Organized Crime has been a major problem around the world since the 1970’s and remains to be a problem today. When speaking of organized Crime many people will think of major cities such as New York City or Las Angeles. Also while thinking of Organized Crime some people think of gangs and some people think of mob affiliates. James H. Mittleman describes how these two have become connected and how they have evolved since the 1970’s.
Many things go into affecting organized crime. As Mittleman talks about, the poor economy and loss of jobs causes many people to become in organized crime as a way of making money. During the 1970’s organized crime existed all over the world but was not as connected as it is today. In modern day crime is much more connected all over the world due to the internet and social media. As Mittleman says “commercial airlines, telecommunications, and the use of computers in business” (227) Crime can now be something done by someone 1000 miles away via a computer hack. Mittleman writes this piece to show a more negative side of globalization. Organized Crime is debatably more affective than ever due to modern day aspects of globalization. Mittleman also talks about how organized Crime would not be possible without wealthy criminals who can buy out cops and control government related businesses. This is a scary thought that some of the people controlling government and police force are also the same people involved in smuggling drugs and other types of organized crime. Although a terrifying reality, this is a great example of how so many things are connected. All of these things; the government, organized crime, the police force, etc. rely on each other. As Giddens says “the nature of modern institutions is deeply bound up with the mechanisms of trust in abstract systems”. This is referring to the trust system Giddens believes in so much. Mittleman would also agree that this trust system is very relevant to any globalized thing whether it be organized crime, the economy, or even sushi.
Giddens and Mittleman would have a lot to agree on especially since many of Giddens theories back up Mittleman’s article. For example Gidden’s theory on trust in abstract systems. Giddens theory on low-probability and high risk could also be applied to this article. Most everyone in the business in organized crime knows the risks they are taking when getting involved in the business , but they choose to ignore the possible consequences. The two differ greatly in writing style though, as Giddens writes more about his theory and does not use examples to back up his theory and Mittleman seemingly does the opposite. Globalization has many positive aspects too it. Due to social media news of a tragedy can now spread all over the world within minutes, awareness of disease is at an all time high and it is becoming easier and easier to learn about the culture of a place you have never been too through technology. Organized Crime however is a great example of a negative aspect of examples in technology and globalization. Giddens fails to mention much about the negativity of globalization which leads me to believe that this article could open up a whole different side of globalization to Giddens.
Globalization & Modernity (77) 
While reading “Global Organized Crime,” I was not actively making connections to the work of Giddens. Afterwards however, I also thought the trust system that Giddens describes seems to be one Mittleman would agree with and believe to be apart of the organized crime structure.
I appreciate how you brought up the fact that Giddens did not touch on the negative aspects of globalization. It seems that being as critical as he is, Giddens would also explore and explain the downfalls to globalization. Besides how terrifying organized crime is, what are other globalization factors that you consider to troublesome?
LikeLike
I liked the approach you took on the negative side of globalization that most people don’t see. Organized crime is a great example for this because it allows criminal organizations to thrive and puts power in corrupt forces. I think it’s interesting when you talk about how the poor economy and loss of jobs are also now a big influence in participation of organized crime. Mittelman goes into this further when he gives the example of the Chinese rural workers losing their jobs due to industrialization and joining criminal groups to make fast money. How do you think we could use globalization in turn to counter the negative effects it has produced from organized crime?
LikeLike
I believe that Globalization can have a major negative impact. I completely agree with you when you say, “During the 1970’s organized crime existed all over the world but was not as connected as it is today. Modern day crime is much more connected all over the world due to the internet and social media.” This power of communication is a double-edged sword; it can be either very beneficial or very harmful. Today’s technology almost gives you the power to reach people all over the globe. This is a huge advantage to most organized crime groups, terrorists, and other criminals. Technology like this is responsible for tragedies like the Boston Marathon Bombing, and other acts of terror.
LikeLike
Like you, I also made similar connections when I read this article to the connection of globalized crime and just how much our society is affected by it. I really loved when you said, “organized crime would not be possible without wealthy criminals who can buy out cops and control government related businesses. This is a scary thought that some of the people controlling government and police force are also the same people involved in smuggling drugs and other types of organized crime.” This made me think of “The Godfather,” one of my favorite movies. Throughout the movie the heads of the crime families paid unbelievable amounts to law enforcement in an attempt to keep them out of trouble. With the ever-developing world of technology, how do you think tactics to “pay off” law enforcement will be different? Do you think there will be an end to organize crime in the post-modern era?
EEM
LikeLike
You’re right that when you search for arguments from Giddens regarding the negative aspects of globalization, they are few and far in-between, and absolutely do not focus at all on something as specific as organized crime. When I looked through the book again to find some evidence, I did want to refer you to Giddens’ statement on pg. 151 that says, “Modernity is inseparable from the abstract systems that provide for the disembedding of social relations across space and time and span both socialized nature and the social universe.” This seems to be only one of a few references to how the abstract system method has it’s drawbacks and can, in its own way, cause discord because it is so radically different from how a natural system would take place. However, I agree with your thoughts on how serious and powerful organized crime has become in our society, just speaking about the US. Identify fraud is one of the most powerfully damaging and dangerous ways to harm a person without being physical–however there are little laws or actions in place to prevent occurrences and punish hackers. In fact, in some instances hackers are even celebrated. We thought of the whistle blower of Edward Snowden as a hero and laugh over the accidental releasing of nude photos of top celebrities like Jennifer Lawrence and Keke Palmer. And these are two very different situations. Are there any instances in which you think organized crime can be beneficial in a way to the public or are you against all forms of organized crime?
LikeLike
“organized Crime would not be possible without wealthy criminals who can buy out cops and control government related businesses.” This is so true. Organized crime wouldn’t be around if there wasn’t wealthy crime in my opinion. I look at it as the organized crime look up to the wealthy crime as roll models.
I also agree with you that this article could open up a whole different side of globalization with Giddens. If we saw the different side of Giddens would it be easier to understand and what would his views be?
LikeLike
The idea that organized crime has gone global is an incredibly scary one. Perhaps the most frightening part of global organized crime is that government officials are being paid off. When organized crime was on a much smaller scale, the reach of these groups was minuscule in comparison to what can be done today. One official being bribed can effect hundreds of thousands of people. This certainly is a worst case scenario in globalization. In reference to Giddens’ ideas on trust, people go about their everyday lives assuming that their elected officials are not corrupt, when in fact many are. What may be even scarier than that is crime will never be completely stopped because as you mentioned, “the poor economy and loss of jobs causes many people to become in organized crime as a way of making money”. There will always be people that will want to make an easy buck, and now that they can connect with people from thousands of miles away, their job is much easier. Do you think the positives of globalization outweigh the negatives or the other way around?
LikeLike