Hacker News Reader

Comment by arcticbull | Hacker News Reader

... by looking the other way while the cartels operate with impunity. My understanding was there was a handshake deal with the narcos that if they stopped murdering they'd stop checking in on them. [1]

So yes, if you allow the state to become an arm of the cartels then I suppose you can call it a job well done that they're not murdering as many people.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-54192736

View on HN

Seems like a reasonable decision to me. I don't see how else the government could control the cartels. Plus it's got to be decent for their economy.

Yes, let's all surrender to the criminals. Embrace the inescapable mad-max future.

Maybe the Sicilians should run for office in Italy?

Is civil war forever really the best policy? At some point it makes sense to realize war is costly, both in terms of lives and the economy. When is it time to just try to make the best peace you can?

Is acquiescing to violent murderers and criminals?

If it stops them from murdering as much, it might be? The options seem to be they murder indiscriminately because they pretty much control the government or they murder less indiscriminately because they came to an agreement on when it's ok to murder with the government. I think option 2 is better, but different normative ethical philosophies certainly disagree.

Be the change you want in this world. Why don't you go to El Salvador yourself and "fix" these criminals. I can't wait to see the results.

> I don't see how else the government could control the cartels.

The use of “else” implies that this surrender constitutes the “government” controlling the cartels rather than vice versa. In fact, the cartels are the government, they’ve just outsourced the boring and less-profitable aspects of governing to the entity that calls itself the “government”, as long as it stays in line.

(Which, to be fair, hardly makes El Salvador unique.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com