S P Huntington- Modernization & Corruption

2000

Recognition for corruption as one of the main obstacles in the way of economic development is a rather recent development in the discipline of Development Economics. Due to wide-spread corruption only a small portion of development money reaches to the public. The reasons behind the corruption culture are numerous such as rejection of moral and spiritual values, greed and lust of money, rising election expenses, no belief in accountability to God or responsibility to the masses. With these states of character, the new policy of liberalization, privatization and globalization provided a golden opportunity to money maximizing culture. The remedy lies in inner purification and fear of God the all-knowing and all-seeing, and propagation of ethical and moral values. The strengthening of democracy and freedom of judiciary, right to information, and freedom of press should also be ensured to dislodge the corrupt politicians and public officials. A country caught in corruption and crimes is like a sick person. If timely and effective measures are not taken, it may result in collapse and disintegration of the whole system.

This study about Corruption is not based on a specific juridical or economic approach. Corruption can also be considered as a moral and philosophical issue. The emphasise here is given to a political and philosophical approach with a focus on the last and the most important evolutions of Western Societies: the decline of the State and the decline of values. Writers and scholars, whom I used as references for this paper, have been studying each of these evolutions for the last 20 years in the West. Globalization is an important fact related to these problems. But how and why? Sociologists and philosophers have been focusing on these issues to study the social and political crisis. To understand what corruption is, we will need to understand the function and nature of the structural crisis of Western societies at the level of Institutions and values. But, how would corruption be related to these facts? These are the questions developed in this paper. 1-What is Corruption? Theoretically, corruption is functioning as an anti-system. The first point is to understand that all systems function following an order. In fact, system means order. In the context of this study, the concept of order is used as organization. But, without an anti-order, the order does not make real sense. What gives sense to a system is the anti-system. Consequently, corruption is an anti-system giving sense to the system itself, as a part of it, as a part of its reality. As all orders have inevitably an anti-order, so all political systems contain a certain potential possibility for corruption! However, this approach which approves corruption as a part of the system, observes it as an anti-democratic reality, which should be studied carefully. So the question is: What is corruption? How and why does it emerge in a system which seems willing to be based on freedom, pluralism and democracy. The first observation should focus on the relation between the individual and the State. Corruption is an attitude, and it is generally related to the disobedience of individuals to the law, and law is most often created and supported by the State. Excessive individual freedom and the blind points in legislative structure may create an attitude of disregard for the law. But in civilized societies, this equation of the relation of individual and State is highly complicated. Therefore, blundering the law does not necessarily create corruption. The history of Western-modern civilization shows that social evolution is fundamentally conditioned by freedom as an absolute necessity for individual initiative and creativity.

2015

Research on corruption and anti-corruption measures has been developing rapidly the last years. Often the debate has focused on the endemic, in some forms institutionalized nature of corruption in post-communist countries and its distortion of democratic development and the functioning of the rule of law. However, in order to combat corruption or at leas to curb the most glaring imperfections it is necessary to estimate the pervasiveness, the penetration of the state and the root causes. The typology used in this paper for measuring corruption distinguishes between ‘day-to-day’-corruption that takes place at the lower levels of the administrative hierarchy and corruption that circumvents legitimate democratic decisions and decision making, i.e. at the middle and higher level of public administration and directly in the political sphere. Based on interviews with more than 900 present and former ministers of government and politically appointed administrators in central government in ...

2007

This study explored issues of "corruption," highlighting fundamental points of misunderstanding between East and West. Through surveys of the literature, field observations, face-to-face interviews, and discussion groups, the research examined emergent realities of the former Soviet Union and Central and Eastern Europe as related to corruption. Western anti-corruption activities toward the region provided a framework of comparison. The study delved into the various legacies that structure patterns associated with corruption in post-communist systems, especially those of the former Soviet Union. This report presents questions to help guide Western organizations as they encounter corruption in the region, both as part of anti-corruption programs as well as in wider diplomatic, business, foreign policy and assistance activities. Disconnect between East and West When an American ambassador to Georgia hosted an American president on a visit there, the two had a few minutes together in private. Having heard about corruption in the post-Soviet state, the president asked the ambassador to fill him in about what could be done to "combat" it. "Mr. President, corruption is the system. How can you combat a system?" the ambassador replied. Both question and answer warrant investigation. The question highlighted a prevailing image of the formerly communist states-especially those of the former Soviet Union. The mere mention of countries in Central Asia and the Caucasus often calls to mind the "c" word. This is important because the image of pervasive corruption can inform policy, whether consciously or not. The answer points to the need to understand the context of corruption-indeed that certain patterns and modes of organization, not merely practices or activities that outsiders might consider corrupt, may be ingrained into the very functioning of certain aspects of post-communist systems. On the other hand, the wholesale characterization of countries as corrupt overlooks positive forces that can exist alongside, within, or even be a part of, those modes of organization. To fully grasp the causes and patterns of corruption, it is necessary to understand the organizational realities that give rise to them. Researchers have found evidence This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Journal of Economic Literature, 1997

Paper abstract: Research on corruption and anti-corruption measures has been developing rapidly the last years. Often the debate has focused on the endemic, in some forms institutionalized nature of corruption in post-communist countries and its distortion of democratic development and the functioning of the rule of law. However, in order to combat corruption or at leas to curb the most glaring imperfections it is necessary to estimate the pervasiveness, the penetration of the state and the root causes. The typology used in ,this paper for measuring corruption distinguishes between ‘day-to-day’-corruption that takes place at the lower levels of the administrative hierarchy and corruption that circumvents legitimate democratic decisions and decision making, i.e. at the middle and higher level of public administration and directly inthe political sphere. Based on interviews with more than 900 present and former ministers ofgovernment,and politically appointed administrators in central...

Studies on Russian Economic Development, 2017

⎯This paper explores the relations between key areas of national modernization, which requires the coordination of three most important dimensions, i.e., science, entrepreneurship, and market.

Rich countries are much likelier to be democracies than poor countries. Why this is true is debated fiercely. Simply reaching a given level of economic development could not itself produce democracy; it can do so only by bringing changes in how people act. Accordingly, Seymour Martin Lipset (1959) argued that development leads to democracy because it produces certain socio-cultural changes that shape human actions. The empirical data that would be needed to test this claim did not exist then, so his suggestion remained a passing comment. 1 Today, large-N comparative surveys make the relevant data available for most of the world's population, and there have been major advances in analytic techniques. But social scientists rarely put the two together, partly because of a persisting tendency to view mass attitudinal data as volatile and unreliable.