What do you think?
Rate this book
Smuggling: Contraband and Corruption in World History
In this lively book, Alan L. Karras traces the history of smuggling around the world and explores all aspects of this pervasive and enduring crime. Through a compelling set of cases drawn from a rich array of historical and contemporary sources, Karras shows how smuggling of every conceivable good has flourished in every place, at every time. Significantly, Karras draws a clear distinction between smugglers and their more popular criminal cousins, pirates, who operated in the open with a type of violence that was nearly always shunned by smugglers. Explaining the divergence between the two groups, the book illustrates both crossovers and differences.
At the same time, states and empires tolerated smuggling since eliminating smuggling was a sure route to a disgruntled and disorderly citizenry, and governments required order to remain in power. As a result, smuggling allowed individuals to negotiate an unstated social contract that minimized the role of government in their lives. Thus, Karras provocatively argues that smuggling was, and is, tightly woven into an uneasy relationship among governments, taxation, citizenship, and corruption.
Bringing smugglers and smuggling to life, this book provides a fascinating exploration for all readers interested in crime and corruption throughout modern history.
At the same time, states and empires tolerated smuggling since eliminating smuggling was a sure route to a disgruntled and disorderly citizenry, and governments required order to remain in power. As a result, smuggling allowed individuals to negotiate an unstated social contract that minimized the role of government in their lives. Thus, Karras provocatively argues that smuggling was, and is, tightly woven into an uneasy relationship among governments, taxation, citizenship, and corruption.
Bringing smugglers and smuggling to life, this book provides a fascinating exploration for all readers interested in crime and corruption throughout modern history.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published November 15, 2009
2 people are currently reading
21 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
October 17, 2020
Smuggling
contraband and corruption in world history.
This book was confusing.
That was my general vibe after finishing it; I was genuinely lost. Look at that title, that should give you exactly what this book is all about and yes all those things are in the book, but so is an out of place commentary on the vice presidents of the 2008 american election and their opinion on tax payment. See I don’t mind that an author is trying to wiggle in contemporary elements to make a point but look back at that title, do you see income taxes in there? Because that was what he was commenting on, their opinion on income taxes….. in the conclusion.
I am going to do something a little different with this review because I am going to deconstruct the title and via that the book but I will be going backwards because that way I can make my point more clearly, so here goes.
World history; well it’s not. I would say that roughly 85% of all examples in the book are situated in late 17 until early 19th Caribbean, some 9% is dedicated to examples of the early 19th centuries east india company shennenigans with opium in China, some 5% or so is for contemporary america and then the rest is few side notes on French controlled Vietnam. Needless to say but I am going to anyway; this is not exactly world history.
I can’t help but wonder why he did not stick to the Caribbean, given the amount of detail he gives and his knowledge of the sparse source material that gives insight in the elusive trade, this would have been more then fine for a book. His dedication to this region is more then apparent in one chapter where he laments on how many times he had to explain he does not study piracy, one can feel the frustration even as he accepts that nobody would want to see a movie called “smugglers of the Caribbean.” The other stuff feels so tacked on, we barely get a chance to get into these other contexts especially the Vietnam examples feel so out of place, is it to show an evolution of how French government officials acted differently as compared to Haiti(San dominique)? If so it is done poorly.
Corruption; throughout the book Karras constantly hammers in that state officials in the Caribbean tasked with dealing with smuggling had to balance two things; their obligation to the far away European state and secondly local people with whom they had to deal with every day and who happened to like the stuff smugglers brought in. I like this way of looking at governing in the Caribbean, this dissonance between the realities on the ground and european metropole expectations. Corruption in this context is a balancing act, it becomes pragmatism and non corruption in this context is a slavish devotion to the law that harms the welfare of all those who are truly affected by enforcing smuggling bans. This made me wonder, was this an elaborate comment on what caused the American Revolution? After all as the commonly known story goes a bunch of pissed of Boston roughians decided they hated the legal tea, sugar and other stuff that was overpriced and often spoiled on the way to the America’s, so they tossed into the water in a spur of the moment.
Karras give several somewhat similar scenario’s in the Caribbean setting with locals whose stuff got confiscated resorted to violence and public disturbance. This brings up several issues though that I will get into a bit later but for now I would like to point out that the East India company sections had a different approach. Here it was the case of a company that was defacto the British state and the Chinese imperial system whose definitions of corruption differed radically; almost guaranteeing as it seems that a conflict like the opium wars was bound to break out. Both of these interpretations of corruption are interesting but could have been fleshed out more.
Contraband; here the book gets frustrating on top of confusing. Flour. By the gods how many times does he not give us the same dilemma over and over again. People in the Caribbean wanted to make bread thus needed flour yet the only legal flour had to come from europe thus it spoiled and was expansive so quite a few traders decided f*ck it and went to get some from north America or cuba. I get it, it is a good example for this context and time, it captures the conflicting interests and how the mercantilist system almost relied on smuggling to maintain itself, to fill in the gaps as it were. But what it is not, is a good foundation to envision a whole re imagining of the concepts of free traders and fair trade, or a comment on how smuggling is so harmless and perhaps even righteous as it brings more wealth to all individuals involved. No I am mistaken; in the conclusion, via that comment on Sarah Palin and Joe Biden he does make a u-turn. By insisting we should pay taxes to the state, that depriving the state of funds hurts the whole of society.
The problem here is a blight and I use that word carefully, a blight on our ecosystem. The smuggling of live animals and animal parts has devastated whole ecosystems and has brought animals such as the Pangolin, the slow lories, tigers countless birds to near extinction. Is this the legitimate correcting of the market failure via illegal smuggling? No what we do get of examples of contemporary smuggling, is undeclared diamonds in US Airports, we don’t get into the drug trade nor is human trafficking that well integrated in the book. As a reader one is left with this idea that smuggling’s only harm is on some abstract level; it is less money for the state and thus less money available for basic services. This is a horrible fallacy to leave readers with.
The word that is not in the title; piracy as mentioned before Karras does not like it when people assume his focus is on piracy, so much so that he dedicates a whole chapter to it. For a person who repeatedly claims not to focus on piracy, he does add quite a bit on exactly that. Piracy is described as something akin to violent theft but it is also equated with state building or better yet, state expansion. Pirates in the new world had to eek out a living in defiance of the Spanish state and these outposts and safe harbors became colonies, the most famous off these pirates was Henry Morgan who became governor of Jamaica. This would have been a fine chapter in a book about legitimacy and state building in the Caribbean but as of now, it feels like a side note that had gotten out of hand. As our the contemporary examples of the Somali pirates of which one can easily find more detailed and insightful information elsewhere.
Finally we get to the main event; smuggling. Is this a book about smuggling? Yes but a poor one. This should have been a book on the Caribbean; how the policies towards smuggling of sugar, slaves, luxuries, flour…. affected the legitimacy of the colonial government in the eyes of the local population, a clash between an existing and restrictive motherland mercantilist legal system and the burgeoning yet illegal pluralistic Caribbean legal system. It could have better worked out the conflict between fair traders, who acted according to rules of society and free traders who ignored those rules; how the same person could both be a smuggler and one advocating stricter enforcement of trade restrictions when it suited them. There is a lot here but it is underdeveloped to an extent that is painful. It should not have been a book that claims to talk about smuggling as a societal force in the whole world and neither does it give any reader a nuanced view on the impact of smuggling today. In stead one is left with a mediocre attempt at ideology writing that squanders source potential and just leaves a reader confused and somewhat frustrated.
On one point he is sorely mistaken though there have been smugglers featured in big budget movies; Han Solo is a smuggler in star wars and there is a British movie off a ship loaded with whiskey that gets looted by local Scottish islanders after it is stranded on their beach. It has all the elements discussed in the book. The local welfare of the people unmatched by the legal trade system, a smuggling opportunity fully embraced by the local population, an uptight local official who is devoted to the law , another official looking the other way and even a fair trader who is non to pleased with state of affairs. I can recommend original and remake over this book.
Whiskey Galore 1949 / whiskey galore 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBp2k...
contraband and corruption in world history.
This book was confusing.
That was my general vibe after finishing it; I was genuinely lost. Look at that title, that should give you exactly what this book is all about and yes all those things are in the book, but so is an out of place commentary on the vice presidents of the 2008 american election and their opinion on tax payment. See I don’t mind that an author is trying to wiggle in contemporary elements to make a point but look back at that title, do you see income taxes in there? Because that was what he was commenting on, their opinion on income taxes….. in the conclusion.
I am going to do something a little different with this review because I am going to deconstruct the title and via that the book but I will be going backwards because that way I can make my point more clearly, so here goes.
World history; well it’s not. I would say that roughly 85% of all examples in the book are situated in late 17 until early 19th Caribbean, some 9% is dedicated to examples of the early 19th centuries east india company shennenigans with opium in China, some 5% or so is for contemporary america and then the rest is few side notes on French controlled Vietnam. Needless to say but I am going to anyway; this is not exactly world history.
I can’t help but wonder why he did not stick to the Caribbean, given the amount of detail he gives and his knowledge of the sparse source material that gives insight in the elusive trade, this would have been more then fine for a book. His dedication to this region is more then apparent in one chapter where he laments on how many times he had to explain he does not study piracy, one can feel the frustration even as he accepts that nobody would want to see a movie called “smugglers of the Caribbean.” The other stuff feels so tacked on, we barely get a chance to get into these other contexts especially the Vietnam examples feel so out of place, is it to show an evolution of how French government officials acted differently as compared to Haiti(San dominique)? If so it is done poorly.
Corruption; throughout the book Karras constantly hammers in that state officials in the Caribbean tasked with dealing with smuggling had to balance two things; their obligation to the far away European state and secondly local people with whom they had to deal with every day and who happened to like the stuff smugglers brought in. I like this way of looking at governing in the Caribbean, this dissonance between the realities on the ground and european metropole expectations. Corruption in this context is a balancing act, it becomes pragmatism and non corruption in this context is a slavish devotion to the law that harms the welfare of all those who are truly affected by enforcing smuggling bans. This made me wonder, was this an elaborate comment on what caused the American Revolution? After all as the commonly known story goes a bunch of pissed of Boston roughians decided they hated the legal tea, sugar and other stuff that was overpriced and often spoiled on the way to the America’s, so they tossed into the water in a spur of the moment.
Karras give several somewhat similar scenario’s in the Caribbean setting with locals whose stuff got confiscated resorted to violence and public disturbance. This brings up several issues though that I will get into a bit later but for now I would like to point out that the East India company sections had a different approach. Here it was the case of a company that was defacto the British state and the Chinese imperial system whose definitions of corruption differed radically; almost guaranteeing as it seems that a conflict like the opium wars was bound to break out. Both of these interpretations of corruption are interesting but could have been fleshed out more.
Contraband; here the book gets frustrating on top of confusing. Flour. By the gods how many times does he not give us the same dilemma over and over again. People in the Caribbean wanted to make bread thus needed flour yet the only legal flour had to come from europe thus it spoiled and was expansive so quite a few traders decided f*ck it and went to get some from north America or cuba. I get it, it is a good example for this context and time, it captures the conflicting interests and how the mercantilist system almost relied on smuggling to maintain itself, to fill in the gaps as it were. But what it is not, is a good foundation to envision a whole re imagining of the concepts of free traders and fair trade, or a comment on how smuggling is so harmless and perhaps even righteous as it brings more wealth to all individuals involved. No I am mistaken; in the conclusion, via that comment on Sarah Palin and Joe Biden he does make a u-turn. By insisting we should pay taxes to the state, that depriving the state of funds hurts the whole of society.
The problem here is a blight and I use that word carefully, a blight on our ecosystem. The smuggling of live animals and animal parts has devastated whole ecosystems and has brought animals such as the Pangolin, the slow lories, tigers countless birds to near extinction. Is this the legitimate correcting of the market failure via illegal smuggling? No what we do get of examples of contemporary smuggling, is undeclared diamonds in US Airports, we don’t get into the drug trade nor is human trafficking that well integrated in the book. As a reader one is left with this idea that smuggling’s only harm is on some abstract level; it is less money for the state and thus less money available for basic services. This is a horrible fallacy to leave readers with.
The word that is not in the title; piracy as mentioned before Karras does not like it when people assume his focus is on piracy, so much so that he dedicates a whole chapter to it. For a person who repeatedly claims not to focus on piracy, he does add quite a bit on exactly that. Piracy is described as something akin to violent theft but it is also equated with state building or better yet, state expansion. Pirates in the new world had to eek out a living in defiance of the Spanish state and these outposts and safe harbors became colonies, the most famous off these pirates was Henry Morgan who became governor of Jamaica. This would have been a fine chapter in a book about legitimacy and state building in the Caribbean but as of now, it feels like a side note that had gotten out of hand. As our the contemporary examples of the Somali pirates of which one can easily find more detailed and insightful information elsewhere.
Finally we get to the main event; smuggling. Is this a book about smuggling? Yes but a poor one. This should have been a book on the Caribbean; how the policies towards smuggling of sugar, slaves, luxuries, flour…. affected the legitimacy of the colonial government in the eyes of the local population, a clash between an existing and restrictive motherland mercantilist legal system and the burgeoning yet illegal pluralistic Caribbean legal system. It could have better worked out the conflict between fair traders, who acted according to rules of society and free traders who ignored those rules; how the same person could both be a smuggler and one advocating stricter enforcement of trade restrictions when it suited them. There is a lot here but it is underdeveloped to an extent that is painful. It should not have been a book that claims to talk about smuggling as a societal force in the whole world and neither does it give any reader a nuanced view on the impact of smuggling today. In stead one is left with a mediocre attempt at ideology writing that squanders source potential and just leaves a reader confused and somewhat frustrated.
On one point he is sorely mistaken though there have been smugglers featured in big budget movies; Han Solo is a smuggler in star wars and there is a British movie off a ship loaded with whiskey that gets looted by local Scottish islanders after it is stranded on their beach. It has all the elements discussed in the book. The local welfare of the people unmatched by the legal trade system, a smuggling opportunity fully embraced by the local population, an uptight local official who is devoted to the law , another official looking the other way and even a fair trader who is non to pleased with state of affairs. I can recommend original and remake over this book.
Whiskey Galore 1949 / whiskey galore 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBp2k...
March 9, 2021
The citation is very comprehensive. Although the discussion on smuggling is not new, it is worthy of my reading time. Although the angle is not very economical and not very historical, the storytelling needs to be improved, and it feels a bit miscellaneous. But in view of the fact that there are few reference materials on smuggling, this book is already very good. After reading it, I feel that smuggling acts as a lubricant for social life, but from different professional perspectives, there are different opinions on how much lubricant is put on and whether it is harmful. I feel that this book provides an insight into smuggling, but it is also limited to this.
January 13, 2015
A phenomenally boring treatment of an interesting history. Provides necessary, revelatory, and fascinating analyses of historical smuggling in the driest manner possible. A great but dull read.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews