by Coloboy » Fri Sep 20, 2024 1:38 pm
pat_marcy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 2:21 pm
If I want to ask any further questions what forum is the best to do it in? Or best forum to go through for its history and making ceremonies etc
At the risk of groans from the regulars, and because it's Friday, I have the time, and I love talking about the outfit, I'm going to lay out a general understanding that may help you wrap your head around some history and membership numbers.
Warning: If you already have a lot of outfit knowledge, this post isn't really for you
We know from first hand intel that even at it's peak in the 50's/60's, the Outfit likely never had more than 100 fully initiated, made members. At first glance that could be surprising given the organization's "stature" and storied history. However, the key words here are
fully initiated members. Thanks to many of the very folks you see commenting on these forums (not me), , we have a much better, although still tenuous, understanding of how the outfit was actually structured.
The criminal organization known as the Chicago Oufit, at it's peak, was likely a network of something like 800-1500 people. Before everyone gets all worked up, I'm referring to the extended criminal enterprise that was overseen by the Chicago family. (this could include independent criminals who were paying street tax, or people who did work for the outfit on a contract type basis). At the core of this vast network, was the element which truly ran the organization and set it's rules and culture. This element was the no more than 100 guys mentioned before, or the actual LCN "Mafia" family at the heart of things. While this was debated for a long time, it has become clear that the outfit was more traditional in some of these mafia elements than had been previously thought, and at various times (or perhaps for most of it's existence), employed things like formal making ceremonies and inductions, and participated extensively in the national commission.
Historically, the Outfit, and many of of other midwestern LCN families, were much more stringent about inducting members. It seemingly came after years of networking/knowing the right people, earning for the family, and building trust. Many researchers would say that the NYC structure of membership is actually the exception and not the rule, and that the more restrictive, closed network type setup that the outfit used, was actually the more common practice employed by the majority of the 26 or so FBI identified mafia families around the country.
This is all to say that while the outfit might have only had 100 members or less, the actual organization it oversaw was much larger.
(On this note, and this is pure speculation, but when today's guesses are thrown around of somewhere between 15-30 made members, my opinion is that this constitutes an organization in 2024 that likely has somewhere around 50-75 guys actually working for or "around" it, if that makes sense.)
While crew structures have continually shifted, during the peak era we know the most about (1960's-1980's), it appears there were about 7 distinct "crews", or groups within the outfit, each overseen by a capo, or "area boss", as it has been referred to. It appears these capos had a lot of autonomy, and were generally free to run their crews as they saw fit. Many have discussed that the crews in the outfit at it's peak were much more akin to mini mafia families, and could comprise an extended network of criminals of perhaps up to 100 people on their own.
The 7 capos reported up to a central administration, the constitution of which has been debated ad nauseum, so I'm not going to get into detail on that. The general sense is that there was typically an underboss, a boss, some type of "top boss/consigliere/senior advisor" type role, and other specialty roles such as political operatives (Gus Alex, Jake Guzik, Murray Humphries), who although they were not initiated members, enjoyed a high stature and worked with/reported directly to the bosses/administration.
That is all to say that the smaller nature of the outfit, particularly at it's peak, was primarily by design. Even in the more modern era, we have a made member (Frank Calabrese Sr.) in a taped conversation, talking about how the outfit was going to endeavor to be more like a "christmas tree" in it's structure...... I.E fewer members, more money for everyone, and tighter controls.
Hope that helps.
[quote=pat_marcy post_id=283880 time=1726780877 user_id=8498]
If I want to ask any further questions what forum is the best to do it in? Or best forum to go through for its history and making ceremonies etc
[/quote]
At the risk of groans from the regulars, and because it's Friday, I have the time, and I love talking about the outfit, I'm going to lay out a general understanding that may help you wrap your head around some history and membership numbers.
Warning: If you already have a lot of outfit knowledge, this post isn't really for you :)
We know from first hand intel that even at it's peak in the 50's/60's, the Outfit likely never had more than 100 fully initiated, made members. At first glance that could be surprising given the organization's "stature" and storied history. However, the key words here are [i]fully initiated[/i] members. Thanks to many of the very folks you see commenting on these forums (not me), , we have a much better, although still tenuous, understanding of how the outfit was actually structured.
The criminal organization known as the Chicago Oufit, at it's peak, was likely a network of something like 800-1500 people. Before everyone gets all worked up, I'm referring to the extended criminal enterprise that was overseen by the Chicago family. (this could include independent criminals who were paying street tax, or people who did work for the outfit on a contract type basis). At the core of this vast network, was the element which truly ran the organization and set it's rules and culture. This element was the no more than 100 guys mentioned before, or the actual LCN "Mafia" family at the heart of things. While this was debated for a long time, it has become clear that the outfit was more traditional in some of these mafia elements than had been previously thought, and at various times (or perhaps for most of it's existence), employed things like formal making ceremonies and inductions, and participated extensively in the national commission.
Historically, the Outfit, and many of of other midwestern LCN families, were much more stringent about inducting members. It seemingly came after years of networking/knowing the right people, earning for the family, and building trust. Many researchers would say that the NYC structure of membership is actually the exception and not the rule, and that the more restrictive, closed network type setup that the outfit used, was actually the more common practice employed by the majority of the 26 or so FBI identified mafia families around the country.
This is all to say that while the outfit might have only had 100 members or less, the actual organization it oversaw was much larger.
(On this note, and this is pure speculation, but when today's guesses are thrown around of somewhere between 15-30 made members, my opinion is that this constitutes an organization in 2024 that likely has somewhere around 50-75 guys actually working for or "around" it, if that makes sense.)
While crew structures have continually shifted, during the peak era we know the most about (1960's-1980's), it appears there were about 7 distinct "crews", or groups within the outfit, each overseen by a capo, or "area boss", as it has been referred to. It appears these capos had a lot of autonomy, and were generally free to run their crews as they saw fit. Many have discussed that the crews in the outfit at it's peak were much more akin to mini mafia families, and could comprise an extended network of criminals of perhaps up to 100 people on their own.
The 7 capos reported up to a central administration, the constitution of which has been debated ad nauseum, so I'm not going to get into detail on that. The general sense is that there was typically an underboss, a boss, some type of "top boss/consigliere/senior advisor" type role, and other specialty roles such as political operatives (Gus Alex, Jake Guzik, Murray Humphries), who although they were not initiated members, enjoyed a high stature and worked with/reported directly to the bosses/administration.
That is all to say that the smaller nature of the outfit, particularly at it's peak, was primarily by design. Even in the more modern era, we have a made member (Frank Calabrese Sr.) in a taped conversation, talking about how the outfit was going to endeavor to be more like a "christmas tree" in it's structure...... I.E fewer members, more money for everyone, and tighter controls.
Hope that helps.