Are all governments corrupt?

[Moxie]

DH and I were talking about the terrible situation in Bangladesh (on the verge of civil war, riots in the street daily, government hiding bodies in the building collapse, visas for reporters are being denied) and I wondered what kind of government it would take to start to turn the country around. DH said that it wouldn't matter, that all governments are corrupt to some degree. Do you agree?

[Heather in Neverland]

Yep. Malaysia is quite corrupt. We just had our big election here last week. The corruption surrounding it was startling.

 

Bribery is common and just how things are here. You can even buy your way out of jail time if you have the money.

[Moxie]

Yep. Malaysia is quite corrupt. We just had our big election here last week. The corruption surrounding it was startling.

 

Bribery is common and just how things are here. You can even buy your way out of jail time if you have the money.

 

 

 

Same in Bangladesh. My sister laughs at the news reports that the building that collapsed was illegally built because they all are or you bribed the right person and got your permit.

 

When corrupt and bribery is so accepted, can anything ever change?? It seems hopeless.

[LisaKinVA]

I agree...power is a corrupting force. I will also cop to feeling like there is a lot of blackmail in many governments (ours included). I suppose that's one reason I'm so in favor of term limits for Congress and the Senate...it seems like the only way to reduce the impact of that corruption (not that it wouldn't still continue...). It's just amazing how all of these Congressmen/Senators get elected (referring to our country), as essentially middle class folk, and then wind up amassing millions of dollars (I suspect, what would be termed "insider trading," voting on legislation that awards contracts to companies...grants to companies, etc. that if these people worked on Wall Street, would have them thrown in jail).

[Parrothead]

Sadly, I believe most every government has some form of corruption.

[happyhomemaker]

There is no profession that can claim 100% of its members are scrupulous. Government officials are no exception.

[Aslana]

Actually, I have another way of looking at it.

 

It's not the Government that is corrupt, but the politicians elected to run the government.

 

I see these as two entirely different things. We have a government in place whose very principle is run by our Constitution (and Bill of Rights, Articles, etc...). But we need people to understand those things written so long ago--to interpret how those things would apply to today's people and still keep those interpretations within the letter of the law written.

 

So it isn't the Government that is corrupt, but the people who are placed there to understand those things written so long ago--the politicians. Agendas and belief systems (religious or otherwise) rule how they interpret what was written.

 

I see it as big G and little g. Big G is the Constitution, Declaration, Articles, Bill of Rights, etc.... Little g are the people charged with interpretation and overseeing of the Big G. The Little g is corrupting and even bastardizing the Big G. Which brings us to everyone using the two terms mutually. I do not think they are mutual.

 

Unfortunately, though, we can't get rid of the Little g.

[staceyobu]

Yes, because all men are corrupt. Isn't that part of the reason our government was established with checks and balances? To try to have checks in place knowing it would be corrupt?

[Aslana]

Yes, because all men are corrupt. Isn't that part of the reason our government was established with checks and balances? To try to have checks in place knowing it would be corrupt?

 

To prevent Tyranny of the Majority, yes. However, this isn't working any more the way it should be. The prevention for the tyranny has become tyrannical in nature. I don't think that was something the Founding Fathers thought of.

[Snow]

Yes, I agree there will always be some level of corruption. But I adamantly disagree with your husband that it doesn't matter what type of government they should have. The type and level of corruption can make all the difference in the world to the people of that country.

[Spy Car]

But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?

 

If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.

 

In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

 

This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other -- that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights.

 

These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State.

 

~Publius (James Madison) from Federalist #51

[Mergath]

I think you're always going to have corrupt people within a government, but I also think it's quite possible for a government to do good overall for its nation's people.

[Orthodox6]

Are all governments corrupt?

 

Yes.

[Happy]

One of the reasons we need a free press is to constantly expose corruption. Just one more check to add to the balance.

[catz]

Are all governments corrupt to some degree? Yes

 

Are some forms of government better than others? Yes

 

Is freedom of press and information a good thing for citizens? Yes

[stripe]

Transparency International publishes a corruption index.

http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2012/results/

The highest score was 90. Out of 100.

 

I think it's unfair to lump anything less than 100% in the same hopelessy corrupt category. The Nordic countries all did very well. Are they totally uncorrupt? No. Sadly. But the general experience of being in an uncorrupt, or only somewhat corrupt, country is utterly different from being in one riddled with corruption.

 

Ask yourself, do you expect to pay a bribe to have a crime investigated? Get a driver's license? Get a passport? Get a library card?

[Aslana]

 

That's something I want to read up on. I recall from past study that the founders wanted a stalemate, and meaningful debate until a clear concensus was reached on an issue.

 

 

In our younger years, this country could have handled a meaningful debate and stalemate until consensus was reached. In today's world? I don't think that could ever happen. Too many special interest groups (on all sides), too many groups who look out for the interests of only a select few, too many groups who look out only for their interests, too many special interests groups sticking their nose into it.

 

We've got groups that say A should be B and groups that disagree. Groups that say B shouldn't be A but AB and groups that disagree. Groups that say A is morally wrong and B groups that say A is not. Back and forth back and forth.. it's a political tug of war.

[TheApprentice]

Yep. Sadly, that power is just to enticing. Goes to their heads.