Criminal organizations acting outside the sanction of any state seem to be a very old phenomenon. It is my understanding that pirates (acting without the sanction of a state or tribe), smugglers, gangs of robbers, and teams of counterfeiters seem to have all existed for thousands of years. But in some times and places, criminality seems to explode and become organized to the point of criminal organizations taking on the role of unofficial governments.

A few examples are the sudden emergence of mafias in Russia as the USSR weakened and collapsed, the birth of the Sicilian Mafia in 19th century, the rise of American mafias under Prohibition, the growth of vast drug cartels stretching across the Americas as the War on Drugs progressed, and the explosion of black-hat hacker groups starting right before the 20-year mark enforced on this forum.

I am trying get a grip on what the most relevant factors in sudden, large-scale boosts in the prevalence and sophistication of crime actually are.

A few relevant ones seem to be:

-A weak state (Russia in late USSR/early Federation times, Sicily in 19th century, large swathes of the Americas in the mid and late 20th century)

-The restriction by law (through heavy taxes, regulations, or bans) of opportunities to make large sums of money (prohibition on alcohol in 1920s US, restriction of free enterprise in USSR, ban on drugs in most places in 20th c., ability to conduct industrial-scale fraud through hacking today)

-The susceptibility of such means on making money to being seized against the government's or legitimate owners' will through force or guile (lemons in 19th c. Sicily, cocaine in Latin America from 20th c. to this day, state-owned businesses in the early years of the Russian Federation, evasion of ban on alcohol (and later drugs) in US through clever smuggling methods)

-Mutual mistrust by citizens of both institutions and other citizens, encouraging systems with crude, but powerful ways of enforcing trust (USSR/Russian Fed. since at least Stalin, much of Latin America for centuries, declining inner cities in late 20th c. US, ethnic strife in cities in early 20th c. US)

What am I missing? Are the above points wrong or in need of qualification? What are some well-respected sources on the history of organized crime?

[deleted]

I've just finished watching World War II in color for the second time and they never touch on what each side did with all of their war prisoners. Excluding the concentration camps, what happened to all of these prisoners during and after the war?

Hey, so I'm currently doing a project about Indo-European history or civilization. Would appreciate any good recommendations. I have a book (Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins by Colin Renfrew), but I need the books to have been published post-2000. Thanks to any who reply

[deleted]

Is that a subject of debate? When it was invented? I think it had the more to do with use of the couched lance than the stirrup.

Why did James Madison and other early presidents not own slaves? Was it a contentious issue at the time? I thought it was very common and accepted?

In a recent /r/AskEurope thread about nicknames of police, I learned that many countries refer to their police derisively as "pigs." How did this get started? Is it related to the insult "fascist pigs"? Or overweight officers? Do we know if it started in the U.S., Europe, or somewhere else?

What was the extent of the Roman's relationship with the people of Ireland (Hibernia)? Did they have regular contact with them? Did trade between the two groups exist, and did the Romans ever seriously contemplate conquering the island? Also any sources about the subject would be great!

Additionally, what made them decide to stop? I'm sure we've all seen pinups painted on the nose of bombers and fighters, but who let them them do this? Especially with art that some would consider pretty racy.

A serrated sword seems like it would be better than a regular sword, as it would be able to inflict deeper cuts, and potentially hook enemy swords, giving the wielder an advantage if they are stronger. Despite all of this, in nearly every depiction of history, they are virtually never seen. Is there a reason for this, and if so, why?

I teach a class that covers a wide range of global issues -- labor exploitation, conflict resources, etc. I would like to place all of these current issues in the proper historical context without overwhelming students.

Any suggestions for a good strategy, documentary, favorite scholar, etc. would be greatly appreciated.

I've been searching but everything of quality seems to be far too dense for second year students with little to no history background.

I've never heard of it before today, where I heard it referenced by that name and said to be especially bloody. I did look it up and I could see there were several countries involved, and that it was a comparatively long war, but I'm not really clear on what caused it or why it has such a huge legacy. What is it that makes this war so important even with all the conflict in Africa since colonization?

[deleted]

Learning Russian history that comes up again and again, but being in Siberia doesn't seem like much of punishment, seems to me like being exiled to Utah, it's not New York but one can manage

My apologies if this is a poor sub for this, but does anyone here know any good books on the expansion of Islam?

Hello dear enthusiasts!
I am looking for a book/TV/MOOC/University lecture series that covers coherently the complete North American history, i.e. pre Columbus until now. I understand that this would be quite some undertaking and the devil is in the detail (resolution), but so much of the New World is covered in many works, it would be nice to see a coherent, linear presentation of the events.
Thank you!!

So, we all know every country in the war had their own nick name. I understand the Huns and the others, but where did “Doughboy” come from?

I understand their cargo was rather heavy and required specially outfitted B-29 Superfortress bombers--but this also means that they were to be protected at all costs on their way to the targets.

I've heard the story and read about the mission several times, but I haven't come across how the US command went about planning the route for the planes. This must have included how they ensured the safety of the most critical and highly classified American weapon ever designed.

How did they plan the route, for what reasons, and what else was done to make sure the bombers reached their targets safely?

Did the Mayans capture prisoners for human sacrifice around 1500 AD or is that only something the Aztecs did?