The U.S. Gradually Weakens Mexico Through a Bottle of Cola
The United States, leveraging a bottle of cola, has gradually infiltrated and weakened Mexico, a nation with a population of 130 million, turning it into a vassal of American economic hegemony.
What’s even more shocking is that every year, tens of thousands of Mexicans lose their lives because of "cola."
What’s Really Going On Here?
How exactly did the U.S. establish its dominance in Mexico through cola?
Due to its geographical proximity to the United States, Mexico became an ideal testing ground for American economic hegemony.
As early as 1921, Coca-Cola targeted Mexico as a populous market with cheap labor, attempting to seize a share of the beverage market.
However, Mexicans initially were not accustomed to sugary drinks, and the abundance of cheap, local drinking water made it difficult for cola to gain traction.
Extreme Measures to Change the Situation
To alter this scenario, the U.S. adopted a series of extreme measures.
In 1922, a dam was constructed on the upper reaches of the Colorado River, cutting off Mexico’s main water supply.
At the same time, the United States also controlled water resources in the upper reaches of the Rio Bravo.
This directly pushed up the price of drinking water in Mexico, indirectly boosting cola sales. After this, Coca-Cola quickly expanded its market share in Mexico.
The Dominance of Cola Consumption in Mexico
Today, the average Mexican consumes 163 liters of cola per year, which is 6.5 times the global average.
Especially in the southern state of Chiapas, the per capita annual consumption reaches as high as 821 liters, equivalent to drinking 2 liters of cola daily.
This figure far exceeds the World Health Organization’s recommended daily water intake.
Cola Replacing Water in Daily Life
In some places, cola has even replaced water.
Mexicans use it not only to quench thirst and cook but also to mix infant formula.
Strangely enough, cola has become an indispensable "sacred drink" at weddings, funerals, and religious ceremonies.
A lack of sufficient cola supply at family gatherings could even trigger arguments and conflicts.
Cola as a Cultural Symbol
This phenomenon is backed by Coca-Cola’s decades-long massive advertising investments, successfully positioning cola as a daily necessity, even a cultural symbol.
In fact, Coca-Cola’s expansion in Mexico has been supported by U.S. government policies.
Government Support and Favorable Policies
From 2000 to 2006, during the tenure of former Mexican President Vicente Fox, who had previously served as CEO of Coca-Cola Mexico, a series of pro-Coca-Cola policies were introduced.
These policies allowed for the privatization of water resources, enabling Coca-Cola to easily access large quantities of water. Additionally, the government relaxed advertising restrictions, even permitting advertisements targeting children.
With the backing of these favorable policies, Coca-Cola rapidly captured the market.
Environmental and Health Consequences
To produce beverages, companies extracted large amounts of local water and indiscriminately discharged industrial waste, exacerbating local water pollution and ecological degradation.
Statistics show that each year, 24,000 Mexicans die from diabetes and obesity-related diseases, with the death toll rising to over 100,000 when including other complications.
Mexico now has the highest obesity rate in the world, surpassing the United States.
Impact on Mexican Children and Traditional Diets
This health crisis extends beyond adults; childhood obesity in Mexico is also alarmingly high, with about 20% of children affected.
Mexican traditional diets, centered around corn drinks and juices, are now being gradually replaced by cola culture.
This shift in beverage choice is not merely a lifestyle change but an invisible form of cultural invasion.
Economic Impact and Profit Repatriation
Coca-Cola’s massive success in Mexico has not brought corresponding economic benefits to the local community.
As early as 1948, Coca-Cola’s sales in Mexico had reached $10 billion.
However, these profits have not benefited the Mexican economy.
The company, through subsidiaries and tax incentives, circumvented profit-sharing, allowing more revenues to flow back to the U.S.
Suppressing Competitors and Legislative Hurdles
To further consolidate its market dominance, Coca-Cola suppressed competitors and formed alliances with Mexican government officials, securing more policy advantages and resource support.
Mexico’s drinking water legislation has been repeatedly stalled in Congress, and regulations on sugary beverage sales are difficult to advance.
The Global Reach of Cola Hegemony
The influence of cola hegemony is not limited to Mexico; similar issues are evident in many countries worldwide.
However, China has adopted a completely different response compared to Mexico.
China’s Approach to Managing the Sugary Beverage Market
After joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, despite facing pressure to open its markets, China quickly introduced a series of measures to strengthen water resource management and restrict foreign capital in the water sector.
At the same time, China actively supported the development of domestic beverage brands, promoted the research and development of healthy drinks, and imposed strict regulations on the sugary beverage market.
For example, the Chinese government legislated to restrict the broadcasting time and content of sugary drink advertisements, while encouraging the production of low-sugar or sugar-free beverages.
Protecting Public Health and the Local Market
These measures have not only protected the local market but also effectively curbed the negative impact of sugary beverages on public health.
Cola hegemony exemplifies how multinational corporations, under the guise of globalization, comprehensively erode the culture, economy, and health of developing countries.
Lessons from Mexico’s Experience
The case of Mexico shows that if the government lacks effective control over public resources and the health market, multinational corporations will exploit their capital advantage to extract resources, maximize profits, and pose a long-term threat to public health.
Comments