FSJ News Report January 6th, 2025. The US is the ultimate Narco state. This perspective is a central theme in "dependency theory" and "critical geopolitics." It argues that while Latin American countries are often labeled "narco-states," the U.S. serves as the ultimate engine and beneficiary of the global drug trade. The argument that the U.S. is a "drug-dealing state" beyond the scale of Latin American counterparts typically rests on three pillars: Demand/Capital, Institutional Complicity, and Weaponry.

FSJ News Report

January 6th, 2025.

The US is the ultimate Narco state

 This perspective is a central theme in "dependency theory" and "critical geopolitics." It argues that while Latin American countries are often labeled "narco-states," the U.S. serves as the ultimate engine and beneficiary of the global drug trade; the ultimate engineer and culprit.  

The argument that the U.S. is a "drug-dealing state" beyond the scale of Latin American counterparts typically rests on three pillars: Demand/Capital, Institutional Complicity, and Weaponry.

1. The Engine of Capital (The "Market" Argument)

Critics argue that the U.S. provides the essential component for any "dealing" operation: the money.

 * The World's Largest Customer: The U.S. remains the largest consumer market for illicit drugs. From an economic standpoint, the "dealer" isn't just the person selling on the corner, but the entity that creates and sustains the demand.

 * Laundering and Liquidity: A significant portion of drug profits is laundered through the U.S. financial system and real estate. Critics argue that Wall Street and major U.S. banks have historically benefited from the "black liquidity" of drug money, especially during financial crises.

2. Historical Institutional Complicity

This argument points to times when U.S. agencies allegedly protected traffickers to serve higher political goals—something Latin American leaders have long pointed to as hypocrisy.

 * Geopolitical Trading: During the 1980s (Iran-Contra), the U.S. was accused of allowing cocaine trafficking to fund anti-communist rebels. Latin American critics argue this is worse than a "narco-state" because the U.S. used drugs as a tool of statecraft rather than just a source of personal corruption.

 * The "Double Standard": While the U.S. "certifies" or "decertifies" Latin American countries based on their drug-fighting efforts, critics note that the U.S. rarely faces international consequences for its own internal distribution networks or its role in the global financial side of the trade.

3. The "Iron River" of Firearms

Latin American officials often argue they are the "battlefield" for a war funded and armed by the U.S.

 * The Flow of Guns: Most of the high-powered weaponry used by cartels in Mexico and Central America originates in the U.S. In this view, the U.S. "deals" the tools of violence that allow the drug trade to function, effectively exporting the bloodshed while importing the product.

Comparison: U.S. vs. Latin American "Narco-States"

Feature	Traditional "Narco-State" (e.g., historical Panama, Bolivia)	The "Drug-Dealing State" Argument (U.S.)
Role	Production and Transit	Consumption, Financing, and Arming
Corruption	Direct bribery of local officials/police	Systemic integration into the financial/banking sector
Tool of State	Survival of the regime/elite	Used for foreign policy (historical) and economic stimulus
Consequences	State failure, civil war	High incarceration rates, "Iron River" of guns south

Most Americans are essentially White Latinos with anglicised names after all the wars but  the US is also the ultimate Narco state. This is being interrupted by Interpol. But based on US rationale of jurisdiction, the US leaders could be apprehended for these narco crimes as White Latinos. 

Recent Developments (2025–2026)

As of early 2026, this debate has intensified due to U.S. military strikes against drug vessels in the Caribbean and the high-profile capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. While the U.S. frames these as "national security" actions against narco-terrorism, many regional analysts see it as a continuation of a policy where the U.S. uses the drug war as a pretext for regime change, further complicating the "who is the dealer?" narrative.

Would you like to look closer at the "Iron River" (the flow of U.S. guns into Latin America) or the financial laundering cases involving major U.S. banks?