3 ms·

I have seen changes of power of governments after 16 years. The result is always that corruption is discovered. After 16 years politicians have had time to get

by kartan 9y ago

I have seen changes of power of governments after 16 years. The result is always that corruption is discovered. After 16 years politicians have had time to get used to power and to put friendly people as public service officers. When power shifts corruption surfaces. The longer the term, the more corruption is found. Some parties are worse than others, but all are worst at the end of a decade that when they began. It is my experience, and it seems logical. But I don't know if there is studies about this effect.

natch 9y ago
You are saying that the corruption is established during the rule (before the change of power) but is more likely to be uncovered upon the change of power, correct? As opposed to the corruption coming about because of the change of power, which is how I'm afraid some people could read your comment if they skim quickly. Assuming that's what you mean, yes it makes a lot of sense. To put it another way, stability of power tends to allow corruption to remain hidden. So all the people who are reaping the benefits of corruption will love the idea of Xi staying in power.
- kartan 9y ago
  > You are saying that the corruption is established during the rule (before the change of power) but is more likely to be uncovered upon the change of power, correct? Yes. In the corruption cases the involved party is the exiting one. As it loses power it can't keep the grip on the public officials and justice is free to work again. City councils are an extreme example, as they can hold power for decades. > As opposed to the corruption coming about because of the change of power, which is how I'm afraid some people could read your comment if they skim quickly. You are right. It's just that I found the concept so implausible that I didn't though about that misread. Thank you for the clarification.
Mikeb85 9y ago
The skeptic in me would say that the new rulers try to discredit their predecessors with allegations of corruption. Not saying you're wrong, but you can't assume the 'challengers' to the establishment always have altruistic motives. Lots of revolutions go completely sideways...
- kartan 9y ago
  > The skeptic in me would say that the new rulers try to discredit their predecessors with allegations of corruption. The public servants are the ones that do this, not the new politicians. These actions involve police, judges, etc. The allegations of corruption are there for every political campaign. One party will try to discredit the other one to lower their amount of votes. It makes little sense for politicians to bring corruption cases out of a political campaign. And sadly enough corruption is usually not one of the top topics of political campaigns as all parties have some corruption cases and most voters react the most to other more divisive - and probably irrelevant - issues.
noetic_techy 9y ago
So do you think the scandals that always get exposed here in the US are a normal part of that cycle then? The tree of liberty refreshing.

by kartan 9y ago

natch 9y ago

You are saying that the corruption is established during the rule (before the change of power) but is more likely to be uncovered upon the change of power, correct? As opposed to the corruption coming about because of the change of power, which is how I'm afraid some people could read your comment if they skim quickly. Assuming that's what you mean, yes it makes a lot of sense. To put it another way, stability of power tends to allow corruption to remain hidden. So all the people who are reaping the benefits of corruption will love the idea of Xi staying in power.

kartan 9y ago
> You are saying that the corruption is established during the rule (before the change of power) but is more likely to be uncovered upon the change of power, correct? Yes. In the corruption cases the involved party is the exiting one. As it loses power it can't keep the grip on the public officials and justice is free to work again. City councils are an extreme example, as they can hold power for decades. > As opposed to the corruption coming about because of the change of power, which is how I'm afraid some people could read your comment if they skim quickly. You are right. It's just that I found the concept so implausible that I didn't though about that misread. Thank you for the clarification.

Mikeb85 9y ago

The skeptic in me would say that the new rulers try to discredit their predecessors with allegations of corruption. Not saying you're wrong, but you can't assume the 'challengers' to the establishment always have altruistic motives. Lots of revolutions go completely sideways...

kartan 9y ago
> The skeptic in me would say that the new rulers try to discredit their predecessors with allegations of corruption. The public servants are the ones that do this, not the new politicians. These actions involve police, judges, etc. The allegations of corruption are there for every political campaign. One party will try to discredit the other one to lower their amount of votes. It makes little sense for politicians to bring corruption cases out of a political campaign. And sadly enough corruption is usually not one of the top topics of political campaigns as all parties have some corruption cases and most voters react the most to other more divisive - and probably irrelevant - issues.

noetic_techy 9y ago

So do you think the scandals that always get exposed here in the US are a normal part of that cycle then? The tree of liberty refreshing.