“Great robbers punish little ones to keep them in their obedience; but the great ones are rewarded with laurels and triumphs, because they are too big for the weak hands of justice in this world, and have the power in their own possession which should punish offenders.” (John Locke)
Have you ever heard that saying, “Crime doesn’t pay”? I’m gonna keep it real with you, that’s a bold face lie; or at the very least a misrepresentation of the truth. I guess though, it applies that crime doesn’t pay for the person who does the crime, gets caught, and has to serve a lengthy sentence.
I don’t necessarily accept that premise because for one, a person can go undetected for a long time, all the while blowing through millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains; ask Bernie Madoff. Is it reasonable to conclude that crime didn’t pay ole Bernie-Bern? And the U.S. government is running a Madoff like ponzi scheme with its Social Security program, amongst other frauds; Uncle Sam knows that crime pays.
Another dimension to this is the guy who does the crime, gets caught, gets the stiff sentence, but has friends in high places whom ensure that he gets a pardon. Such as the case with “Scooter” Libby, or that Cal. State politician’s son whom Arnold (“the Gubernator”) granted partial clemency to (Arnold basically admitted that he did as a favor for his politician friend). Ask “Scooter” if crime pays.
Then there’s the people who commit crimes, yet due to their status and position in U.S. society, never get prosecuted. Anybody remember the “Iran-Contra” affair? Plenty of evidence has surfaced that implicates the CIA with drug smuggling-trafficking during this era; as there were reports, from agents with uncompromised integrity, filed within the CIA during this time and bringing this criminal activity to light within the Agency. Ironically George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and the upper level intelligence/Justice Department officials, claiming ignorance of the crimes, avoided legal accountability for this criminal activity. Ask the Bush politicians if their crimes pay.
The government of Columbia sued the Phillip Morris tabacco company for: smuggling Marlboro cigarettes into that country; readily accepting large amounts of cash from traffickers, then smuggling cash back into the U.S. (see “Crossing The Rubicon” by Michael C. Ruppert) Ironically this criminality didn’t receive much focus in the U.S., nor did the Phillip Morris decision makers have to defend their criminal conduct in the U.S. criminal court system. Also RJ Reynolds (Nabisco) has been sued by the entire European Union for large scale smuggling and money laundering (again, refer to “Crossing The Rubicon,” it’s highly suggested reading). Ask the Wall Street elitists if their crimes pay.
We see politicians and government bureaucrats on T.V. all the time speaking of their commitment to eliminating crime and their sincere desire “to see a crime-free America.” I say that they’re the grossest liars and flatterers, devoid of integrity and a healthy sense of shame for their intentional deception. At the best they tell half-truths on the issue. Consider this brief excerpt from “Crossing The Rubicon”:
“Allegations that the CIA and Department of Justice were complicit in the flow of cocaine into South Central LA; that the Clintons were partnered with George H.W. Bush and Oliver North through the offices of the National Security Council in a little Iran-Contra arms and cocaine trafficking operation in Mena, Arkansas; and that Hillary Clinton’s law firm was helping launder the local share of the profits through state housing agency securities and investments were never addressed objectively by the corporate media.”
Notice that this flow of cocaine wasn’t into Beverly Hills or Orange County. Nevertheless people can speak any number of untrue things with persuasive conviction but the proof is always in the pudding, the pudding being the person’s actions. The Clintons surely know that their pudding in crime makes for part of a financially filling pie.
Think of crime in economic terms and how it relates to your local, state, and national economies. Along with crime comes a lot of middle-class wage level jobs, which contributes largely to the local and national economies; through purchases, taxes, donations, etc. If there were no crime all of those jobs would be absent from the market.
I mean there’s city, county, state, and federal police; jail and prison staff (guards, probation and parole agents, administrators, secretaries/clerks, “educators,” maintenance workers, medical/mental health staff, etc.); lawyers, judges, bailiffs, clerks, stenographers, private investigators, expert witnesses, etc.; police, dispatchers, parking enforcement, code enforcement, animal control, etc. I know that you get the point; there’s a lot of jobs dependent on the existence of crime.
To eliminate crime and create this “crime-free America” would be to eliminate all of these (and more) jobs/money that crime creates. That would be catastrophic for an already fragile U.S. economy. In this crime-free environment a very slim minority of the displaced workers could be absorbed into other professions but the vast majority would remain unemployed.
That many jobless citizens in this nation, where the economy is based on consumption, is unsustainable. Also, the absence of their tax dollars would certainly diminish, very substantially, government consumption. Which in turn would cause job and services cuts in other areas, and that trend would continue on throughout the entire economy. That kind of trickle-down would be fatal to this consumer economy.
Now do you think these politicians really want to eliminate crime, synonymous with destroying the economy? Of course they don’t! And I can assure you that if everyone in America stopped, this very day, committing acts which are currently deemed criminal, then all the politicians would do is find new things to label as crimes.
As for the bureaucrats, the lie is much closer to the surface with them. Many of them are employed directly in the criminal justice sector, so basically their livelihoods is directly dependent on the existence of crime. So for us to believe them in their professing their desire to see crime cease, we are to believe that they want to lose their hundred thousand dollar plus (in many instances) annual salaries, their Cadillac benefit packages, and other job related perks?! This absurdity is almost laughable to any other rational being. Even the bureaucrats whom are not employed in the Criminal Justice sector are well aware of the negative effects economically that a complete absence of crime would entail. Like politicians, the bureaucrats know the deal; crime pays.
Here’s another relevant excerpt from “Crossing The Rubicon.”
“A certain percentage of the prisons in this country are run by private companies which trade their stock based on how many human beings they ‘house.’ In pure economic terms, inmates have become inventory. The two largest of these corporations are Wackenhut and Corrections Corporation of America. Both of these corporations, through their boards of directors and executive management have direct ties to US intelligence agencies, including the CIA."
“All of this means that the corrupt economy makes money by first selling drugs to people and then putting them in prison for using drugs.”
The parallels between private, for profit, prisons are substantial. Big business is in on the secret… crime pays!
So whether we like to admit it or not, this nation generally realizes a benefit from crime. It’s usually always about the dollar here in the U.S. and crime related professions combined makes up a substantial portion of the GDP, largely aiding the efforts to maintain a strong dollar. You can believe those who chant “crime doesn’t pay” if you want to. As for me, I know the real; crime may not pay for those whom are ground to dust in its machinations (prisoners, parolees/probationers, drug addicts, etc.) but for many others crime does in fact pay, and pay well!
“We hang petty thieves and appoint the great ones to office.” (Aesop, C. 500 B.C.)
If you are working on an APWA-related project, please let us know how you plan to utilize the Archive. We hope to share information about your work with our readers and, whenever possible, with relevant APWA authors.
APWA is an open access archive. We encourage use of the writings for research, course planning, and projects engaged in examination of the criminal legal system. Reproduction of essays in their entirety infringes on author copyright without their explicit consent from the writers. Please contact us if you plan to reproduce entire essays; we will do our best to put you in contact with the authors for consent, and their compensation for any project that is profit making.