo is a lot more like anarchy than you might
think, for the following reasons:
There isn't an effective government presence in large portions of
the town. The police force has been drastically downsized, and
large portions have been in, effectively, "private" employ for
years. If you want to know what the absence of any prospect of law
enforcement looks like, folks, go to Nuevo Laredo.
Much of the money funding the gangs comes from "illegal" goods and
services, but the illegality all happens somewhere other than NL,
if you see what I mean, due to the near-total absence of law
enforcement. As far as the locals are concerned, these are just
profitable lines of business to be in.
Since there will be profitable lines of business even in anarchy
heaven, together with a total lack of law enforcement, exactly how
is Nuevo Laredo not a cautionary tale for anarchists, again?
Mind you, I'm a good old-fashioned guns-n-dope libertarian, but one
who believes that a night watchman state is an essential part of
any functional society. I regard Nuevo Laredo as proof of the
latter proposition, is all.
R.C.: There's a giant difference, isn't there, between private
employment and public corruption?
Also, most variants of anarcho-capitalism do not propose a "total
lack of law enforcement"; they propose a minimal law code whose
enforcement is not monopolized by a single agency.
There's a lot of political lessons here, but I don't this has much
to say about those hoary old anarchism vs. minarchism debates. (If
anything, it makes the minarchists look bad, since it reminds us
that public police aren't necessarily going to act in the public
interest. Though I wouldn't want to stretch that argument too far
-- I suspect there are corrupt private security guards in Nuevo
Laredo too.)
1000 rounds? RPG's? Sounds more like Robert Rodriguez fare than
Oliver Stone to me.
Were any of the RPG's fired from a guitar case, by any chance?
Given that there were allegedly no fatalities, it sounds more like an episode of The A-Team.
and/or terminator II
personally, with all the collapsing buildings and kidnnapping
sub-plots, this one seems more like Jerry Bruckheimer to me...
"Shouldn't Oliver Stone be making a movie about this?"
No, man, Quentin Tarantino!
The super-secret agenda of the War on Drugs is to give anarchy a
bad name.
To think the War on Drugs has clouded a few minds even here on
H&R is damn discouraging.
Government bans activity
activity continues
Government sends armed enforcers
threatened gangsters defend themselves
Government enforcers funded through extortion
gangsters funded through creation of black market
Conflict costs both sides bucu cash
Where's the fucking anarchism in that? Half the fight isn't even
the ones bearing the brunt of the cost of their own policies. If
the police were a profit driven private firm they would have
negotiated peace by now.
agent provocateur,
Before beginning the discussion, we must be able to distinguish
between chaos and complexity.
I suppose this will drive the price of cheap souvineers way down. Woo-hoo! Shiny sombreros for everyone!
The anarchists on the thread are overlooking the fact that the
vast majority of the violence in Nuevo Laredo is gang-on-gang
violence. These are "private firms", and they most emphatically are
not "negotiating peace" with one another.
Lets say the government of Mexico says "Alright. We give up. We
will no longer attempt to impose our jurisdiction on Nuevo Laredo.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law." Does anyone
really think this will usher in a new millenium of peace and
prosperity in Nuevo Laredo?
Granted, like I said, I was playing devil's advocate. I think that
a deeply dysfunctional and overreaching state did a lot to lay the
groundwork for what we see in Nuevo Laredo today.
But to pretend that in an anarchy everything will be peaches and
cream, when in stateless areas around the globe and throughout
history the opposite has been the case, strikes me as willful
blindness.
Oh, and one question - what kind of 'anarchy' has laws, anyway?
Doesn't that presuppose the existence of an authoritative source
for the laws, to wit, a state? Once you start talking about a
society with laws that are enforceable against all members of
society regardless of whether they have individually consented to
abide by each individual law, then you are no longer talking about
anarchy, but some version of minarchy.
My knowledge of the typical police force in Mexico is that it's
basically a for-profit enterprise for each officer, and in order to
keep his police priveleges he must pay tribute to the police chief
on a montly basis. In order to do that he's got to be aggressive in
generating revenue which means basically hitting people up for
money (bribes) and charging for services.
That kind of corruption is no one's idea of an effective police
force, but it is slowly becoming the norm in the US as police
forces continue to beg for expansion and getting it without
commensurate funding increases - so the police departments further
the practice of asset forfeiture to fund themselves.
"Where's the fucking anarchism in that?"
Many of the federalies in border towns are working, essentially, as
private contractors.
...I used to see them in the bars on Revolution. The same cops in
the same bars weekend after weekend. My understanding was that the
bar owners hired them to be there--to protect the bar owner from
other federalies.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245