Introduction
Reducing violence is not just an urgent need, but a moral and strategic priority for any society aspiring to coexist in freedom. Uruguay currently faces the unavoidable challenge of decreasing violence levels that disproportionately affect vulnerable sectors. This issue goes beyond mere security or statistics; it concerns the future of many children and, consequently, the quality of coexistence.
Historical Context and Current Situation
For decades, Uruguay was recognized as a cohesive society built on shared values such as respect, effort, and the work culture. However, this moral foundation has eroded. Invoking a tranquil past is no longer sufficient, as violence has become entrenched in specific areas where criminal organizations have instilled fear and loyalty through the logic of violence as a norm.
While Uruguay may not be more violent compared to absolute terms (as suggested by Steven Pinker in “Better Angels”), certain social segments have normalized violence as a means to resolve disputes, impose authority, or establish hierarchies—mislabeled as “codes.”
Proposed Strategy
A decisive and courageous strategy is required. It’s time to act firmly against narco clans, strengthen penal classifications, enforce isolation regimes for these criminals, and pursue their economic power intelligently. Merely apprehending a leader is insufficient if the organization remains intact; the entire network must be targeted.
Facing organized crime leaves only two paths: either the state reaffirms its authority with all legal force, or it cedes space to a parallel, mafia-like order promising peace in exchange for submission. This is not true peace.
We’ve witnessed this in Mexico, Ecuador, and Brazil. In these countries, the state withdrew from certain territories, allowing criminal clans to impose an unlawful peace dependent on the whims of the local drug lord. Former Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador even claimed that in Sinaloa, “there are no homicides” because a powerful band controls the area. However, this peace comes at a price—not the law, but crime.
Uruguay cannot afford this path. A selective and effective crackdown is necessary. All members of these (approximately 60) criminal organizations must be severely penalized.
Repression vs. Authoritarianism
Enforcing the law is not authoritarianism; it’s upholding the law, protecting the innocent, and ensuring every citizen’s most fundamental right: living without fear.
Key Questions and Answers
- Q: Why is reducing violence a moral and strategic priority? A: It’s essential for any society aspiring to coexist in freedom, as violence disproportionately affects vulnerable sectors and threatens the future of many children.
- Q: How has Uruguay’s moral foundation eroded? A: Shared values like respect, effort, and work culture have weakened, allowing violence to become entrenched in specific areas controlled by criminal organizations.
- Q: What is the proposed strategy against organized crime? A: The strategy involves firm action against narco clans, strengthening penal classifications, enforcing isolation regimes for criminals, and pursuing their economic power.
- Q: Why can’t Uruguay follow the path of other countries allowing parallel, mafia-like orders? A: This path leads to unlawful peace dependent on the whims of drug lords, which is not true peace. Uruguay must avoid this by implementing a selective and effective crackdown against criminal organizations.
- Q: Is enforcing the law authoritarian? A: No, upholding the law, protecting the innocent, and ensuring citizens’ right to live without fear is not authoritarianism.
