AHC: Reduce Corruption in Europe

Must define "corruption" first. There are no absolutes when it comes to corruption, only what society and the people who live in that society agree is acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

For example many would say that corporations "being people" is corruption and allowing large multi-national corporations to donate vast sums of money to politicians is corruption, because these companies wield disproportionate influence compared to one person. Others would say you can boycott a company if it goes political, and companies have long had the rights of people in bankruptcy court and the right to own assets

Everyone would agree that handing money or favors to a politician for benefit is corruption. If that is the case, then many so-called non-corrupt countries have institutionalized corruption by allowing politicians to receive donations directly or indirectly from corporations and unions. Just because it's legal doesn't mean it isn't immoral or corrupt.

If influence by money is the standard of corruption, the only way to create an absolute standard of corruption would be to remove money from the equation all together. Make donations during campaign and in office illegal, make use of personal funds to campaign illegal (that is, to pay for political campaigns with public money) and make third-party endorsement of specific politicians or parties rather than policies illegal. Then the question is who gets to go on the ballot, which would be a threshold of votes in the previous election (five percent?) and random draw or draw based on some life accomplishment other than financial success. Impractical and unacceptable for many (few want to pay more taxes to pay for politicians political campaigns). But less corrupt countries take some or all of these steps to some degree (for example John McCain used public financing, donations or graft is illegal in countries most people declare non-corrupt etc.)

** Edit: Just realized that some would consider handing money for favors to a politician to not be corruption, but the cost of doing business. This need not be malicious for example in a country where government has broken down and warlords control it, a benign or altruistic government official may need money to bribe to keep a bullet out of his brain.
 
He's good at logic, you zap to the extreme and corruption is really subjective. In all seriousness, it's a Corruption Perception Index. What is seen as a hideous abuse of power in one country is probably just how you speed things along in other countries. In most of the West, politicians taking bribes is seen as abhorrent, but in other countries it's a way of getting through the red tape. Of course, that's changing as there is a mass anti-bribery movement in India, but the developing world has a long way to go.

My agreement was with the point that countries like Italy aren't more corrupt purely as a function of being "too socialist", with Scandinavian countries being a powerful counterexample. That point stands irrespective of any index (and, to be completely honest, I haven't even looked at the CPI).

By the way, how are your friends, the Manajerks?
 
Top