3 ms·

I would say I find government corruption to be more concerning than government incompetence. For the same reason that I would find a crime committed with intent

I would say I find government corruption to be more concerning than government incompetence. For the same reason that I would find a crime committed with intent to be more concerning than a crime committed with negligence. Neither are unconcerning though.

ComputerGuru 4y ago
Corruption is a very serious allegation and typically involves some form of quid-pro-quo (direct or indirect, tangible or non-tangible). There are contexts it likely applies, such as lobbyists and PACs getting favorable laws passed, wealthy donors getting ambassadorships, etc, but I can’t see how it applies in this case. Are you suggesting that everyone involved from attorney generals to congressmen, senators, federal judges, and Supreme Court justices (not a one of which - including the two Trump appointees - formally registered their disagreement with the unanimous decisions/reviews or lack thereof) were, somehow, making decisions and getting something out of deciding/acting contrary to how they would have otherwise?
- throwaway-blaze 4y ago
  Look up Lois Lerner and all of the "oops we deleted those hard drives you subpoenaed from the IRS" during the Obama Administration. While some corruption involves a quid pro quo, the most damaging kind of corruption in our government today is ideological corruption. When an unelected person has an opinion (which they're certainly entitled to have in their private life) and uses their government position to put their thumb on the scale of how people / organizations are treated to match their ideological beliefs, that's a different kind of corruption.
- AmericanChopper 4y ago
  Knowingly and illegally violating somebody’s rights in order to enact some alternative agenda is very obviously corruption, and anybody who knowingly participated in it knowingly participated in corruption. Bribes and paying for influence aren’t the only form of corruption. Any abuse of power is corrupt.

ComputerGuru 4y ago

Corruption is a very serious allegation and typically involves some form of quid-pro-quo (direct or indirect, tangible or non-tangible). There are contexts it likely applies, such as lobbyists and PACs getting favorable laws passed, wealthy donors getting ambassadorships, etc, but I can’t see how it applies in this case. Are you suggesting that everyone involved from attorney generals to congressmen, senators, federal judges, and Supreme Court justices (not a one of which - including the two Trump appointees - formally registered their disagreement with the unanimous decisions/reviews or lack thereof) were, somehow, making decisions and getting something out of deciding/acting contrary to how they would have otherwise?

throwaway-blaze 4y ago
Look up Lois Lerner and all of the "oops we deleted those hard drives you subpoenaed from the IRS" during the Obama Administration. While some corruption involves a quid pro quo, the most damaging kind of corruption in our government today is ideological corruption. When an unelected person has an opinion (which they're certainly entitled to have in their private life) and uses their government position to put their thumb on the scale of how people / organizations are treated to match their ideological beliefs, that's a different kind of corruption.
AmericanChopper 4y ago
Knowingly and illegally violating somebody’s rights in order to enact some alternative agenda is very obviously corruption, and anybody who knowingly participated in it knowingly participated in corruption. Bribes and paying for influence aren’t the only form of corruption. Any abuse of power is corrupt.