Talk:Protection racket

On 20 October 2007, Protection racket was linked from Slashdot, a high-traffic website. (Traffic)

All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history.

Neutral Point of View

This article desperately needs a rewrite from someone that's NOT a mob sympathizer Kevin143 20:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC) I started by deleting two paragraphs of crap. Kevin143 20:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone vandalized this article. "fuck RICO"? How stupid. 68.110.28.39 16:47, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Government

"Some have argued that this is an accurate description of most governments, but used in this way the term would be seen as emotive." - This is a weasel sentence. Amend it, or delete it. Rintrah 07:40, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I removed it completely, as I can't even see what useful purpose the sentence would serve if it were amended. --BennyD 07:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The use of the word nation-state in the opening sentence is not helpful. Whilst some radical libertarians no doubt argue that taxation has the properties of a protection racket, an encylopaedia should distinguish between the conventional meaning of the word, and more metaphorical cases used to make strident political points. I will remove this.

See also includes the government and 9/11. Am I one of the few who hasn't recognised the widescale protection racketeering of 'the government' and 9/11 terrorists, or is this getting over-the-top? Rintrah 11:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the qualifier "non-governmental" neatly removes the need to mention the similarities to government at this time but at some point someone should mention that Roman government (the basis of US government?) was essentially based on patronage and protection. Pinjar 22:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're all a lot of conformist suckups. Government fulfills the description perfectly:

1. It uses force to extort money from citizens in the form of taxation. 2. It claims to use tax money to protect citizens while all too often doing them harm 3. It gets into conflicts with other governments over who has the right to extort a group of people in a given geographical area.

I know it's vogue to blindly support Government while your party is in power, but unquestionably government fits the description provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.247.40.238 (talk) 16:57, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

"The bad reputation gained by organised crime also stems from the tragic incidence of civilian casualties during "mob wars". This reputation was a catalyst for rebellious attitudes that arose in the late fifties and early sixties, wherein the new generation of organised crime rejected the age-old tradition of the council."

Organized crime has a bad reputation, does it? Anyway, what does this have to do with the subject? MrBlondNYC 22:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

The term has been expanded by feminists to refer to men who 'rescue' women by insisting on protecting them from dangerous strangers when it is actually the so-called protector who will turn on the woman who rejects his protection and deprives him of his excuse for violence. Ellen Goodman noted (4/14/06) that this analogy can be extended to the current U.S. executive, where preemptive violence provokes blowback that tends to affect women and children most.

This paragraph is not enlightening to someone trying to understand the concept of 'protection racket'. It seems to have been suspiciously added to serve the contributor's agenda. Rintrah 05:16, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, suggest moving the feminist reference as a disambiguation Fremantle74 14:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Mob never uses extortion???

I find it very hard to believe that the Mob never does a little shake-down, or even lets freelance criminals operate in its territory.

References, anyone?

The article could do with a few references. The party can't keep going on without referential supervision sometime. Rintrah 03:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge with Racket (crime)?

Maybe this stub would be better off as a section in Racket (crime)? I dorftrottel I talk I 05:07, December 11, 2007

that does not seem like a good idea to me. 74.68.152.245 (talk) 01:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pimping is a protection racket

"Pimps" operate a type of protection racket. I tried to add "Pimp" to the list at the bottom of the article, but a cluebot undid my change [1] and the cluebot was not available for me to report the false positive 517846 to... Somebody else will need to make this change I guess.74.68.152.245 (talk) 01:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unethical edits are happening here.

I would like to know why material which was accompanied by perfectly adequate citations was removed without explanation. Where's the referee? This is a foul. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.62.11 (talk) 02:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]