Source

We should start a thread about interesting news like this; sure, it isn't your usual run of the mill stories, but things like this could be useful too, y'know?

It's not that surprising. Really, outside of the US, crime syndicates provide social services about as often as they don't (or alternatively, social services delve into organized crime to fund themselves). It's difficult for us to accept that in the US, but that's mostly because in the US we have so many well-funded social services already, organized crime simply can't become competitive (with few exceptions).

I fully expect in an SR setting that organized crime fills in more and more roles in establishg social stability.

I would invite you to reconsider the idea that the US's exceptionally well-funded and well-operated social services reduce criminal organization community involvement.

If anything, my armchair sociology would point the finger at the US's status of "melting pot"; from what I know, large organized crime tends to have grown from local organizations protecting the interests of certain regional groups (details involving how socially responsible the group is and the degree to which the uninvolved believe the interests being protected are in fact at least partly theirs vary for a number of reasons not unique to organized crime). In the US, the inheritors of that duty of obligation (such as it is) are invariably a tiny fraction of the populace.

~J

I wonder how japanese prisons are.

This is oftentimes true, however in the US the segregation between cultural groups, especially between cultural groups and the government, is relatively low. It hasn't been since the 1920s that most Americans would claim their primary nationality as anywhere but American, whereas in many (most?) other countries, a foreigner is distinctly aware of what his roots are. Hence the term 'the melting pot' - people melt together and lose their cultural distinctiveness. (It is a little curious we didn't see any real growth of African-American syndicates. I suspect that's because of a lack of cultural background and cohesion.)

The US also seems quite blind in regards to offering social benefits. Legal disputes, welfare, protection, insurance are offered almost equally, regardless to the individual's cultural background or oftentimes even his legal status as a citizen. These are common sources of influence for organized crime, and for the most part, they've been outcompeted. The police do it better and (effectively) charge less. The point where syndicates gained serious cultural influence was in providing illicit goods and services (especially alcohol), but the goods provided are rarely what one might consider a social good.

i would say that what many nations of europe are going thru right now is the same that USA experienced with the second wave of immigrants, when non-protestant eastern europeans set out in hopes of riches.

i think i once read about someone talking about "near foreigners" vs "far foreigners", where the first are people that outwardly cant be distinguished from the local population, while the second can. this is somewhat thanks to the cold war, and somewhat thanks to the improved mobility of EU travel policies, and i guess one only have to give it time, and generations growing up that are more used to seeing a mix of features.