When I Wear My Alligator Boots Response Questions
Question 1: What is a narcocorrido? Please explain this term and its place in both historical and contemporary Mexico. How are these songs part of contemporary drug trafficking culture? What is the style and persona associated with this music?
Traditionally, corridos “celebrated the heroes and social bandits of the 1910 - 20 Mexican Revolution.” (Muehlmann, 93) Today, the corrido takes new form in narco-corridos, “drug ballads, a genre of folk songs that tells the stories of men and women working in the drug business on the border.” (Muehlmann, 86) Historically, the corrido represents stories of battle. Currently, they represent the same notion, but rather, the battle of the war on drugs, and the consequences faced by the Mexican people in relation to it. They speak of violence and death associated with the drug trade. Both historically and contemporarily, corridos represent stories not covered within the Mexican media. “Narco - corridos speak “la pura verdad,” the pure truth, as well as, “la voz del pueblo,” the voice of the people.” (Muehlmann, 88) Narco-corridos highlight the political and social conditions that allow narcotrafficking to occur. (Muehlmann, 88)
Often, narco-corridos “describe the protagonists’ rural and humble past, often beginning with the traumatic incident in which they experience some injustice, both perpetrated and survived, and ending with the description of how they are now revered and feared.” (Muehlmann, 87) These songs are a part of contemporary drug trafficking culture because they embody the “narco-chic” allure. Their style embodies the lavish life of the narcotrafficker, the parties, wealth, power and strength in masculinity. Their upbeat rhythms mask the violence and bloodshed, the pain and sorrow that they speak of. They represent for the Mexican people the true dream story, rising from poor and poverty-ridden lives to lives of comfort, wealth, and power. This “narco-chic” style and persona is represented in both dress and attitude, including lavish dress, large belt buckles, and alligator boots, who symbolize and signify, true narcotraffickers.
Andrés, a previous narcotrafficker that Shaylih Muehlmann meets during her ethnographic work, embodies the men that these narco-corridos speak about. When he wears his alligator boots, he takes on the persona of narcotrafficker – puffed out chest, fierce, angry and powerful; he is the emblem of masculinity. He also represents the stories that these narco-corridos speak of because he found an alternative to the poverty-ridden life he was living, but was eventually arrested and put in jail for his involvement in the trade. Although he is “not involved” any longer with the drug trade, he occasionally wore his alligator boots in order to remind others of his previous life, and what he is capable of, as well as takes on the hard-shelled persona of masculinity when he wears them or speaks about his involvement as a narcotrafficker.
Question 2: Explain the alternative framework the author is providing for understanding the drug trade. How is this different than predominant explanations for drug trafficking?
Muehlmann explains in the introduction of her ethnographic work her premise for her research. She states that through her research, she hopes, “to complicate the very notion that there is a definable “in” and “out” of the trade.” (Muehlmann, 7) Rather than taking each entity, the legal and the illicit trade on their own merit, Muehlmann argues through her research that they are directly and complexly intertwined. She attempts to elaborate this notion through the stories of the people that she meets who have suffered the direct consequences of NAFTA and the illegal drug trade, that the formal legal economy needs the illicit, that one cannot and does not exist without the other. She also attempts to blur the lines of divide between where the drug world begins and ends, and argues that this line has been created by government coercion, for there really is no beginning or end at all.
Muehlmann thesis differs from predominant explanations for drug trafficking because she argues that the legal production of goods is directly linked and intertwined with the production and delivery of illicit ones. Predominant explanations try to separate these two entities, stating that majority of the consequences faced by the Mexican poor are in direct and exclusive relation with the illegal drug trade, where Muehlmann argues that NAFTA and government prohibition on drugs in the United States has made the illegal drug economy prevalent and fueled its establishment and continuation.
Question 3: How did NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) facilitate sweeping changes in drug trafficking?
Following the introduction of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the increase of cheaper agribusiness ways of producing crops put Mexican farm owners and rural workers out of business and out of jobs. “Increased legal trade between the United States and Mexico also facilitated increased illegal trade, because the same routes could be used to smuggle narcotics across the border with much more ease.” (Muehlmann, 12) The influx in the number of trucks crossing the border “has tripled since NAFTA.” (Muehlmann, 12) There is a one to one ratio between illicit and legal trucks crossing the borders of Mexico into the United States, indicating that each facilitate the other.
In addition to the influx of trucks over the border, maquiladoras set up shop, assembly plants, essentially sweat shops at access points that exist in a state of liminality because they are territory not delegated to either Mexico or the United States under NAFTA. Here is where the consequences of the sweeping drug trafficking culminates, where violence and desolation are fueled by marginalization, specifically involving the already poverty stricken Mexican community.
Shaylih Muehlmann offers that there is culpability on both sides of the trade. Essentially she suggests that the United States is exceptionally culpable for the consequences faced by the Mexican poor due to the high demand of both legal and illegal products.
During her participant observation, Muehlmann met El Chibo, “the Goat,” a truck driver who was affected following the implementation of NAFTA. El Chibo found that the trucks transporting legal goods were being raided by drug cartels and converted into hidden transport of illegal products as well. Rather than being a “blind mule,” El Chibo decided to get into the drug trade knowingly in order to reap some of the financial benefits that came with his awareness and willingness for participation. He explained to Muehlmann, “I figured it was better than unknowingly taking a load and not getting paid.” (Muehlmann, 13) She also met Alvaro, a Mexican man attempting to make a living through fishing. After the implementation of NAFTA, Alvaro’s fishing business suffered immensely. He was unable to afford the cost of his fishing nets following NAFTA and exclaimed to Muehlmann that he needed to support his family. To him, his involvement in narcotrafficking was a, “response to being denied the right to work by the Mexican government.” (Muehlmann, 20)
Question 4: Is there an alternative explanation for the rising militarization and violence of the drug trade in Mexico other than those that rest on criminality or strict behavioral explanations?
Many believe that prohibition of drugs will help with the violence, but Muehlmann argues that, “Prohibition polices and U.S. and Mexican interdiction efforts have not stopped the flow of drugs but instead, have outsourced to Mexico much of the violence associated with the trade.” (Muehlmann, 15) She follows this argument with the fact that, “addiction rates and availability have increased with prohibition.” (Muehlmann, 16) Prohibition has actually fueled the illicit drug trade, and the alternative economic argument comes from the scarcity for which the drugs are available but are under such high demand. This has fueled the violence associated with the drugs because it proliferates tensions surrounding the trade. Rather than reconsidering prohibition for decriminalization or legalization, militarization has increased a crack down on these illicit drug organizations, only further widening and intensifying tensions amongst them.
Question 5: What are the elements of the narco economy? How does this penetrate the everyday experiences of the rural poor in Mexico? Please illustrate with an example of an individual depicted in the ethnography.
The narco-economy is the economy surrounding the drug trade in poverty-ridden Mexico. Elements of the narco-economy are seen in popular culture through fashion trends that are “narco-chic,” that denote wealth or perpetuate the violence, as experienced through Shaylih Muehlmann’s interaction with the young children as they act out and try to imitate the narcocorrido they are watching at a family party.
The narco-economy is intertwined with the everyday lives of the individuals of the Mexican poor, whether they chose to willingly be a part of the drug trade or not. High rates of incarceration for involvement, violence closely associated often resulting in deaths, as well as mass rates of addiction affect each and every member of the rural poor in Mexico in one way or another.
For example, Andrés, a former narcotraficante whose family Muehlmann becomes close with during her ethnographic work, was working legal odd jobs far from home and for little pay, just trying to make ends meet for his family. When he was pulled into the drug trade, he was done so not only by the benefits that the narco life allure contends, but mostly because he was enticed by the financial gain he would get as a result of his part in the trade. Andrés was eventually caught and put into jail, facing consequences not only of incarceration, which for Andrés was physical injuries sustained while in jail, but also of the adjustments to life following his release. Many of Andrés friends had dabbled with the drug they sold, some of them falling susceptible to addiction. Andrés spoke of the violence and death not only that he had seen, but also that he had experienced as a result of the drug trade, losing close friends and relatives whom were involved in different degrees. The largest repercussion on Andrés life came as a result of incarceration, as he tried to distance himself from the narco life and find alternative means of a stable income, only to realize that it is complexly intertwined in every aspect of rural Mexican life and that he could never truly escape the drug trade.
Question 6: How does the role and image of the narcotraficante create an allure for individuals to enter the drug trade despite the danger of violence and/or prosecution?
The role and image of the narcotraficante is alluring for different reasons for different individuals. Sometimes it can be the allure for attention or the allure to get rich quick that draws people in. For others, the culture that perpetuates the image of the narcotraficante, displaying it as masculine, strong, and powerful offers allure.
For example, Isabella, well aware of the danger and violence and threat of prosecution for those involved in the narco-life due to her involvement with Andrés, is allured by the image of the narcotraficante because of the role of the narcowife. For her, the narcowife is the image of security, particularly financial security, something she has always sought to have. The narcowife also lives a life of luxury due to the wealth that her significant other matriculates, something that Isabella enjoyed the thought of as well.
For Cruz and Andrés, the allure of power, masculinity, strength and wealth all allowed the oversight of the violence and prosecution that are consequences of being a narcotraficante. Unfortunately for Cruz, he also overlooked the addiction complex closely associated with being so engrossed in these drugs and unfortunately fell victim to them.
For many who get involved with the drug trade though, the largest draw of the narcotraficante life is that of economic security, which the people poverty stricken poor of Mexico dream of. They hope to provide for their family so that they can live safely, happily, and with enough financial security to live comfortably. Many of the men and women who get involved with the drug trade see no other alternative to providing for their family, and therefore they see no other choice but to overlook the danger of violence and prosecution that could come from it.
Question 7: How is the role of women in the drug trade rendered invisible? Please explain through an example of a woman depicted in the ethnography.
The role of women in the drug trade is rendered nearly invisible because their stories are never told. The stories of the drug lord men who run or operate the organizations are explained in the news, through the stories of their arrest or through the stories of their death. The women whom are left to care for the families and the homes when this occur are rendered invisible because there is no structural foundation or support for the families left behind following this.
For example, Paz, Andrés mother, had to find alternative ways of making money while her son, the sole provider in their family, was incarcerated. She had to sell tamales, and used most of the money that she earned to bribe the guardsmen in jail to protect her son from harm. For women in similar situations as Paz, whose family members or loved ones have had previous or current involvement in the drug trade, they face a system of obligation or debt to the organizations for which their loved ones once belonged. For Paz, and many women like her, this obligation came with unspoken understanding that while their drug mule sons, brothers, and husbands, ect. are incarcerated or incapacitated from working, their obligations are now the responsibilities of these women including housing or transporting drugs.
Many of the women in similar situations as Paz also face the violence and corruption in the form of the deaths of those close to them. There is no structural condition set up for these families to recover following the devastation of the loss of their loved ones, and there is no structure for help in rehabilitation for families such as these whose members become riddled with addiction.
The role of these women in the drug trade is rendered invisible not only because there is no structural foundation set up to assist them, but also because there is a lack of coverage of the aftermath of the consequences of the drug trade on these women’s lives.
Question 8: How has drug addiction emerged in Northern Mexico and impacted its population in recent years?
Following the implementation of NAFTA, drug addiction has further emerged in Northern Mexico due to the escalated flow of drugs through this area, as well as the increased local production of products that make them readily available to members of the community. (Muehlmann, 130) The number of meth users has greatly escalated since the introduction of the program. Rather than help efforts, “Prohibition has fueled the expansion of criminal networks and facilities such that there has never been greater availability of highly potent drugs in the United States or Mexico.” (Muehlmann, 131)
For example, Muehlmann experiences Cruz trying to fulfill his addiction complex through legal means, as he goes to the store to purchase cigarettes. But when the store is closed, he can easily find more than five places to purchase methamphetamine with the same money, and there the impact of NAFTA on the legal economy shows its effect on the illicit, and where Muehlmann sees the true impact of the drug trade in its relation to government interdiction.
In recent years, the drug addiction that has become prevalent in Northern Mexico has impacted the community in many ways, but unfortunately there are little to no means to help with the recovery from their addictions. Rehabilitation program facilities are a hub for the violence that comes from the drug trade, and are too financially costly to families who wish to send their loved ones for help as well. A large number of users are often incarcerated after charges of possession, only to find that drugs are readily available within these facilities as well. Muehlmann states that until Mexico and the United States change their approach to addiction and addicts there will be no change, “until there is such a restructuring of priorities of government investment in the problem of drug addiction, people like Cruz have very few options and no support for recovering from their addictions.” (Muehlmann, 133) Under this notion, until changes are made, the Northern Mexican population, as well as the population in the United States, will unfortunately continue to see the plight and downfall of the community.
Question 9: How is it riskier not to get involved in the drug trade?
For most of the Mexican poor population, it is far riskier to not get involved in the drug trade whether it is for financial, social, or cultural reasons. Financially, there aren’t any jobs available that pay remotely as much as jobs associated with the drug trade. It is financially riskier to not get involved because these families cannot sustain themselves on income from legal means alone. It seems that the only way to find comfort in living and to escape poverty is to get involved with the drug trade, regardless of the possible violence or threat of incarceration associated with the narco-life.
Socially and culturally, the Mexican heritage is built off of patronage and debt, for the members of this society, “risk is not simply weighed against financial gain. It’s also weighed against social debts – what you owe your children, your friends, your parents, and those who have helped you before.” (Muehlmann, 165)
For example, Andrés got into the drug trade mainly to sustain his family because he wasn’t making enough money to do so through legal means. He felt a debt to his mother Paz, to take care of her and make her feel comfortable in whatever means necessary.
For Paz, this idea of patronage and debt came when Andrés was in jail and his boss, El Gordo, came to have her keep packages under her watch. Paz was unable to say no, thinking that if she did so, it could cause conditions to worsen for Andrés within jail, and because she thought that if she did El Gordo a favor, he would help to ensure his safety within the facility and his early release.
Lupita felt this social debt to Don Emmanuel after he offered to drive her 36 hours from Mexico City. She could not tell him no to helping him carrying large sums of money because she owed him for doing her the favor of driving her such a far distance back home.
Muehlmann sums up the main reason why it is riskier to not get involved in the drug trade, “Ultimately they are already positioned in the drug trade regardless of whether they “choose” to take on the role of smuggling or stashing drugs.” (Muehlmann, 166) Whether they choose to or not, members of this community’s lives are directly intertwined with the drug trade, and it is far riskier to be blind to this involvement and not seek the benefits, rather than to participate and understand the calculated risk.
Question 10: Explain the author’s statement that the ‘war on drugs’ is really a war on the Mexican poor.
Muehlmann states that the war on drugs is synonymous with the war on the Mexican poor because, “the social conditions that put people at risk of developing substance abuse problems are precisely the conditions that make them vulnerable to being drawn into direct involvement in the trade as small-time traffickers and mules.” (Muehlmann, 186) What Muehlmann relates is that the implementation of prohibition policies has moved violence further into these communities, and while the government tries to associate this violence with the drug trade, the lines of those who are “in” and “out” of the trade are quite blurred. Mostly without choice, the lives of the rural poor of Mexico are touched in one way or another by the drug trade.
While lawmakers in the United States tend to place a behavioral blame, they fail to look at the economic and social consequences of the Mexican poor that their policies affect. What Muehlmann suggests is that the problems of the drug trade in the social, daily lives of the Mexican poor are amorphous with the economic and political issues occurring within the region, and that while lawmakers continue to disregard this fact, they will continue to exacerbate the violence and consequences of addiction that the Mexican poor face, and the desperation that they feel to which they see no alternative but to get involved in the drug trade.
Question 11: What are the author’s critiques of the ‘war on drugs’ and her premise that prohibition of drugs in the United States exacerbates drug trafficking and creates violence rather than the Mexican supply of drugs?
Muehlmann argues that the United States is taking a “top-down strategy of enforcement,” attempting to cut off the supply of drugs to the United States rather than penalizing consumers. (Muehlmann, 111) What she suggests through her thesis is that supply cannot be blamed alone. Muehlmann states that the lens needs to be turned on the demand coming from the United States, for much of these organizations would no exist and the magnitude of the violence surrounding the drug trade would not have reached the tensions it has, without the pressure from the demand aspect of this economic exchange.
Shaylih Muehlmann suggests rather, that supply and demand exist on a continuum, that the larger the demand is, the more pressure there is for delivery for more potent and higher quality products at a faster and larger rate. She juxtaposes the open trade of goods that NAFTA supposedly was supposed to allow by stating that, “while Mexico exports the drugs and profits to the United States, the United States exports the guns, the bloodshed, and the blame to Mexico.” (Muehlmann, 175)
Paz: Andrés’s mother, represents the gender dynamics of drug smuggling and the “invisible women” of the drug trade idea because she had to deal with the repercussions of Andrés’s involvement following his incarceration.
Andrés: Paz’s son who experienced the standard story of the narcotraficante. He rose to wealth from his poor socio-economic status after his involvement with the drug trade, but was arrested and incarcerated because of it. Even after his arrest, Andrés continues to glorify his trafficking days. He fell to the allure of the narco-life for financial stability, as well as the power and prestige that came with the title. Mainly though, his cultural necessity to care for his family was the driving factor behind his involvement. He struggled to re-assimilate following his time in prison because he found there was no way to fully rid his life of traces of the drug trafficking world.
Don Emmanuel: Money launderer who utilizes the Mexican cultural ideals of patronage and debt to justify his work. He operates in both the global capital arena as well as under the traditional patronage culture. He believes he is “assisting women in the formal economy” by helping them open accounts for money laundering, and claims he is working under the best interest of his customers. Andrés begins working for Don Emmanuel but is naive in believing that this doesn’t incorporate him back in to the drug trade, since the money Don Emmanuel is laundering is for large drug organizations and cartels.
Isabella: Andrés’s ex-girlfriend. She represents the role of the allured woman to the narco-life because she dreams of being a narcowife. She dreams of embodying the narcochic style, and values the ideas of Western capitalism. She also embodies behavioral and structural contradictions. Yes, Isabella makes some poor life choices, but she is also in a structural formation where she finds that living the narco-life and being a narcowife are her only means of finding financial security for her family and herself. To her, the lifestyle of the narcotrafficante and narcowife are made common sense because of this ideal, and therefore she symbolizes hegemony in the trend of globalization.
Cruz: Represents the addiction complex, he was influenced and allured by the drug trade both culturally and economically but unfortunately succumbed to all the pressures that the trade entails. He represents the journey of addiction that much of the rural Mexican poor population experience in result of the drug trade. His addiction was fueled by capitalism, for it created the conditions that made his addiction possible.
