5 ms·

The central premise of The Godfather is right in the opening scene - it's that organized crime was really a kind of alternative government, serving many of the

The central premise of The Godfather is right in the opening scene - it's that organized crime was really a kind of alternative government, serving many of the functions that governments serve, but one whose 'citizens' were mostly criminals. The claim that the Italian mafia was also looking out for the interests of the Italian immigrant community is also presented, though the counterargument is that organized crime always preys on its own community as much as it does on 'outer society'. The parallel to the white-collar mafia on Wall Street is instructive: if a mid-level employee of a Wall Street hedge fund steals from their employer by some scheme, then typically the FBI would investigate, the DOJ would prosecute, and the thief would go to prison. The blue-collar mafia operated similarly, though since they didn't have their own prisons, murder of mafiosi who stole from their bosses was the more common outcome. The author does seem uncomfortable comparing the US government and business world, with all its wars and plots in the name of 'national interests' since the end of World War II, with Washington and Wall Street washing each other's hands, to a large organized crime cartel, but the similarities are rather striking.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kbenson 4y ago
> though the counterargument is that organized crime always preys on its own community as much as it does on 'outer society'. Not much of a counterargument, since from a clinical perspective government preys on its citizens as well, through taxation. For any that take issue with the idea that the government preys on its citizens, it's important to consider it wholistically, as relative to all forms of government and not just an idealized democracy, as we often tend to assume we live in. Is the mafia better or worse than various forms of dictatorships we've seen? It's all relative, and some people will view some instances of government as net beneficial and other forms not. The only difference here is that the mafio is setting up a second government on top of an existing one, so they have less benefits to provide and are more draining. Even so I find the parallels to government very strong.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  One difference is the mafia is not a democracy, another is the mafia is rule by man not rule by law.
  - christophilus 4y ago
    My reading of the comment you are replying to wasn’t comparing the mafia to democracy, but to government broadly. It’s a fair comparison. Specifically to dictatorships and various negative forms of government. The mafia looks much like a certain slice of government that we’ve seen throughout history many of which were rule by man, not by law.
    - kbenson 4y ago
      Yes, my comparison was to government as a concept, and the various forms of it we've seen, not specifically to our government or any modern one in existence in particular. And like most governments, whether those people it considers under it's authority agree with that assessment or not is largely irrelevant, as the "law" they rule under is determined by the ruling group alone.
    - weard_beard 4y ago
      The author makes this point explicitly: “The problem isn’t merely that Michael lacks his father’s warmth, though having it would have helped. It is that Michael wasn’t the founder. As Machiavelli explains, while principality is necessary to found states, republican institutions best preserve them. The perpetuation of states is the hardest challenge in politics—more difficult even than founding.” One main, if not THE main point of the article is that the film adaptation of The Godfather injected 70’s Watergate cynicism making just such a comparison to US corruption which would have ruined other films but the comparison is made in the guise of sleazy self deception.
  - kbenson 4y ago
    Yes, that's why I was specifically comparing it to all forms of government and not just democracy. I was trying to head off this misinterpretation of my point before it happened. :/
beepbooptheory 4y ago
Small point but you don't even necessarily need to compare or analogize the two sides with each other, even with our current historical hindsight we can see the state and organized crime will corroborate and even overlap when there are shared interests.
- nivenkos 4y ago
  And literally the mafia in Sicily if you're talking about the USA.
MichaelCollins 4y ago
> it's that organized crime was really a kind of alternative government, serving many of the functions that governments serve, but one whose 'citizens' were mostly criminals. Criminals, or in the case presented in the opening of the movie, otherwise law-abiding people who seek vigilante justice after the government fails to deliver justice through official avenues. This theme is repeated later in the movie when Michael, until then a law-abiding citizen, commits a vigilante act of murder against a corrupt police captain to avenge his father.
rufus_foreman 4y ago
"All they got from Paulie was protection from other guys looking to rip them off. That's what it's all about. That's what the FBI can never understand - that what Paulie and the organization offer is protection for the kinds of guys who can't go to the cops. They're like the police department for wiseguys."
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Apparently the original Sicilian Mafia started out as bandits, who were then hired by the local aristocrats to keep the people in check, collect taxes etc. Then they started taking both sides. Which fits neatly with the "stationary bandit" theory of government: > Olson argued that under anarchy, a "roving bandit" only has the incentive to steal and destroy, whilst a "stationary bandit"—a tyrant—has an incentive to encourage some degree of economic success as he expects to remain in power long enough to benefit from that success. A stationary bandit thereby begins to take on the governmental function of protecting citizens and their property against roving bandits. In the move from roving to stationary bandits, Olson sees the seeds of civilization, paving the way, eventually for democracy, which by giving power to those who align with the wishes of the population, improves incentives for good government
- Proven 4y ago
- ncmncm 4y ago
  The Sicilian mafia have traditionally claimed descent from local nobility displaced by invaders. That does not change the story much, because "nobility" is another word for those self-same stationary bandits. Invading bandits may be better or worse than whoever they displace.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

kbenson 4y ago

> though the counterargument is that organized crime always preys on its own community as much as it does on 'outer society'. Not much of a counterargument, since from a clinical perspective government preys on its citizens as well, through taxation. For any that take issue with the idea that the government preys on its citizens, it's important to consider it wholistically, as relative to all forms of government and not just an idealized democracy, as we often tend to assume we live in. Is the mafia better or worse than various forms of dictatorships we've seen? It's all relative, and some people will view some instances of government as net beneficial and other forms not. The only difference here is that the mafio is setting up a second government on top of an existing one, so they have less benefits to provide and are more draining. Even so I find the parallels to government very strong.

WalterBright 4y ago
One difference is the mafia is not a democracy, another is the mafia is rule by man not rule by law.
- christophilus 4y ago
  My reading of the comment you are replying to wasn’t comparing the mafia to democracy, but to government broadly. It’s a fair comparison. Specifically to dictatorships and various negative forms of government. The mafia looks much like a certain slice of government that we’ve seen throughout history many of which were rule by man, not by law.
  - kbenson 4y ago
    Yes, my comparison was to government as a concept, and the various forms of it we've seen, not specifically to our government or any modern one in existence in particular. And like most governments, whether those people it considers under it's authority agree with that assessment or not is largely irrelevant, as the "law" they rule under is determined by the ruling group alone.
  - weard_beard 4y ago
    The author makes this point explicitly: “The problem isn’t merely that Michael lacks his father’s warmth, though having it would have helped. It is that Michael wasn’t the founder. As Machiavelli explains, while principality is necessary to found states, republican institutions best preserve them. The perpetuation of states is the hardest challenge in politics—more difficult even than founding.” One main, if not THE main point of the article is that the film adaptation of The Godfather injected 70’s Watergate cynicism making just such a comparison to US corruption which would have ruined other films but the comparison is made in the guise of sleazy self deception.
- kbenson 4y ago
  Yes, that's why I was specifically comparing it to all forms of government and not just democracy. I was trying to head off this misinterpretation of my point before it happened. :/

beepbooptheory 4y ago

Small point but you don't even necessarily need to compare or analogize the two sides with each other, even with our current historical hindsight we can see the state and organized crime will corroborate and even overlap when there are shared interests.

nivenkos 4y ago
And literally the mafia in Sicily if you're talking about the USA.

MichaelCollins 4y ago

> it's that organized crime was really a kind of alternative government, serving many of the functions that governments serve, but one whose 'citizens' were mostly criminals. Criminals, or in the case presented in the opening of the movie, otherwise law-abiding people who seek vigilante justice after the government fails to deliver justice through official avenues. This theme is repeated later in the movie when Michael, until then a law-abiding citizen, commits a vigilante act of murder against a corrupt police captain to avenge his father.

rufus_foreman 4y ago

"All they got from Paulie was protection from other guys looking to rip them off. That's what it's all about. That's what the FBI can never understand - that what Paulie and the organization offer is protection for the kinds of guys who can't go to the cops. They're like the police department for wiseguys."

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

Apparently the original Sicilian Mafia started out as bandits, who were then hired by the local aristocrats to keep the people in check, collect taxes etc. Then they started taking both sides. Which fits neatly with the "stationary bandit" theory of government: > Olson argued that under anarchy, a "roving bandit" only has the incentive to steal and destroy, whilst a "stationary bandit"—a tyrant—has an incentive to encourage some degree of economic success as he expects to remain in power long enough to benefit from that success. A stationary bandit thereby begins to take on the governmental function of protecting citizens and their property against roving bandits. In the move from roving to stationary bandits, Olson sees the seeds of civilization, paving the way, eventually for democracy, which by giving power to those who align with the wishes of the population, improves incentives for good government

Proven 4y ago
ncmncm 4y ago
The Sicilian mafia have traditionally claimed descent from local nobility displaced by invaders. That does not change the story much, because "nobility" is another word for those self-same stationary bandits. Invading bandits may be better or worse than whoever they displace.