I think it's more because the national guard is only necessary to suppress large-scale riots, and there aren't enough executives all in the same place to make even a small-scale riot. Executives who are charged with crimes can be individually arrested.

But all of that is beside the point, because I'm comparing union leaders and organizers with executives.

> The only change in this in the US was the brief history after WW2 where FDR and Truman wielded outsize political power and the country saw the ills of the gilded age because of the enormous impact felt by the average person during the great depression.

This completely misses the more relevant fact that the US represented 50% of the global economy at the time (due to every other industrialized nation being absolutely devastated by the war) and reinvested much of their remaining wealth into rebuilding both their allies and their former adversaries, which led to an unsustainable period of "catch-up" economic growth that faded just as soon as the Germans and Japanese started doing a better job at manufacturing than the US did.

> To answer your question directly there are most definitely executives tied to organized crime.

Citation needed.