View Full Version : Rioting in New Orleans vs. yakuza distributing water bottles
GovernorOfCA
09-02-2005, 05:55 AM
I've been watching the news religiously over the past couple days, seeing the damage from hurricane Katrina in the South, and reading reports of looters, rapists, and murderers roaming the streets of New Orleans. It's quite a different story than what happened in Japan a while back, when a major earthquake struck (in Niigata? I forget) and the yakuza, rather than taking advantage of the situation, started distributing bottled water and food to the affected citizens.
A New Orleans official said today that these street gangs are a recurring problem during regular times, but that their behavior is normally more subdued. The Yakuza also operate during normal times, probably even more openly than the street gangs, but they reacted to crisis more appropriately than the U.S. villians.
Any ideas why there's such a difference? A stronger sense of community responsibility? The Yakuza's image as an integrated, almost "accepted" part of society? I don't entirely understand why we've got people firing on hospitals in Louisiana.
Related to that, does anyone know what happened in the aftermath of the tsunami this year? Was there looting in India, Indonesia, and other places? Or did everyone sort of band together in time of need?
I don't know why, but that's really funny/a sad comparison.(sad for the US obvouisly).
PiccoloNamek
09-02-2005, 07:59 AM
I'm going to make this clear to all of you.
All that looting and killing you're seeing on TV is not people in panic. It's ghetto-ass people coming from places such as the Iberville housing project who don't give a flying fuck about anything but themselves. I can assure you to the fullest extent that if there were no hurricane Katrina and there was a possibility of looting without punishnment, those people would still do it in a heartbeat.
Why?
Because they're just a bunch of ghetto ass people who don't give a fuck about anything.
Arvynia
09-02-2005, 08:08 AM
Well said, Piccolo. Well, Japan is also more of a collective country that tries to help each other out, whereas here, it's just too much individualism... everyone for themselves. It is sad though.
Citizen
09-02-2005, 08:29 AM
The Yakuza get a bad rap outside of Japan. For the most part, they only fuck with people if they get fucked with first, or if there is serious money to be made.
They've always had a lot of honor and are accepted for several reasons.
1. They aren't simple thugs.
2. They can't really be stopped.
3. They actually do good things for communities and average citizens.
4. They keep their business to themselves. It's not like American gangs, who will fight and shoot anyone or anything they want whenever they want for any reason they want.
Invictus
09-02-2005, 08:36 AM
In other words, the Yakuza are more mafia-esque. ;)
But yeah, the Yakuza aren't too bad to the average citizen. Heck, word has it that a lot of people as innocent as yatai operators have Yakuza connections...
Mechs
09-02-2005, 02:10 PM
Well I believe you cant really compare the two. I mean think about it for a sec. Street gangs<Yakuza. I mean citizen pointed out one of the main differences and that is: They arent simple thugs. Organized crime and street gangs cant really be compared.
I wonder who'd win in a mafia war, a U.S. big mafia family, or the Yakuza. Probably the Yakuza, because they're bigger. But isn't the Mafia more Rutheless?
JudoPorkChop
09-02-2005, 03:11 PM
Yes, but SWORDS!
Have you not seen any of Toshiro Mifune? Any of the Kurosawa goodies? Just one tattooed dude with a sword can kill like everyone, at once, even.
atomiton
09-02-2005, 05:19 PM
True, but what system allowed the condition of these people allowed to get this way? This is happening all over too... rich get richer, poor get poorer.
Why not look at WHY they're in the "ghetto"
Western society and in particular the US, is very individualistic... Personal rights and personal freedom is emphasized.... it's very much a me-first culture.
I'm going to make this clear to all of you.
All that looting and killing you're seeing on TV is not people in panic. It's ghetto-ass people coming from places such as the Iberville housing project who don't give a flying fuck about anything but themselves. I can assure you to the fullest extent that if there were no hurricane Katrina and there was a possibility of looting without punishnment, those people would still do it in a heartbeat.
Why?
Because they're just a bunch of ghetto ass people who don't give a fuck about anything.
Citizen
09-02-2005, 07:32 PM
I wonder who'd win in a mafia war, a U.S. big mafia family, or the Yakuza. Probably the Yakuza, because they're bigger. But isn't the Mafia more Rutheless?
It's hard to say. The modern mafia is just as smart as the Yakuza, they are both huge organizations, and they both have plenty of assets and connections.
One advantage the mafia would have is that everyone gives the Yakuza too much credit. Mafia leaders are just as smart as Yakuza leaders, and Yakuza enforcers are just as dumb and blindly loyal as mafia enforcers. Hell, the mafia has to be smart. They aren't as welcome in America as the Yukazu are in Japan, so that's another thing to consider.
Although it would be entertaining if either of them pissed of the Irish, Scotish, or Russian crime organizations. :D
whispering
09-02-2005, 07:58 PM
It's hard to say. The modern mafia is just as smart as the Yakuza
Erm, Yakuza is a mafia.
Although it would be entertaining if either of them pissed of the Irish, Scotish, or Russian crime organizations. :D
Its all about regions. Yakuza wouldnt have a chance in Russia. Russian mafia wouldnt have a chance in Japan. We have the Estonian and Russian mafia here, probably doing the same stuff street gangs do in US, drugs, prostitution and, well, mainly drugs. But they have an agreenment who does what.
Oh and Finland is the least corrupted country in the world. So wherever you live, its probably worse there :p
Cybren
09-02-2005, 08:13 PM
Mafia is in reference to italians, obviously. Given that, you know, the word is italian. Like yakuza. You wouldn't say the Gambino family is a yakuza.
Citizen
09-02-2005, 08:19 PM
Erm, Yakuza is a mafia.
I realize this. They are reffered to as the Yakuza though. Whereas the American and Italian mafias are simply called "the mafia". Others, such as the Russian mafia, have the country they are from as part of the title. It may not be 100% accurate to do it like that, but it makes it easy for people to know which one you're talking about.
Although I'm gussing you knew that, and were just trying to be smart. :)
Its all about regions. Yakuza wouldnt have a chance in Russia. Russian mafia wouldnt have a chance in Japan.
A war of that scale wouldn't stay in one region. Homefield advantage wouldn't matter, because they'd both take it to each other.
We have the Estonian and Russian mafia here, probably doing the same stuff street gangs do in US, drugs, prostitution and, well, mainly drugs. But they have an agreenment who does what.
Yes, they are all pretty much the same when you get down to it. I only mentioned the Russians, Scots., and Irish because their organized crime families tend to be much more violent, and they don't care as much about being subtle.
So wherever you live, its probably worse there :p
And proud of it. :D
Cybren
09-02-2005, 08:20 PM
Didn't you guys see Death to Smoochie? THAT'S organized crime!
Citizen
09-02-2005, 08:35 PM
The seedy underworld of children's programming. :(
co_delphi
09-02-2005, 10:08 PM
True, but what system allowed the condition of these people allowed to get this way? This is happening all over too... rich get richer, poor get poorer.
Why not look at WHY they're in the "ghetto"
Western society and in particular the US, is very individualistic... Personal rights and personal freedom is emphasized.... it's very much a me-first culture.
Actually you have a very odd perception of it all. From my experience poor can be defined as not making enough to get by. The only way to achieve this is to not have a good source of income or to try to live beyond your means. Typically speaking the only reason a person does not have a job is due to unwillingness to do menial labor, not being educated enough to get a better job, or have something in their work history that most employers frown upon.
Typically speaking most people who qualify as poor have actually earned it through their own actions. Either having kids before they could financially support them (I've seen alot of this). Poor decisions made at previous places of business (stealing from the till, hitting their manager, getting fired for something stupid), or my favorite drug addiction. You take anyone in this position given the ability to potentially live above their means with little chance of getting caught no matter what the country and they are likely to jump at the chance.
hapacheese
09-02-2005, 10:29 PM
Actually you have a very odd perception of it all. From my experience poor can be defined as not making enough to get by. The only way to achieve this is to not have a good source of income or to try to live beyond your means. Typically speaking the only reason a person does not have a job is due to unwillingness to do menial labor, not being educated enough to get a better job, or have something in their work history that most employers frown upon.
Oh... Well, then how about this example? You're born into a poor family. Let's say your family is so poor that you have no car, no bike, etc.
You live in the ghetto. Nobody wants to open a business in the ghetto because, well, there's no money in the ghetto and it's dangerous. So, if you want a job (a legitimate one, at least), you gotta get out of the ghetto. But, you've got no car. You've got no bike. How are you going to do that? Strike one.
So, in order to get out of the ghetto, you plan for the long term. You decide you want to get a good education and go to a decent college and get a degree. But, in order to get that degree, you'll need a scholarship. So, you decide to study.
But, your school has no funding. There are very little books, the teachers who are in the ghetto don't even want to be there because of the working conditions and lack of funding (teachers even in rich areas have to buy their own supplies), etc. So, you end up getting a less than satisfactory education. Strike two.
Something happens (mom gets mugged, dad gets shot, whatever) and now your family needs you even more. You have no money. You have no way of getting a job. Someone asks you to sell drugs for money so you can support your family... what do you do? Strike three.
Sure, there are a lot of people like the ones in your example, but there are also a lot of people in situations like the one I describe above.
co_delphi
09-03-2005, 01:05 AM
Sure, there are a lot of people like the ones in your example, but there are also a lot of people in situations like the one I describe above.
As with any generalization there are always exceptions (you did a excellent job at pointing out one such exception). Unfortunately, for the most part, many of the poor people fit under my generalization..... (also please note..... both strike one and strike three involve the actions of people under my generalization to be true.)
hapacheese
09-03-2005, 01:09 AM
Actions of people, perhaps. But not actions of the individual in my case.
Like I said, both situations are true, but it is possible that yours is the dominant case. Whatever the situation may be, the few people who have the inspiration/gumption to do something about it, often get beat down into place by "the system" (which includes the other people stuck in their situation). It's a vicious cycle. We expect the people to be able to just stand up and see the facts, but when you're eyebrow-deep in the sh*t, it's kinda hard to see the forest for the trees =\
Personally, I'm torn on the subject, as you can probably tell :(
co_delphi
09-03-2005, 01:42 AM
Trust me I know too well. I have been in the situation of barely scraping by for a number of years as one of the exceptions (not being able to find work because of being over-qualified). But I am steadily getting back. It allowed me to see things from a different view but it also made me try harder to get out of it.
Kustom
09-03-2005, 03:04 AM
A couple of facts:
- During Niigata, there was in fact tons of scams and looting going on, with people (including yakuzas, I seem to remember) extorting large amounts of money from the victims for basic commodities like food and water, or to return possessions from their houses, which in fact they never did. Warnings were constantly given on TV.
- The Yakuzas are in sharp decline, and got their ass kicked repeatedly in Japan by the Korean and especially Chinese maffias (who don't give a rat's kidney about honor). They still retain a lot of influence in politics, business and among the police, but they are an endangered species.
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.