I don't know

Here I am in my pajamas with a lingering hangover, pissed off because Netflix is down, but yes, this seems like as good a time as any to try to answer your question about the Mexican drug war. Needless to say I feel a little ridiculous presuming to have an opinion at all (see above). But one thing this blog has been making me consider again, maybe for the first time since college, is that it's okay to form opinions and ask big questions about situations we're removed from, because those questions can bring us closer to understanding. It's like what you're saying, Megan, about stepping back to see connections. On the one hand, I'm trying to not feel guilty about a night like this, for example -- when I'm sitting on my lazy ass just enjoying myself while people are killed in Mexico. I want, like anyone else anywhere, to just be happy and delight in the small things. But on the other hand, I know how important it is to remember that we are all connected. I think it was the Boston Globe article you linked to that said calling it "Mexico's drug war" is misleading, because so much money/drugs flow between our two countries. It's not so far away from us. So my biggest question is, how do I balance those two -- trying to be happy and also remaining connected to the people in this world who aren't so lucky?

To answer your question, it seems that it is important to crack down on the gangs and bring an end to the violence. But that's only my perspective from this comfortable, safe spot in my bed. Could there be a better way than how the president is going about it? Sounds like it. I wouldn't want to say that someone shouldn't stand up to evil/injustice just because it might cause more trouble before it's over. But honestly, I'm uncomfortable with the consequences of that choice. Megan, what do you think? Has your opinion changed since being there?

As for Bolano, I don't think he meant to tie things up at all. I base this opinion solely on the other novel of his that I read, The Savage Detectives, which he did finish and which still had a lot of loose ends/unanswered questions at the end. I think that was his style and also shows something about his worldview -- maybe he was okay with not having the answers, as long as he could ask the questions. But I agree that maybe he was trying to show us those previously-mentioned connections, which many of his own characters in 2666 don't see.