4 ms·

I’m just wondering... in which governing scheme is corruption not the default? I can’t think of any in use today by a country or large organization where it’s n

I’m just wondering... in which governing scheme is corruption not the default? I can’t think of any in use today by a country or large organization where it’s not there in one way or another. The only solution, I think, is to have an extremely low tolerance for corruption (and incompetence because that’s often what corruption is disguised as) such that anybody in power would be too scared to do corrupt shit because they know they’ll get put in to jail and get the hole bill put into their name, but such a thing wouldn’t work because none of the types of people that want to be in power would ever let something like that take place because, well, they want to stay in power.

gravy 9y ago
The answer is not in policing corruption, since everyone is subject to corruption (no population is free of bad apples), but in preventing corruption. If there is not much power to be had by those seeking election, then the people "in power" are not worth influencing. Note: not anarchy and not anti-regulation; just a little slightly anti-lots of government power. EDIT: But this is the right idea.
nickpp 9y ago
A government is a monopoly by definition. And in a monopoly, competence is useless - being replaced by corruption (just a different skill). But the more areas the government is involved, the more corruption it spreads. And in socialism the government does it all: production, jobs, education, health care, etc.