Is it possible that government is just a form of crime organization?

Question

Except by its own definition, of course.

We are strongly conditioned by pro-government propaganda to put government in a category separate from "crime organizations," but what real difference is there? The only distinctions are arbitrary, ad hoc, and self-serving ones that the government itself defines.

Governments claim a territory and write rules for the people who live there. So do crime organizations.

Crime organizations routinely perpetrate extortion, abduction, theft, and robbery. Crime organizations murder people for substantial acts of defiance. Crime organizations engage in wars with similar organizations. And governments also do all of these things. The only differences are in the names used for the activities, with government always having the benefit of the more respectful synonym.

For example, when a crime organization charges a fee to let a captive go free, we call it ransom; when the government does it, we call it bail.

Is there really any difference?

Both government and crime organizations have policies to regulate the behavior of their own functionaries. And both have corruption with respect to those internal rules to about the same degree.

Ah yes. Someone will mention elections. But the real effect of elections is only superficial. The people may stir the pot, but they can't change the recipe. The policies and general aims of "democratic" governments are not adjusted by elections. Elections are media-managed razzle-dazzle, and their purpose is to confuse people into thinking that what government does to them, they, the people, do unto themselves.

Crime organizations don't have elections because they don't control the mass media and therefore can't use information management to constrain the results.

There are lots of things that many Americans want but will never see an election candidate who, if elected, will give it to them. Closing the border with Mexico, executing illegal aliens, halting foreign aid to Israel, declaring the 14th Amendment fraudulent and all pursuant laws non-enforceable... I'm sure you can think of other examples, if you will try.

Answer 1

Excellent question, though I would say that criminal organisations are another form of government. As you point out, there are many similarities, probably because both seek to control.
Ideally of course, in a democratic country, a government exercises its power on our behalf, though it has to be said that some criminal organisations have sometimes benefitted their community.
Ultimately, criminals act exclusively in their own interests, where as governments hmmmm - it may be too close to call.

Answer 2

Lots of good points. Lots of extortion even for a person
on a fixed income. Why should people 70, 80 and even
90 have to pay tax on a drink of water? Good luck getting
a sensible answer.

Answer 3

I think you are sorely misguided on this one. Some sort of organization must exist to ensure that humans co-habitate peacefully in the pursuit of happiness (in the case of western democracy anyway). It is true that some governments exist today that are nearly a criminal organization, like North Korea or Iran. Western Democracies established governments that are at the will and whim of the governed. A criminal organization is at the will and whim of the strongest criminal who is likely to run the organization like a dictatorship.

Answer 4

look at the legacy of the last clinton liberal extremist administration and you be the judge...

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
i think the answer is obvious and the sad part about it is we may be faced with this issue again.