And what about all the customers of this cartel who give them the money to pay people enough to do things like this?
Well, strictly speaking, there are more elements to the causal relationship. If no one wanted to purchase drugs, this would also preclude the cartels from having customers. In this sense, irresponsible drug consumers are at fault as well. Indeed, many conscientious drug users have turned to various dark markets for "fair trade" drug suppliers.
That seems to be an unpopular statement, but it's still true.
Blaming the customers is ineffective, because there's no way to end the demand for drugs entirely - we have decades of prohibitions that prove that[0]. Whether or not you or I would like them to boycott these products on principle en masse is a moot point, because it's just not feasible.
[0] If we can't even keep federal prisons drug-free, how could we keep the rest of the country drug-free?
Not sure what type of event it would take to finally push people over the edge to favor an end to drug prohibition but I imagine it is so drastic that the vested interests in the cartels wouldn't be stupid enough to do it.
Or are you being sarcastic?
Making a link between homosexuality (consenting adults) with the paraphilia paedophilia (adults predating children) is a fucking weird thing to do.
Drugs are a fact of life, they've been used since the dawn of man and will be used likely until the end of man. They're not going away.
It's abhorrent that in order to access drugs, you've to essentially send money down the chain to people carrying out such acts...but people are going to do drugs, and in the face of no alternatives, this is where they're going to get them.
The people buying these drugs, generating the income for these cartels, are so removed from the reality behind them that it may as well be totally unconnected as far as all are concerned. We, first world Westerners, are generally very disconnected from the realities surrounding many of the products we buy, from legitimate products like those manufactured by Nestle, to cheap clothing manufactured in terrible conditions in the East, through to illicit substances such as cocaine which are manufactured in South America and whose trade fuels a bloody war there.
Indeed, many of our tech products that we all here use are manufactured by Foxconn, a company whose working practices are so bad that they had issues with people killing themselves on the job and tackled it by installing suicide nets around the back of the buildings and in the stairwells.
As such, there is a lot of inherent immorality associated with a lot of the consumerism we here fuel, but the reality for us is that we are extremely disconnected from these issues.
But what are the alternatives? Go even harder on those found with drugs, while continuing to let Western consumerism promote without any interference terrible working conditions for our manufacturers in the East?
One potential solution to all these issues is to apply a similar approach to all - manufacture these in the 1st world under regulations and subsidize their sale so that the consumer points towards these regulated manufacturers rather than using products manufactured abroad.
Unfortunately, while this may be the solution, it itself raises so many other issues. If we took coke production out of the hands of South America and made it in the US, for example, what in hell's name is going to happen when the vast numbers of not just cartel members, but relatively innocent coco farmers in South America can no longer derive anywhere near the same income from them?
Manufacturing these things ourselves would also, if not greatly subsidized for promotion, drive prices for the consumer up and thus have them pointing in the wrong direction again.
It's a complex issue and personally I'm not sure of what the best potential solution may be, but I find it hard to sit here and criticize those using coke in the US from a product containing FoxConn parts where people are miserable and ending their lives because of what our demand for the products being made there is doing to them.
There are a number of disconcerting realities surrounding companies like Nestle and Apple. None of those come close to the direct violence perpetrated by the Cartels in Mexico and to claim they are even in the same realm is pretty obtuse.
I would be EXTREMELY happy if the levels of abuse perpetrated by mexican cartels were reduced to within an order of magnitude to those perpetrated by FoxConn.
second offense - one way ticket to Reynosa or Cd. Juárez or Sinaloa for six months. Think of it as "Survivor: Edición Frontera"
White people use coke.
Did you decide on the truth of all of these assumptions by yourself?
Drugs are extremely popular today.
Using the two above, I made the assumption that people will be using narcotics so long as our species continues, unless their effects can be explicitly replicated and induced by technology at some stage in the future, although I wouldn't necessarily say that such an act would not be doing drugs.
I mean, diseases have been going on for all of human history, but we've wiped out a few different kinds.