4 ms·

It's actually a bit complicated. One premise is that the Yakuza is very hierarchical, not only a personal hierarchy in clan internally, but as an organization.

It's actually a bit complicated. One premise is that the Yakuza is very hierarchical, not only a personal hierarchy in clan internally, but as an organization. Members of the most major Yakuza clans, for example Yamaguchi-Gumi, are a leader of another clan himself, one tree down from the parent clan itself. So, when they say there's a certain Yakuza clan, you are not talking about one clan manging people under them; you are probably talking about tens, perhaps hundreds of organizations under the clan, which can stem two or three levels down. (So when they talk about 23000 clan members, that's including everyone in the tree -- there are only a little more than 80 members in "Yamaguchi-Gumi" itself.) Essentially, as a "public stance," many higher organization "prohibits" lower organizations down the tree from engaging in illegal activities. For example, Yamaguchi-Gumi's known to have very strict "no-drug" policy, and they even tell their under if they engage business of drug dealing, they will shun offenders. But here's a problem. Basically, it is expected that lower clans pay a membership due regularly to higher clan, and it can get very costly as a person goes higher up on the tree, except the leader of the very top clan himself, perhaps. (As a side note, a lot of news speculates this is probably why split of the Yamaguchi-Gumi took place in the first place.) That's you are talking about payment of 100000yen-ish (basically $10000-ish) every month. Being a leader of a clan under the main clan themselves, they will naturally order their henchmen below to pay him a membership dues. As you go down the tree, someone will have to get their hand dirty to make that kind of money; they could be legally to down right illegal business like prostitution (there's very legal gray areas of this in Japan), loan sharks, and some do, turn to crimes mainly, like fraud, and exploitations in order to make that kind of money. Essentially, while it is an argument that laws and regulations are attempting to make it harder and harder to get away with, basically the top clan's saying "hey, I am telling everyone to not engage in illegal activities, we even fire when they violate it, so we are not responsible for their actions."

throwaway7767 11y ago
Quite similar to how these things happen in corporations. No exec ever makes a decision to violate the law, they just put underlings into stressful situations where they can't achieve the set goals without doing so. The people at the top can then say they knew nothing of it, and they're shocked, shocked, that their employees would do such a thing.
- protomyth 11y ago
  "No exec ever makes a decision to violate the law" That's a bit far fetched. Execs do decide to violate the law, check some of the court cases on HN.
- unsignedint 11y ago
  Their "contract" between their pseudo kinship makes it very difficult for someone in the lower hierarchy to blame their upper, let alone whistle blow, about such wrongdoing without very severe consequences. Many of clan members would voluntarily accept imprisonment by limiting blame to themselves instead of to their upper or their immediate upper would pressure for them to do so, which I don't necessarily think the case for corporations. (I wouldn't say this doesn't exist, though.)
VLM 11y ago
In a way its simple, not complicated. This is just basic corporate or government organization management. Produce to a financial goal as first priority, also try not to get caught violating the law or regulations or we disown you, well, at least officially.
wnevets 11y ago
>Essentially, while it is an argument that laws and regulations are attempting to make it harder and harder to get away with, basically the top clan's saying "hey, I am telling everyone to not engage in illegal activities, we even fire when they violate it, so we are not responsible for their actions. Sounds like a modern corporation to me.

throwaway7767 11y ago

Quite similar to how these things happen in corporations. No exec ever makes a decision to violate the law, they just put underlings into stressful situations where they can't achieve the set goals without doing so. The people at the top can then say they knew nothing of it, and they're shocked, shocked, that their employees would do such a thing.

protomyth 11y ago
"No exec ever makes a decision to violate the law" That's a bit far fetched. Execs do decide to violate the law, check some of the court cases on HN.
unsignedint 11y ago
Their "contract" between their pseudo kinship makes it very difficult for someone in the lower hierarchy to blame their upper, let alone whistle blow, about such wrongdoing without very severe consequences. Many of clan members would voluntarily accept imprisonment by limiting blame to themselves instead of to their upper or their immediate upper would pressure for them to do so, which I don't necessarily think the case for corporations. (I wouldn't say this doesn't exist, though.)

VLM 11y ago

In a way its simple, not complicated. This is just basic corporate or government organization management. Produce to a financial goal as first priority, also try not to get caught violating the law or regulations or we disown you, well, at least officially.

wnevets 11y ago

>Essentially, while it is an argument that laws and regulations are attempting to make it harder and harder to get away with, basically the top clan's saying "hey, I am telling everyone to not engage in illegal activities, we even fire when they violate it, so we are not responsible for their actions. Sounds like a modern corporation to me.