this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
118 points (100.0% liked)
World News
38273 readers
418 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
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.
Why do you suppose the institutions are so weak or the cartels exist at all, never mind having significant power? You get that the CIA has largely been managing the global illegal drug trade for decades, right? Those cartels are there because the US wanted them there. The Iran-Contra affair wasn’t an aberration but a peek behind the curtain of the everyday activities of US empire.
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.
Again, no one dismissed anything, so why are you still shadowboxing this strawman?
Your writing and tone is rather dismissive. Maybe you should put your pride to the side and read about what I am saying that there is much more happening here than just the CIA
Notice that I wrote about a Mayor and a 43? Those are morphing into a catch all of all kinds of violence and government and socity inability to reform. Not all of that has anything to do with the CIA.
Still the same strawman. No one said tgat every problem is caused by the CIA or that Mexico has no problems of its own, so why are you still arguing against a position that no one holds?
You framing the issues in terms of the CIA is dismissive of broader issues that these protest are taking on. By circling back to the CIA you are implicitly saying we don't need to take this seriously its just the CIA. I am willing to believe that was not your intent, but you should take some self reflection of how your writing is being interpreted if that is the case.
The article wasn’t about whatever grassroots grievances Mexicans may have; it was about astroturfing.
If you want to have a discussion about broader issues in Mexico then post about them.
Well, I guess I was wrong.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/trump-administration-planning-new-mission-mexico-cartels-current-forme-rcna241167 not lazy if true. Mexico doesn't have a lot of experience in the matter, but many Latin countries do. Same playbook. It's lazy to think it would work the fiftyeleventeenth time.
Do you want to point out where I said the US might not try something? Did you read the part where I am explaining that people have some unresolved issues?
It is rather patronizing to have westerners tell others "thats not the problem you are having this is the real issue. You have no problems with the current admin just with the CIA".
Which is why I quoted you as saying it's lazy. The president of the US has himself stated what the objective is. It's not some hidden CIA plot.
And I didn't say they wouldn't try to do something, but I am calling out for dismissing the issues of people who live there and trivializing their grievances as just the CIA.
OK, but they've seen what the CIA does, and 70% support is not just not enough, but seemingly the reason why CIA would overthrow it. And I don't see how it would be lazy of them to not turn their country into a slave trade.
I think you should re-read what I said and read what others are also saying on the matter.
I did, and I see a lot more agreement with me, and the person you initially responded to, by upvotes and comments.
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.
Yes, what the USA and CIA want is irrelevant. Sheinbaum approval rating is nearing 80%. What Mexicans want out of their representatives is clear, and USA/CIA need to stay out for once.
It would be patronizing if we were actually telling them that.
Well the article and your comments dismissing much of the social tensions and just skipping to foreign interference does make the tone of your writing as telling them that
that's because the foreign influence is at the heart of almost all of the issues that mexico is facing rn.
the institutions would be so weak for american capitalism didn't force them to be and the cartles wouldn't be so powerful if the cia/atf did help them so much.
None of them have claimed such a thing. That’s just you putting words in their mouths and pretending to be their savior.
It's very relevant though. We deserve countries free from US interference. That's not an excuse to pretend things are fine either, we still need to do the work, etc.
We do. I am simply pointing out that my fellow lemms here are being dismissive of real issues by simply saying it is due to the CIA.
Not really, no. Everyone I know who's anti US intervention here acknowledges that this government has fallen rather short in basically every regard concerning their opportunist left wing rhetoric. That doesn't absolve the CIA and the US altogether from their responsibility in the perpetuation of such systems, they're principally at fault for the problem and principally to blame for these astroturfed protests.
This has been their playbook for decades, they've done it rather recently in dozens of countries and they're not even trying to be subtle about it. Can't say I blame them, given that there's clearly people stupid enough to go along with it.
you should also consider that one of those biggest problems -- the cartels -- would not be so successful if it weren't for american intervention; either through training from the school of americas (i forget what it's new name is now) or by literally giving them weaponry like they did the "fast and furious" program a few years ago or the iran contra much longer ago.
they didn't grow to become powerful on their own and they continue to get support that the world won't know about until the freedom of information act applies 25 years from now.
Anyone involved in or around the universities absolutely still talks about the 43, it's still very important.