There is no global, uniform, standard definition of organised crime and incredibly there are very few countries that define it in legislation.  So let's combine several and define organised crime as follows: 

Organised crime is a course of illegal conduct by two or more persons acting together with a view to profit; it's not a one-off event, and it's basically a business. 

Historically, organised crime has been widely considered to be by a family but the term "family" is stretched to include members of a close-knit criminal gang and their associates. The groups were often bound by religion, ethnicity or nationality or some other identifying characteristic. And, mostly, they stayed within a small geographical area. 

That's changed. In the 1980s, international organised crime became a significant concern, primarily driven by trade in drugs and weapons. It wasn't new: but the organisations had been part of The Establishment, often, before that. But as "criminals" started to threaten The Establishment, attitudes started to change.

And now they are changing again: migration has led to criminal gangs developing at both ends of their supply chains, they have taken the crimes they were familiar with to societies that are ill equipped to deal with them and, often, they have little respect for life and violence goes along for the ride. 

It's mutating again: in the UK and Germany, specific types of organised crime by migrant communities is on the rise. No one wants to talk about it because it's seen as, for example, racist. 

But from ethnically based sexual assault rings to fake businesses, the problems are becoming clear. 

It's time to talk about it. 

Organised crime has changed in the recent past. Why, how and what are the effects? Organised crime has often been regarded as limited to "family" type organisations and even the definition of organised crime is.. well, actually there isn't one. If we take a selection of definitions and look for common elements, we arrive at this: Organised crime is criminal activity conducted by one or more persons as a business. That very straightforward definition is powerful. And it cuts across all the problems that arise out of trying to define "organised crime groups", a term that we find somewhat unhelpful because it implies that groups operate in some form of silo. Organised crime has changed because there is now far more cooperation between groups than historically. Groups operate side by side, often providing services to each other while maintaining discrete membership and areas of activity. Organised crime "families" often draw on national. ethnic or cultural (which includes religious) backgrounds and loyalties. This has become an area of considerable concern as political correctness and woke attitudes have made it more difficult to raise questions about affiliations. This is not a new problem: in the mid 1990s, a carefully researched official report into organised crime in London was quietly withdrawn when one particular group alleged it was based in prejudice against it. Even descriptions of groups with reference to their ethnicity, nationality or religion, no matter how factual, are difficult to use. And yet, as we look at organised crime as it has become, one thing is clear: those affiliations are exactly how the groups expand and grow both domestically and internationally. Organised crime, as we define it, thrives over the internet and through other telecommunications systems. Are efforts to combat this directed at the correct targets? Are we too busy researching organised crime to police it? And if we police it are the policies in place to act quickly and decisively against it? Why are so many "families" so conspicuously wealthy and why are they not subject to strong investigation as to the sources of their wealth? Law are in place: why are they not used? We are presently booking speakers. Details to follow.