"Claims of similarities between modern democratic states and organised

crime provide an unhelpful and misguided understanding of the former."

Discuss.

This essay will be arguing for the negative of this statement to a moderate extent. I will first
outline the claims that are in question between modern democratic states and organised
crime1. I will then tackle the two claims which the statement makes, whether the claims of
similarities are misguided,2 followed by whether they are helpful.

The Claims of Similarities

The main claim of similarities between the two entities is in their use of violence and
protection. Tilly states that “Someone who produces both the danger and, at a price, the shield
against it is a racketeer” (Tilly, 1985:171), and according to him both entities would fit this
definition of racketeering and belong on the same “continuum” (Tilly, 1985:170-1). The
comparison here is that the mafia will go to local shops and make shopkeepers pay a fee to
avoid said mafia possibly destroying the business. This can be likened to the payment of
taxes under a state.3 The state will go to people or businesses and require them to pay tax to
avoid said state shutting down the business or prosecuting the person. Both corporate and
income tax, evidence this. Tilly also goes onto state that “Someone who provides a needed
shield but has little control over the danger's appearance qualifies as a legitimate protector”
(Tilly, 1985:171), and once again both entities fit this quality. For example, the mafia can
charge a fee for protection against rival mafia, and the state will impose wartime taxation to
protect citizens from a foreign power. The fabrication of this danger could also apply to both
the mafia, in making the shopkeeper falsely believe the rival mafia is a threat to them, or the
state, in making their citizens believe a rival power is a threat to them (Tilly, 1985:171). An
obvious example of the latter is the US and UK both invading IRAQ in search of WMDs
which were never found.

Although the concept of protection is the core similarity, the claims can extend beyond it.
Gambetta quotes a cattle breeder who sought out a “Peppe”4 to come to an agreement with
the butcher, given that both did not trust each other, and “Peppe” brought enough trust into
the situation for this issue to be resolved. For his involvement “Peppe” was paid a share
(Gambetta, 1996:15). This illustrates how a mafia can work to facilitate transactions similar
to how under modern states, laws and the application of them by police also facilitates
transactions.

The mafia and police also have similarities in the sense of setting order within an area. As
Gambetta states “having a “wise guy” around puts things in order and keeps people in their
place” (Gambetta, 1996:22).

To sum up, the claims of similarities between the two entities are made of the extraction of
resources in exchange for protection, facilitating transactions and setting order.

1
I will also refer to organised crime as the mafia throughout the essay.
2
The Claims of Similarities section will bleed into the section Are They Misguided? because by giving
examples to support the claims, I will be arguing for the accuracy of them.
3
When referring to a “state” without any other descriptors, I will only apply characteristics present in all
conceptions of states, meaning it will apply to modern democratic states. These characteristics will be informed
by Tilly’s four activities: War making, State making, Protection and Extraction (Tilly, 1985:181).
4
“Peppe” represents “mafiosi” (Gambetta, 1996:17)
Are They Misguided?
This section will be concerned with whether these claims misunderstand or misrepresent a
crucial part of the modern state which separates them from organised crime. The obvious
response to these claims is that modern democratic states’ use of coercion is legitimate and
the mafia’s use of it is not (Tilly, 1985:171)5. Therefore, by presenting these similarities in
such a way is misleading given that it gives the impression that both are equally reprehensible
or praiseworthy. However, I would argue that if democracy’s legitimacy comes from voting,
then the modern states in question are acting similarly to organised crime towards those who
did not vote for them, by illegitimately acting on those who did not vote for them. One would
respond that in democracy there is an implied consent from living under it that you must
accept the power of the winning candidate regardless of who you voted for. Even so, a person
has not chosen to live under a democracy and presuming that they have the resources to move
is unrealistic, therefore the implied consent is involuntary. So, if this legitimacy comes from
democracy representing people’s opinion, the state’s acts do not carry legitimacy towards
those who’s opinion they don’t represent, yet the state is expected to act on those who didn’t
vote for them, thus meaning that the reason behind the actions seen in the claims is not
legitimacy.

Another reason to believe these claims are misguided is that under democracies, revenue
extraction will be less significant, given that the incumbent will either want to be re-elected,
or have a member of their party be elected (Olson, 1993:570). Due to this, to gain the favour
of the majority, the incumbent will have to ensure greater resources for his subjects to keep
them happy. Therefore, the extraction of resources between the two entities is not to the same
degree, since the mafia will function as stationary bandits and maximise revenue while
ensuring development for their subjects that so that they can be exploited further (Olson,
1993:568). This results in the modern states being misrepresented as ones’ that aim to
maximise revenue, making the claims misguided. However, this response is still not entirely
valid since majority support can be earned through other means such as ideology and agenda,
while extraction of resources remains high. This can be seen in the AKP’s platform in Turkey
being driven by Islamic sentiment as opposed to one based in economic distribution. Given
that this argument is not entirely valid, it doesn’t prove that the claims are misguided, but
gives room for doubt within the accuracy of the similarities.

Are They Helpful?

I would argue that these claims are helpful because they allow us to better critique modern
states and their propensity to act unjustly. A good example of this is the Ferguson Police
Department which sought to maximise revenue and did so by carrying out improper
procedure, specifically towards black people (Department of Justice, 2015). These claims
highlight how things such as Ferguson can happen under these modern democratic states and
make us wearier of them. If I recognise that government can be akin to the mafia, when they
act like the mafia, I will take notice of it quicker.

It is also helpful in that it shows us how modern democratic states can have authoritarian
aspects which many under it would disapprove of, going against its own concept of
democracy. By highlighting how those we elect can exert their power in ways that are beyond
the control which democracy is supposed to provide us with, the claims illuminate errors
within our democratic system or our involvement in it.
5
Tilly does not argue this, he refers to how this is a response to these claims.
One may argue that it is unhelpful as it can bring undeservedly excessive criticism towards
modern states that result in harm to society. Although I would argue that the claims are not
misguided and mostly provide an accurate representation of modern states in the aspects
protection, facilitation and policing, a claim that our government is similar to organised crime
may result in certain people making the logical jump that it is one. This will result in a
pipeline of conspiracy theories that are actually misguided and harmful to society in that a
small number of them can behave outwardly anti-socially. This can range from hate-speech to
genuine terror attacks (Global Database of Terrorism, 2022). Therefore, I understand that it
cannot be considered entirely helpful since it can invoke such damage, however I believe it is
overall more helpful than not since it is unlikely that these claims are what drive the
conspiracy theorist to act anti-socially. They most likely would have acted as such whether
these claims existed or not, given the numerous other logical fallacies which inform their
world view.

Conclusion
In conclusion the claims of similarities between modern democratic states and organised
crime are mostly, not misguided, given that they give a roughly accurate representation of
modern states’ activities, in the areas where the similarities are claimed to be in. Where they
can be misguided is how they ignore the degree to which the extraction of resources occurs as
it’s possible to be less so under modern states. These claims are also mostly helpful in that
they highlight areas of fair criticism to be levied towards modern states. Although it can
contribute to conspiracy theories which can be harmful to society, it is in a very minor way.

1482 words

Bibliography
1. Department of Justice (4th Mar. 2015). Investigation of the Ferguson Police
Department. Research rep. Civil Rights Division, United States Department of
Justice. 102 pp.
https://tinyurl.com/jpk4bjb (Last Accessed 10/01/2024)

2. Gambetta, Diego (1996). The Sicilian Mafia: The Business of Private Protection.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

3. Global Terrorism Database (n.d).

National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism
(START). University of Maryland.
https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/ (Last Accessed 10/01/2024)

4. Tilly, Charles (1985). “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime”. In:
Bringing
the State Back In. Ed. by Peter B. Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer and Theda
Skocpol. Cambridge University Press.
https://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/19sd/refs/Tilly1985.pdf (Last Accessed
10/01/2024)

5. Olson, Mancur (1993). “Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development.” American

Political Science Review 87 (3)
https://conferences.wcfia.harvard.edu/sites/projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/
gov2126/files/olson_1993.pdf (Last Accessed 10/01/2024)