8 ms·

Except that those individualistic countries in the west have some of the lowest rates of corruption and lowest perceptions of corruption in the world. The suppo

Except that those individualistic countries in the west have some of the lowest rates of corruption and lowest perceptions of corruption in the world. The supposedly less individualistic countries of the east lag behind, including China. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index The Asian countries that do match the west for low levels of corruption (Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore) largely have a very obvious trait in common - wealth. The least corrupt countries are all among the world's wealthiest, and the most corrupt all among its poorest - regardless of how "individualistic" the country is. The poorer a country is the more necessary are the advantages to be gained by gaming the system. The weaker a country's institutions the easier it is to get away with corruption - hence the worst offenders being failed states like Syria and Lybia. It's honestly fairly simple even without considering culture. If anything a more collective society is more susceptible to corruption (and I say this as proponent of big government). The reason China hands out death sentences for corruption is that an individual at the top of the governmental organisations in China can do an enormous amount of damage since the government directly controls the apparatus of the economy and has a huge stake in every major company. No governmental official in the west has as much control over the societal purse as a high ranking official of the CCP.

pphysch 4y ago
Those Western "Corruption" ratings are deeply unserious. Washington is totally, systemically corrupt. Lobbying, insider trading, and the revolving door are all corrupt practices that practically define the Beltway. Try winning even a local government seat without being buddy-buddy with local "employers", media, and other unofficial power brokers. That's not democracy.
- DoughnutHole 4y ago
  The fact that your prime examples of corruption in the west is Washington corruption and corruption in local government indicates you don't have a grasp of what truly endemic corruption is like in developing countries. - Do you have to personally slip a DMV official several times the actual required fee whenever you get your license renewed to get them to even look at the application? - Do you have to directly bribe police officers to get them to respond to your complaint? If you were pulled over for a traffic offence would your assumed way out of it be to personally slip something to the police officer? - Do truckers have to routinely bribe state officials when crossing state lines? - Do local officials routinely illegally procure land via the government purse for their own personal use? - Are government officials ever bribed to declare someone dead to allow someone to erroneously claim the totally-not-dead person's property? These are all pretty much regular occurrences in India - a country that is basically middling in terms of corruption on a global scale. And don't worry, they have all of the high level local and national legislative corruption that the US has as well, with the bonus of a civil service and judiciary that are corrupt from the top down to their roots. Outside the west corruption isn't just government officials making bad choices to satisfy their doners and special interests (as bad and dysfunctional as that is). In most developing countries it's a fact of day-to-day life - if you are on the lower rungs of the social ladder you have to personally engage in corruption in order to survive. Getting a home, a business licence, governmental documentation etc etc pretty much always come down to either who you know or who you bribe. And if you're higher up you might be lucky enough to benefit from it.
  - pphysch 4y ago
    It's an interesting phenomenon: the dwindling middle class in the West frowns upon corruption even as it is the lifeblood of the ruling classes. Who do I gotta donate to? Which ZIP code do I gotta live in? Which special "membership plan"/recurring bribe do I have to pay to get access to decent social services? America in particular has institutionalized corruption so that it no longer resembles the bespoke form practiced in developing countries. Media portrayals plays a big role in this. After all, what is corruption but allowing market forces to rule over human rights, justice, and essential public services?
    - twblalock 4y ago
      Living in a certain zip code is not corruption, and Americans don't need to bribe social services, or the police, to get on with their daily lives without being molested. There are many countries where that is not the case.
      - short_sells_poo 4y ago
        I saw it described as: The West is corrupt, but in a different way. Politician can be bought for certain projects, people who control the flow of money can be encouraged to let it flow more one way than the other, etc. But trying to bribe a policeman can land you in serious trouble. It's better to pay a $50 fine than try to bribe them with $30 off the books. In other words, in Western society, middle-class corruption is perhaps not really worth it (on average). The stakes have to be much higher than that. Developing countries have more widespread corruption, in that it is part of everyday life. If you want your passport renewed, you have to bribe the clerk, otherwise it will take 1 year. If a policeman stops you, they may well be looking for a bribe and you can make things go much more smoothly by acquiescing. I'd argue that low-level corruption is more immediately annoying to everyday life, but it is the high level corruption that is the real pervasive worldwide issue. In the same way that pickpockets are annoying, but a single corrupt government can plunder the public finances and run the country into ruin.
  - dasil003 4y ago
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  It's easy, just redefine terms so that the same activities can be legally/socially classifiable as lobbying rather than corruption and the problem is solved - Voilà, no corruption!
  - themitigating 4y ago
    Yes, you're right and if you'd like to change that vote for the people that will make it illegal
    - DangitBobby 4y ago
      Setting aside the fact for a second that our system requires us to vote strategically instead of based on our actual preferences, I'm pretty sure there's no one I can vote for that is seriously championing making it illegal. But even if they were, there is so much corruption and money on the side of keeping it legal, I can't imagine they'd be able to get it done in the face of the enormous opposition. Telling people to vote is a bit of a copout in the face of systematic corruption.
      - themitigating 4y ago
        "Setting aside the fact for a second that our system requires us to vote strategically instead of based on our actual preferences" You can band together to make lobbying illegal. What I feel like your saying is that you don't like that you have to vote for someone whose views don't always match yours but that's how it will always be. If I'm not understanding you correctly please let me know. "But even if they were, there is so much corruption and money on the side of keeping it legal" Then vote to make it illegal. What is the alternative? A monarchy in which the same corruption could occur? A revolution which causes massive suffering for a long period of time and then you form a new government that is a democracy which faces the same issues?
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      who are they? id even be willing to share my district info if that would help.
- themitigating 4y ago
  Winning requires money which is considered free speech.
somenameforme 4y ago
It's a perceptions index, carried out by a Western organization, polling almost exclusively other Western organizations, that deemed Western nations are just awesome. I am not suggesting that e.g. China is not corrupt (nor that Denmark is not awesome), but I am suggesting that it's as objective as poll of Eastern organizations on the same question - which is to say, not at all. The unfortunate thing is that corruption is in many cases all but impossible to prove or quantify. And in some cases there is a mixture of corruption and genuine interest. As one example a war that furthers national interests, but also ensures rich rewards for companies of which you will receive returns from (indirect or otherwise) ends up in a balancing act of trying to measure immeasurables - perceived self interest vs perceived national interested.
andrepd 4y ago
> The Asian countries that do match the west for low levels of corruption (Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore) largely have a very obvious trait in common - wealth. Okay, then an honest comparison would be wealthy "individualist" countries vs wealthy "collectivist" countries (not that that distinction is quite meaningful, but still). Poor countries have higher corruption that rich countries, that much is obvious and not very interesting.

pphysch 4y ago

Those Western "Corruption" ratings are deeply unserious. Washington is totally, systemically corrupt. Lobbying, insider trading, and the revolving door are all corrupt practices that practically define the Beltway. Try winning even a local government seat without being buddy-buddy with local "employers", media, and other unofficial power brokers. That's not democracy.

DoughnutHole 4y ago
The fact that your prime examples of corruption in the west is Washington corruption and corruption in local government indicates you don't have a grasp of what truly endemic corruption is like in developing countries. - Do you have to personally slip a DMV official several times the actual required fee whenever you get your license renewed to get them to even look at the application? - Do you have to directly bribe police officers to get them to respond to your complaint? If you were pulled over for a traffic offence would your assumed way out of it be to personally slip something to the police officer? - Do truckers have to routinely bribe state officials when crossing state lines? - Do local officials routinely illegally procure land via the government purse for their own personal use? - Are government officials ever bribed to declare someone dead to allow someone to erroneously claim the totally-not-dead person's property? These are all pretty much regular occurrences in India - a country that is basically middling in terms of corruption on a global scale. And don't worry, they have all of the high level local and national legislative corruption that the US has as well, with the bonus of a civil service and judiciary that are corrupt from the top down to their roots. Outside the west corruption isn't just government officials making bad choices to satisfy their doners and special interests (as bad and dysfunctional as that is). In most developing countries it's a fact of day-to-day life - if you are on the lower rungs of the social ladder you have to personally engage in corruption in order to survive. Getting a home, a business licence, governmental documentation etc etc pretty much always come down to either who you know or who you bribe. And if you're higher up you might be lucky enough to benefit from it.
- pphysch 4y ago
  It's an interesting phenomenon: the dwindling middle class in the West frowns upon corruption even as it is the lifeblood of the ruling classes. Who do I gotta donate to? Which ZIP code do I gotta live in? Which special "membership plan"/recurring bribe do I have to pay to get access to decent social services? America in particular has institutionalized corruption so that it no longer resembles the bespoke form practiced in developing countries. Media portrayals plays a big role in this. After all, what is corruption but allowing market forces to rule over human rights, justice, and essential public services?
  - twblalock 4y ago
    Living in a certain zip code is not corruption, and Americans don't need to bribe social services, or the police, to get on with their daily lives without being molested. There are many countries where that is not the case.
    - short_sells_poo 4y ago
      I saw it described as: The West is corrupt, but in a different way. Politician can be bought for certain projects, people who control the flow of money can be encouraged to let it flow more one way than the other, etc. But trying to bribe a policeman can land you in serious trouble. It's better to pay a $50 fine than try to bribe them with $30 off the books. In other words, in Western society, middle-class corruption is perhaps not really worth it (on average). The stakes have to be much higher than that. Developing countries have more widespread corruption, in that it is part of everyday life. If you want your passport renewed, you have to bribe the clerk, otherwise it will take 1 year. If a policeman stops you, they may well be looking for a bribe and you can make things go much more smoothly by acquiescing. I'd argue that low-level corruption is more immediately annoying to everyday life, but it is the high level corruption that is the real pervasive worldwide issue. In the same way that pickpockets are annoying, but a single corrupt government can plunder the public finances and run the country into ruin.
- dasil003 4y ago
kelseyfrog 4y ago
It's easy, just redefine terms so that the same activities can be legally/socially classifiable as lobbying rather than corruption and the problem is solved - Voilà, no corruption!
- themitigating 4y ago
  Yes, you're right and if you'd like to change that vote for the people that will make it illegal
  - DangitBobby 4y ago
    Setting aside the fact for a second that our system requires us to vote strategically instead of based on our actual preferences, I'm pretty sure there's no one I can vote for that is seriously championing making it illegal. But even if they were, there is so much corruption and money on the side of keeping it legal, I can't imagine they'd be able to get it done in the face of the enormous opposition. Telling people to vote is a bit of a copout in the face of systematic corruption.
    - themitigating 4y ago
      "Setting aside the fact for a second that our system requires us to vote strategically instead of based on our actual preferences" You can band together to make lobbying illegal. What I feel like your saying is that you don't like that you have to vote for someone whose views don't always match yours but that's how it will always be. If I'm not understanding you correctly please let me know. "But even if they were, there is so much corruption and money on the side of keeping it legal" Then vote to make it illegal. What is the alternative? A monarchy in which the same corruption could occur? A revolution which causes massive suffering for a long period of time and then you form a new government that is a democracy which faces the same issues?
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    who are they? id even be willing to share my district info if that would help.
themitigating 4y ago
Winning requires money which is considered free speech.

somenameforme 4y ago

It's a perceptions index, carried out by a Western organization, polling almost exclusively other Western organizations, that deemed Western nations are just awesome. I am not suggesting that e.g. China is not corrupt (nor that Denmark is not awesome), but I am suggesting that it's as objective as poll of Eastern organizations on the same question - which is to say, not at all. The unfortunate thing is that corruption is in many cases all but impossible to prove or quantify. And in some cases there is a mixture of corruption and genuine interest. As one example a war that furthers national interests, but also ensures rich rewards for companies of which you will receive returns from (indirect or otherwise) ends up in a balancing act of trying to measure immeasurables - perceived self interest vs perceived national interested.

andrepd 4y ago

> The Asian countries that do match the west for low levels of corruption (Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore) largely have a very obvious trait in common - wealth. Okay, then an honest comparison would be wealthy "individualist" countries vs wealthy "collectivist" countries (not that that distinction is quite meaningful, but still). Poor countries have higher corruption that rich countries, that much is obvious and not very interesting.