SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
left-wing
Can Sheinbaum Avoid A Death Spiral After the El Mencho Killing?
On one hand, demonstrating the ability to confront organized crime may help counter the narrative that progressive governments are soft on violence. On the other, history suggests that decapitation strategies rarely defeat cartels.
Mar 04, 2026
On February 22, 2026, Mexican special forces in Tapalpa, Jalisco, authorized by left-wing President Claudia Sheinbaum and acting on intelligence from the US military, killed Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, Nom de Guerre “El Mencho,” the 59-year-old leader of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG) and the most-wanted man in Mexico.
Within hours, the cartel put up roadblocks, arson attacks, and running gun battles across a dozen states, ravaging Tapalpa and other cities. By the time the violence subsided, over 70 people were dead, including 25 Mexican National Guard troops. The entire country is holding its breath as it prepares to enter a new phase of its decades-long Drug War.
Does decapitating a cartel end the Drug War?
The operation was also the culmination of a strategy that Claudia Sheinbaum's predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, had promised to abandon, namely, the militarized war on drugs that since 2006 has left between 350,000 and 400,000 Mexicans dead and more than 130,000 disappeared. Instead, while making some initial welcome gestures, he militarized the Southern Border, created the National Guard, and continued the War on Drugs.
Removing El Mencho may weaken CJNG in the short term. But it could also ignite the next phase of Mexico’s drug war, one that extends far beyond the country’s borders and deeper into the Western Hemisphere.
The Mexican drug war has never been Mexico's responsibility alone. It is the product of an insatiable American thirst for drugs that has only intensified with the opioid crisis, as fentanyl has flooded US streets, claiming tens of thousands of lives annually, with support from Big Pharma. The United States remains the world’s largest consumer market for narcotics; American demand generates billions of dollars annually for trafficking organizations.
Mexican cartels such as the CJNG and the Sinaloa Cartel now supply fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin to a US market whose demand keeps increasing, according to new reporting.
American guns are also at the center of this crisis. There are exactly two legal gun stores in all of Mexico, operating under strict military supervision. Across the border, in the four US border states, there are more than 9,000 legal gun sale points.
An estimated 250,000 to 500,000 guns are trafficked from the United States into Mexico each year. Roughly 70% originate north of the border. These include .50-caliber rifles capable of piercing armored vehicles and downing helicopters; many of them were from the American military. A new raid on a CNJG ammo depot revealed that 47% of the ammunition came directly from one US Army plant in Kansas City. That very same ammo was used to kill 13 police officers in Michoacán in 2019.
The CJNG now dominates 23 out of Mexico’s 32 states, with operations stretching from the Pacific Coast all the way to the Northern border. The cartel's estimated worth exceeds $20 billion, drawn not only from drugs but from a diversified portfolio of extortion, petroleum theft, human trafficking, and kidnapping.
It has used extreme force and military-level tactical planning against its rivals, including the state itself. In 2015, it shot down a Mexican military helicopter in Jalisco. It has assassinated mayors, attacked police convoys with improvised armored vehicles, and used drones and explosives against state security forces.
Internally, polls suggest support for the operation is between 80 and 90%. After years of feeling helpless before cartel violence, many Mexicans welcome any action that produces “results.” With this, we see the rise of “penal populism” across Latin America, where electorates increasingly embrace tough-on-crime approaches, even when those approaches destroy democracy and human rights.
The high popularity of El Salvador's right-wing dictator Nayib Bukele, whose approval ratings have hovered around 90%, testifies to the political appeal of iron-fist tactics, regardless of their clear governance costs. Bukele's mass incarceration model, where tens of thousands have been jailed without due process in inhumane conditions where torture is common, has become a model that politicians across the region now invoke, including in Honduras, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Costa Rica, and Peru.
That comes despite his success being predicated on secret deals with gangs, not on a War on Drugs—most countries that have tried his militarized tactics have suffered increases in the violent crime and homicide rates, at the same time as their economies have become increasingly unequal and democratic societies have cratered.
Externally, President Donald Trump has made clear his view that “cartels are runnning Mexico” and that Sheinbaum and other Latin American leaders should go to war with them, otherwise he will do it for them. His administration has designated Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and considered military intervention in Mexico. A US intervention would be disastrous for both Mexico and Sheinbaum, so the El Mencho operation is the price they settled on.
To add insult to injury, this summer, Mexico will host numerous World Cup matches, including four in Guadalajara, the capital of Jalisco state. The Sheinbaum government is trying to give the allure of tightening security ahead of the games.
She has modeled aspects of her approach on Brazil. Before the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Olympics, Rio de Janeiro launched aggressive “pacification” campaigns in favelas, military occupations that temporarily suppressed violence but failed to address its roots while killing high rates of civilians and eroding civil liberties. The War on Drugs has not stopped there, either. We have to wait and see if Mexico follows this tragic pattern.
Across Latin America, the right has successfully framed security as a question of toughness versus weakness, where, as Bukele would put it, “All the gangs know is violence,” and thus must be met with violence. This framing leaves progressive governments perpetually on the defensive, forced to prove their bravado by adopting policies that at the very least, in theory, fly in the face of leftist principles.
The left's consistent (and successful) approach, emphasizing socioeconomic development, public health interventions, drug decriminalization, negotiation, and targeted intelligence rather than mass militarization, has struggled to gain traction in a climate driven by right-wing narratives and fearmongering.
The fundamental problem is that leftist programs take years to bear actual results, while voters demand immediate security. The right, meanwhile, offers quick and strong-handed solutions that reassure voters. It is harder to kill monsters with microloan programs and harm reduction clinics than with tanks and M-16s.
When Former Mexican President Felipe Calderón launched his war on drugs in 2006, he targeted the Gulf Cartel and its armed wing, Los Zetas. The kingpin strategy eliminates cartel leaders, but each decapitation meant groups splintered, and each splintering produced more violence, creating an endless loop of violence until neoliberal President Enrique Peña Nieto was able to sign pacts with certain gangs before resuming the military approach.
During this period, the number of major cartels grew from about half a dozen to more than 200, operating across the country and the entire world. The homicide rate tripled, while many border cities have homicide rates well over 100 per 100,000. Now, hundreds of thousands are dead as a direct result.
Mexico finds itself once again at this crossroads, where it must choose wisely. El Mencho’s bras droit, “El Tuli,” was killed in a clash with security forces hours after. But, the pattern suggests that new leaders will emerge, and the violence will continue. Cartels are resilient, and can adapt to new leadership, new business structures, and market forces very reactively. Taking out one leader, or even the drug trade, won’t put them out of business.
Left-wing governments have struggled to respond without appearing weak. Some voices, particularly those outside of direct political power like academics, human rights advocates, and a few leftist intellectuals, have pointed out the dangers of returning to kingpin strategies, the inevitability of retaliation, and the way military operations invariably claim civilian lives.
So far, however, the Sheinbaum coalition and the left in Mexico have, for the most part, supported the operation, praying that embracing these shows of force can help the left reclaim dominance over the security debate. But, ceding ground to the right on security might risk alienating the rest of the left; shifting the Overton window to the right; and making politics, rather than policy solutions, determine the direction of Mexico’s Drug War.
Sheinbaum’s operation thus creates a profound paradox.
On one hand, demonstrating the ability to confront organized crime may help counter the narrative that progressive governments are soft on violence. On the other, history suggests that decapitation strategies rarely defeat cartels.
Removing El Mencho may weaken CJNG in the short term. But it could also ignite the next phase of Mexico’s drug war, one that extends far beyond the country’s borders and deeper into the Western Hemisphere.
Can you win the politics of security without reproducing the failures of the war on drugs? It may buy Sheinbaum and the left time to continue expanding the welfare state, strengthening institutions, and foolproof Mexican democracy, but it may also open the door for further weaponization of security to destroy that very progress later on.
The better alternative may be to instead embrace a true leftist, principled defense of nonviolent solutions, or, to theoretically and politically justify a security progressivism. Such will be the test of the Latin American left in the wake of rising right-wing populism on the back of security fears.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Catherine Connolly's Win in Ireland Proves Good Things Can Still Happen
In a world of strongmen, a voice for peace and a beacon of hope shines through.
Nov 01, 2025
On November 11 2025, independent Member of Parliament Catherine Connolly will become the new president of Ireland after winning an overwhelming victory over the fiercely unpopular Heather Humphreys.
In her acceptance speech, President Connolly vowed to remain rooted in service, stay humble, and actively practice neutrality. She is anti-war, anti-imperialist, pro-reunification, an advocate for disability rights, and fluent in Irish. She has also been openly critical of the European Union's inaction on Gaza, and is distrustful of France and the United Kingdom due to their massive armament programs.
In her words, Connolly strives to be "a moral compass in a world increasingly driven by profit and spectacle. A voice for those too often silenced."
Who is Connolly?—The Politician Not Afraid to Stand Against the Consensus
As a former barrister, from a humble background, Connolly has spent her years volunteering with the elderly and taking night classes to train in law. She formally entered politics in 1999 with the mission of tackling Ireland's dire housing shortage crisis.
After serving 17 years as a councillor in Galway for the Labour Party, she left, citing a lack of support, and began her journey as an independent. In 2020, she became the first woman elected to chair debates as deputy speaker in the Dáil Éireann.
Rather than pandering to corporate interests, the wealthy elite, or a personal ego trip bent on abusing power (naming no names), Connolly offers a hopeful vision for a more compassionate and responsible approach to politics.
Connolly's victory marked an important moment for independent candidates around the world. As the world slides to the right, her humble message of peace, inclusivity, and democracy is a powerful reminder that there is light. We must continue to draw attention to and support those who stand up against the establishment.
Connolly has shown that it is possible for well-deserving underdogs such as Zohran Mamdani, Jeremy Corbyn, Zack Polanski, and Bernie Sanders to bring common-good policies into the mainstream.
2025 Irish Presidential Election—Game-Changing for this Divided Nation
In a demonstration of her ability to unify opposing voices, Connolly's landslide win came after she secured the support of opposition parties Sinn Féin, the Social Democrats, People Before Profit, and even her former party, Labour.
As an independent, Connolly pledged, in her opening speech, to be a '"president for all." Her victory was secured after gaining the largest number of first-preference votes ever—the equivalent of 63%.
When we look at the bigger picture, however, it tells the story of a divided, disillusioned, and apathetic Ireland tired of the two-party system. Voter turnout was just 45.8%, and a huge 213,738 votes were either invalid or spoiled. This accounted for almost 13% of the overall vote, notably, more than 10 times the number in the last presidential election.
In the run-up to the election, violent riots broke out in the capital for two consecutive days. They took place in front of a hotel housing asylum seekers in an anti-immigration sentiment being witnessed across large parts of Europe. This is just one example of the ongoing immigration tensions in Ireland.
Irish citizens are frustrated with the government after years of austerity measures, the ongoing housing crisis, poor public services such as healthcare, and the fact that key candidates, such as Maria Steen, were not on the ballot.
Connolly's Policies—A Progressive Ireland Led by a Moral Compass
With Connolly's left-wing, progressive, and anti-war stance at the reins, the world eagerly awaits to see if Ireland can be the guiding light that so many nations need right now. In the face of fascist, authoritarian leaders such as Donald Trump, Viktor Orbán, Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Nicolás Maduro, we desperately need a new playbook.
Some of Connolly's stances include:
- Strong advocacy for Irish reunification through a peaceful and democratic process;
- The legalization of same-sex marriage. She stands for equality for all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation;
- Providing access to safe and legal abortion services. She advocates for reproductive rights and a woman's right to choose;
- A compassionate and humane approach to immigration;
- A universal healthcare system that is accessible to everyone;
- Addressing the housing issue and getting people experiencing homelessness off the streets;
- The promotion and preservation of the Irish language by encouraging its integration into education and public life;
- Comprehensive and urgent climate action to reduce carbon emissions, promote renewable alternatives, and support conservation efforts;
- Implementing a wealth tax to address economic inequalities and fund public services;
- Enhancing democratic processes to ensure transparency, accountability, and increased public participation;
- Promoting peace through diplomatic means and maintaining neutrality. She is critical of NATO and other military alliances; and
- Vocal advocacy for peace in Gaza, ending the blockade, and promoting humanitarian efforts to end the suffering of the Palestinian people. She supports a more ethical approach to international arms sales and highlights the complicity of those weapons which are used to commit war crimes, genocide, and create long-lasting human suffering.
With her pledge to be accountable to the citizens of Ireland, her policies are people-and-planet focused. Her commitment to justice, equality, and transparency is a refreshing change from the status quo. Rather than pandering to corporate interests, the wealthy elite, or a personal ego trip bent on abusing power (naming no names), Connolly offers a hopeful vision for a more compassionate and responsible approach to politics.
Let's hope that her recent win bolsters the campaigns of other progressive candidates and serves as a reminder that positive change is possible. This is a huge win for the left; let's keep the momentum going.
In the words of Catherine Connolly: "Use your voice in every way you can, because a republic and a democracy need constructive questioning, and together we can shape a new republic that values everybody."
Keep ReadingShow Less
A Counter-Campaign for Democracy from Below
How the left can fight Trump’s authoritarian crackdown.
Oct 10, 2025
President Donald Trump is done pretending. In the past few weeks, the administration has made its intentions plain: Critics will be punished, media will be silenced, and the left will be targeted as an enemy to be crushed.
The pattern is crystal clear. As of this writing, at least 145 people have been fired or suspended across K-12, universities, corporations, and nonprofits for exercising freedom of speech related to Charlie Kirk’s death. In one of the highest profile examples, The Jimmy Kimmel Show was briefly suspended after a tame joke.
Trump has openly threatened to strip licenses from broadcasters that dare criticize him. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Brendan Carr, a longtime opponent of net neutrality and author of the telecommunications section of Project 2025, is saying coercive things such as, “These companies can find ways to change conduct to take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” He has stated that reporting that critiques him is illegal, demonstrating a clear opposition to the First Amendment.
These moves come as he has run over university students for exercising free speech such as Mahmoud Khalil, invaded majority Black cities like DC and Chicago with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other law enforcement agents connected to a massive deportation machine, and directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute his political rivals despite a lack of evidence.
The Authoritarian Playbook
Trump’s crackdown isn’t just about silencing dissent—it’s about shoring up his base through racism. The administration has turned Charlie Kirk into a martyr of white grievance, celebrated openly by white supremacists. It is attacking immigrants and poor people to justify ICE raids and threats to Medicaid and SNAP. This is the oldest trick in the authoritarian playbook: Use racism to divide, then use division to dismantle democracy. Groups like Showing Up for Racial Justice (SURJ) organize the white working and middle class because we are clear that we have more to gain by rejecting this politics of scapegoating and joining a multiracial fight for freedom.
How do we build a mass movement that isn’t just symbolic protest but concretely defends and expands democracy to fully meet the needs of the multiracial working class and shift the conditions that led us here?
The Trump administration has been signaling escalation: using RICO charges, injunctions, and going after unions, nonprofits, and movement organizations. This isn’t “cancel culture.” It’s not the “culture of consequences.” It’s authoritarianism. What’s happening now isn’t just an attack on a late-night comedian or a few unlucky workers. It’s a campaign to dismantle the infrastructure of dissent itself.
We’ve seen this before. Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s blacklist destroyed the livelihoods of radicals and artists. COINTELPRO infiltrated and dismantled Black freedom organizations. Each time, repression worked best when the left was fragmented and unprepared. Each time, resistance gained ground when people refused to be isolated by organizing and fighting back together.
So what the hell do we do about it now? How do we build a mass movement that isn’t just symbolic protest but concretely defends and expands democracy to fully meet the needs of the multiracial working class and shift the conditions that led us here?
South Africa: Democracy from Below
For historical inspiration, let’s look to South Africa under apartheid. In 1955, the African National Congress (ANC) and its allies—including socialists, trade unionists, and township organizations—convened the Congress of the People and adopted the Freedom Charter. The Freedom Charter was based on the demands of millions of South Africans, collected by the ANC and allies.
The charter declared, “The people shall govern!” It demanded not just the right to vote, but to publish freely, live without racial segregation, the right to organize unions, and share in the wealth of the land. This was a vision of radical multiracial democracy written under conditions where simply handing out a leaflet could land you in prison.
The South African Communist Party played a central role in pushing the liberation struggle to link democratic rights with economic justice. Despite repression, arrests, and bannings, they built underground newspapers, coordinated legal defense, and organized international solidarity. Their insistence on a mass, united front strategy meant that democracy was never reduced to just elections, but tied to social and economic transformation. The front pushed for inclusion of working people’s demands in the charter.
Even as the apartheid state criminalized dissent through surveillance and treason trials, the Freedom Charter kept alive a positive vision of democracy worth fighting for. And when the system finally cracked in the 1990s, it was that vision that helped shape South Africa’s transition.
What the US Left Must Do
The South African lesson is both simple in concept and hard in making: Repression can be survived if the left insists on turning defense into a broader offense. It means looking beyond this crushing moment to the horizon.
- Make Freedom a Mass Issue. We can’t let Trump define this as a spat among elites. The left should hammer home that attacks on free speech and association aren’t abstract: They mean workers losing jobs for speaking their mind, neighborhoods losing organizations that fight evictions, and entire communities being silenced. Defending these rights is defending bread-and-butter survival.
- Defend the Infrastructure of the Left. The administration is betting that nonprofits, unions, and grassroots groups will fold under pressure. Instead, we need to treat their survival as a collective responsibility. That means legal defense funds, rapid response networks, solidarity actions, and mutual aid across organizations. An injury to one really must be an injury to all.
- Use Elected Allies Aggressively. Progressive elected officials have a role to play beyond issuing statements. They can pass city and state resolutions protecting targeted organizations, refuse cooperation with federal crackdowns, and put the administration on notice that repression will be met with political consequences.
- Escalate and Broaden the Fight. Every authoritarian move should be met with resistance that is both robust and expansive when red lines are crossed. If workers are fired, organize walkouts. If nonprofits are hit with injunctions, mount solidarity strikes and mass protests. The goal is not just to defend ourselves, but to show millions that democracy itself is under attack.
- Build Cross-Movement Solidarity. Democratic Socialists of America, unions, immigrant rights groups, racial justice campaigns—we can’t afford siloed struggles. What we need is a Defend Democracy united front that can mobilize thousands at short notice: rallies outside TV stations, pickets at workplaces where critics are fired, coordinated campaigns against companies that kowtow to White House threats.
- Build a Mass Multiracial Working Class Base. We must organize working class people who have the most to gain from ending authoritarianism into a self-conscious bloc that can drive deep change. This will require confronting white supremacy in order to inoculate against the right’s attempts to divide the working class, and building a shared interest in winning a world where we all live full lives.
Beyond Defense: A Democratic Offensive
For years, SURJ has organized white communities to recognize our collective shared interest in rejecting racism and authoritarian populism. The white working class has more to gain by defending a multiracial democracy that centers tangible public goods than it does by clinging to the false promises of MAGA strongmen. One of the strongest tools the right uses against us is white supremacy to divide the working class and convince white people we have more in common with billionaires than with neighbors. Authoritarianism offers division, scapegoating, and declining standards of living. Multiracial democracy offers solidarity, higher wages, and genuine freedom.
Trump’s strategy is clear: Isolate the left, silence its organizations, and terrify people into submission. Our response must be just as clear: Unite, defend one another, and broaden the fight for real democracy. It can start in the here and now: organizing in cities, counties, and states politically and in the streets.
That means not only resisting repression but demanding more democracy. Public funding and democratic guarantees for independent media. Expanded protections for whistleblowers. Real rights for workers to organize unions without retaliation like the PRO Act.
The choice is between authoritarianism and a revitalized democracy rooted in working-class power. We cannot wait this out. We must have a counter-campaign now —not just to survive, but to fight for the kind of freedom that can’t be canceled.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular