les should be limited to government. (Rand)Randall Holcombe references Robert Dahl and Max Weber, summarizing their points of view that a monopoly on the use of force in a given area is the defining characteristic of government, thus adding a spatial characteristic to the definition. Holcombe further points out that obviously a monopoly on the use of coercive force is not required as can be seen from examples of overlapping area and jurisdictional authority within the federal, state, and local governments in the United States. Finally Holcombe puts forth the idea that, for a positive economic view, the hallmark of government is the ability to tax all parties within a given geographical region, for the purpose of financing its operations. (Holcombe)Mafia as GovernmentWould the Mafia meet the criteria of Rand, Dahl, or Weber? Except in certain isolated instances, probably not. The United States federal government exerts coercive influence over practically all individuals or firms living or operating within its boundaries, not to mention state and local agencies. Of course, by any definition requiring a monopoly of use of force, whether spatially limited or not, the “real” governments don’t qualify as governments either.Following Holcombe’s definition, which does define the aforementioned federal, state, and local agencies as governments, where does the Mafia fall in respect to being considered as a government? In other words, can it be argued that the Mafia has the power to “tax” all businesses or individuals within a geographic area? Armed with only information from hearsay and popular culture, the answer would have to be yes. Systemized extortion or “protection” fees could very well be collected for all within a given area. It may be that the popular image is inaccurate, which may affect the classification, but for the sake of argument it is considered an accurate assessment here....
