4 registered members (DiLorenzo, Toodoped, 2 invisible),
677
guests, and 3
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums21
Topics42,488
Posts1,061,808
Members10,349
|
Most Online1,100 Jun 10th, 2024
|
|
|
Re: VITO GENOVESE
[Re: Giancarlo]
#719207
06/06/13 08:21 PM
06/06/13 08:21 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
ht2
Capo
|
Capo
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
|
Well, there was no #1 in a sense that #1 controlled everything. One boss, one vote on the Commission. What it all came down to was to have allies on the Commission. It all worked while there were two philosphical blocs on the Commission.
I agree with you on that #1 comment, nobody has supreme power over the others but it pays to have families with a commission vote on your side. Exactly, and to the extent a boss or voting bloc control the majority vote, they can control the Commission. I think the one man, one vote is being overstated. On the streets, the most powerful family will always have more influence, one way or another. It's like arguing that the United States and the Cameroon are equal in power since they both have a single vote at the UN general assembly.
|
|
|
Re: VITO GENOVESE
[Re: ht2]
#719212
06/06/13 09:02 PM
06/06/13 09:02 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,841 OC, CA
Faithful1
Underboss
|
Underboss
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,841
OC, CA
|
Well, there was no #1 in a sense that #1 controlled everything. One boss, one vote on the Commission. What it all came down to was to have allies on the Commission. It all worked while there were two philosphical blocs on the Commission.
I agree with you on that #1 comment, nobody has supreme power over the others but it pays to have families with a commission vote on your side. Exactly, and to the extent a boss or voting bloc control the majority vote, they can control the Commission. I think the one man, one vote is being overstated. On the streets, the most powerful family will always have more influence, one way or another. It's like arguing that the United States and the Cameroon are equal in power since they both have a single vote at the UN general assembly. Well, you can't make that comparison about the USA and Cameroon since the USA is on the Security Council. Anyway, saying one boss one vote does not contradict saying that they also made political alliances. Of course they tried to sway people to their sides and had voting blocs. They're both true.
|
|
|
Re: VITO GENOVESE
[Re: Faithful1]
#719215
06/06/13 09:19 PM
06/06/13 09:19 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,418 Secret location (WITSEC)
HairyKnuckles
Underboss
|
Underboss
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,418
Secret location (WITSEC)
|
I think ht2´s comparison is very good. Think of a functioning Commission in the same way as a functioning UN, before the collaps of the USSR.
In the 1960s, Lucchese could count on Gambino´s support in one matter, while Gambino could count on Lucchese´s support in another matter. At the same time, Bonanno could count on Profaci´s support in one matter, while Profaci could count on Bonanno´s support in another matter.
On street level, yes the Gambinos for example were much more powerful than the Pittsburgh Family. But keep in mind that the Pittsburgh Family had it´s representative on the Commission, speaking for them. So in a sense the Pittsburgh Family did have some influence on the Commission. In real life, and in real life politics, a small country like Cameroon has no influence in the UN or in the security council.
|
|
|
Re: VITO GENOVESE
[Re: ht2]
#719260
06/07/13 01:16 AM
06/07/13 01:16 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,835 Underground
Toodoped
Murder Ink
|
Murder Ink
Underboss
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,835
Underground
|
Well, there was no #1 in a sense that #1 controlled everything. One boss, one vote on the Commission. What it all came down to was to have allies on the Commission. It all worked while there were two philosphical blocs on the Commission.
I agree with you on that #1 comment, nobody has supreme power over the others but it pays to have families with a commission vote on your side. Exactly, and to the extent a boss or voting bloc control the majority vote, they can control the Commission. I think the one man, one vote is being overstated. On the streets, the most powerful family will always have more influence, one way or another. It's like arguing that the United States and the Cameroon are equal in power since they both have a single vote at the UN general assembly. Good point ht2 They cannot compare the U.S. and Camerron on the same table,theres always a supreme force on the table.Yes they all have equal vote,but votes can be controlled.My opinion is that the commision was formed so the more powerful families can have some sort of control and information over the less powerful families,about uncovering plots,solving conflicts and stuff like that.Good example is the uncovering the Bonanno plot against Lucchese and Gambino.
He who can never endure the bad will never see the good
|
|
|
Re: VITO GENOVESE
[Re: HairyKnuckles]
#719264
06/07/13 03:09 AM
06/07/13 03:09 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,841 OC, CA
Faithful1
Underboss
|
Underboss
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,841
OC, CA
|
I think ht2´s comparison is very good. Think of a functioning Commission in the same way as a functioning UN, before the collaps of the USSR.
In the 1960s, Lucchese could count on Gambino´s support in one matter, while Gambino could count on Lucchese´s support in another matter. At the same time, Bonanno could count on Profaci´s support in one matter, while Profaci could count on Bonanno´s support in another matter.
On street level, yes the Gambinos for example were much more powerful than the Pittsburgh Family. But keep in mind that the Pittsburgh Family had it´s representative on the Commission, speaking for them. So in a sense the Pittsburgh Family did have some influence on the Commission. In real life, and in real life politics, a small country like Cameroon has no influence in the UN or in the security council.
I agree with the analogy, just not the comparison of the USA to Cameroon. On this final point we are all in agreement.
|
|
|
|