TED Conversations

Kamran Ali

Project Internee, Atlas Honda Limited

This conversation is closed.

How you will define Corruption? Any strong strategy for elimination of Corruption?

Corruption can be define in many ways, in simple it vary from person to person. I have thought lot about it and have found almost every one (including myself) a corrupt one in any stage. People only define this in a way that they neglect their own corruption and include the corruption done by all other people.

(I am not criticizing any one, but I just want to know your opinion )

  • thumb
    Mar 11 2014: Kamran, have you noticed that the TED prize winner for 2014 works in precisely this area and will announce her wish at the TED conference in Vancouver next week?

    I believe her presentation will be live-streamed from the site. http://www.ted.com/participate/ted-prize
    • thumb
      Mar 11 2014: No dear Fritize, actually I am a Student and recently joined this TED Talk.. I will watch this video and hope that I will get more points of solutions..
    • Mar 15 2014: I commented and invited others to come into this conversation to dialogue about the issue…

      Hope many see and join this interchange including Charmian Gooch Anti-corruption activist
      • thumb
        Mar 16 2014: Here is what I think will happen because of the timing of the TED Prize wish in three days.

        Gooch is already in Vancouver preparing her big presentation. If what happens is similar to what happened last year when Sugata Mitra made his wish, Chris Anderson will follow her presentation by asking of the 1200 people in attendance what they can offer to contribute to make the wish come true. One after another will rise and offer how his/her organization will enter the collaboration to advance the wish.

        The talk will be livestreamed on TED.com but also will be posted soon, I am pretty sure, as talks are for comment from the community that listens to the talks. There will be conversation there, perhaps with Gooch participating if she is not doubly busy from the launch of her wish and setting in motions the collaboration with those who offer to help her. I find it inspiring and energizing to see how the TED community converges around the TED prize wish, thinking about how they, with whatever special resources they or their organizations have, can join forces to launch the wish.

        It is the best example of how a TED talk launches effective collaboration of people with widely different resources to bring to the table.

        Further, this thread is one of the featured threads in TED Conversations, so anyone who comes into TED Conversations will see it right away and join in if she/he chooses.

        The TED prize winner will put forward what people can do who want to be part of action, going beyond conversation. People who hear her talk will choose whether to jump in individually or through their organizations in the undertaking she proposes.
        • Mar 16 2014: Hope that before Gooch makes her big presentation she considers and includes a vital fundamental part related to dealing with corruption stemming from individuals actions. Bluntly put changes the pitch from "unless we all do something about it…" to "what each does contributes to what happens, we each need to do something about this… we each ought to do what each ought to do".
      • Comment deleted

        • Mar 16 2014: Fritzie,

          Thanks for the link and alerting us about the ted prize winner. Yea from the talk ( http://www.ted.com/talks/charmian_gooch_meet_global_corruption_s_hidden_players ) I agree with you that it's likely she will choose to focus on expose and correct corruption involving natural resources, and based on her past ted talk will likely miss the vital fundamental part of addressing individuals contributions. Hopefully this conversation will reach her in time and help her reconsider certain matters and enrich the wish presentation.

          earlier today I posted a link in (https://www.facebook.com/GlobalWitness ) to this conversation too… so there are multiple ways the message can get there :-) Each ought to do their part… :-)
      • Comment deleted

        • Mar 16 2014: , edited to remove your name and ask why you deleted your comments...


          I just want to point out that there is a difference between assuming something and pointing something out. I realize that many focus on what is right and wrong for them to do in different situations… and it may be a bit different from what is right and wrong to do in different situations.

          In my life I have noticed that individuals may share a set of beliefs of what is true and right … sometimes finding common ground based on the truth of the matter. Of course sometimes finding the common ground is a bit more of a challenge; especially given the fact some individuals do not want to focus on the truth of the matter. Please notice how I am differentiating between 1- what someone things to be the truth of the matter and 2- what happens to be the truth of the matter.

          I believe that every individual who seeks the truth of the matter arrives at the same realization (sooner or latter). Do notice that this is a bit different from what you said. I also differentiate between those who see things their way and happen to see things as they are and those who see things their way and happen not to see things as they are. It can be frustrating sometimes when people do not accept certain ways especially whey they insist on others accepting certain ways. Kind of contradictory but thats just how the cooky crumbles with some folks.

          I do respect any benevolent faith … in other words I am tolerant of everyone while insisting everyone be tolerant by choice or by force :-). Each can choose to behave appropriately or be guided to behave appropriately, either way each will behave appropriately .
  • Mar 24 2014: I think its better not to get involved in intricacies of defining this because we all know what it is. It is also dynamic in nature and changing its ways depending upon the circumstances and opportunities.Best strategy is to bring the change in the mindset of the society from materialistic to holistic.
  • thumb
    Mar 22 2014: Any first year law or criminology student will tell you that there is no crime without first there being a law to define it as so. The same goes for regulations without which people will do whatever they can get away with. A classic example of both political and corporate corruption within the financial community is how Enron Corp. owners used its political influence with the Bush family to expand upon the Regan deregulation process which directly lead to the resulting plundering of billions of investor dollars.

    Conversely, there is a long and troubling history of all kinds of laws being enacted to marginalize and discriminate against minorities and the indigent along with regulations drafted to provide business entities with monopolies and unwarranted tax payer subsidies.

    In other words, if you are not an active participant in you communities law and regulation making there is a very good chance you will one day find yourself a victim of those laws and/or regulations.
    • Mar 22 2014: William,

      Have you wondered why it is the case that only passed laws are considered crimes?
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2014: laws invariably reflect the prejudices, attitudes and agendas of those making the laws rather than any actual needs or interests of the community the law makers are supposed to represent.
        • Mar 23 2014: William,

          You originally said something to the effect of: without such stuff people will do whatever they can get away with. Implicitly that means people will not choose to follow a certain path of their own free will and need to be coerced into behaving nicely. The thing is that the side effects of what is done often amplifies the exact opposite. For example a while back the computer where touted as leading to the paperless office and the demise of paper companies when in fact the exact opposite happened! People would not correct the paper printouts but would reprint the paper… sometimes reprinting the whole document. Similarly the notion that -"... there is no crime without first there being a law to define it as so" leads many to " do whatever they can get away with" so long as there isn't a law against it, or they can get away with it… often getting into tantrum frivolous demands that seek to get a candy at the expense of others.

          Laws are a convenient way to sideline and defer resolving the matter among siblings and peers and pushing something unto others. For example the right to smoke in a public place vs the right to be in a public place without smoking or have the smoke of others in one's surroundings. A while back we simply had to tolerate what others did in our surroundings. At first we could resort to just not move to a certain place. A small step was taken when individuals began demanding reserved smoke free areas. Another step was taken when places where compelled to have smoke free areas. Then there was a tipping point where instead of smoke free areas there where designated smoking areas. Finally there was the step that compelled that enclosed areas were to be smoke free. I am sure some are working on criminalizing smoking altogether. That is just one particular example. The underlying point here is that individuals resort to the laws or other authorities to manipulate what happens. Some shield behind the laws, regulations, and authorities.
  • thumb
    Mar 18 2014: The most troubling form is 'political' corruption and invariably involves corruption of the process and/or the individuals and permeates every level of governance.

    There are corruptors that simply use brute force such as threats, blackmail and intimidation.

    Others prefer more subtle forms such as persuasion and seduction, either to sway a person towards a particular perspective or action and/or for use as blackmail afterwards.

    Still others will use money and position to maneuver an agent of theirs into a position of trust and influence towards a particular end desired by the corruptors. .

    Lastly, sad to say, there are just too many individuals involved in our institutions of governance that can simply be bought if enough status, position or money is offered.

    While it is impossible to eradicate corruptive influences, the most effective way of blocking them is to have multiple layers of checks and balances that must be adhered to. Yes it makes the system tedious and cumbersome, but the alternative is the type of rampant financial ruin that has been heaped on all those nations that arrogantly or stupidly removed those checks and balances such as we have seen in the U.S. over the last 30 years or so.
    • Mar 19 2014: William,

      What we ought to have in place is a way for a single individual to determine and establish the way for everyone and it takes everyone to corrupt the system! If we look at what happens now a single individual can corrupt and ruin it for everyone else… where as it takes everyone to ensure an incorruptible system… the reverse of what we ought to have! Of course anything is possible and we just need to cultivate that which bring about the better ways of being within ourselves, within others and wining individual interrelationships.
      • Mar 19 2014: I loved the idea that no one is above no one.

        We may say that the system must be more burocratic on its metodology, so no one have power, just follow the rules

        A change on the system must pass the process, pass throught the layers (hierarchy) and in the top of the hierarchy it must be all the citzens togheter

        We can break the country in parts
        each people votes for what they want and if it can be implemented independentlly (dont affect others), the group who votes for it would be responsible for the executive branch, raising money themselves and implementing the solution themselves, and depending on the project collecting the result only for themselves
        • Mar 19 2014: Raymond,

          What you said seems on the other side of what I had in mind… the system must be agile on it's methodology and implementation so that anyone who happens to have a better way can change and improve the system and it takes everyone to change the system for the worst. In other words only facilitate beneficial changes while blocking degradations. Here even the system itself is on equal footing when it comes to improvements.

          The idea that a change must pass the process through layers of hierarchy and some authority on the top arbitrarily decide to approve it (or reject it) is rather archaic; instead the idea for change involves the change passing through a transformative process that improves the system and the change itself.

          Ideally what individuals / groups want and accomplish will benefit them and others creating a self sustaining enriching cycles
    • thumb
      Mar 19 2014: I agree William, that transparency (multiple layers of checks and balances as you say) is one good effective strategy. I think, with most of our systems, it is difficult for one individual to practice corrupt behaviors. They generally need to have support, even if it is people simply turning their backs on the situation....I think there has to be some support for a corrupt behavior to be successful.

      Corruption happens more easily in isolation....if nobody knows about it, or people don't want to stir the pot by openly challenging corruption, it is accepted and normalized....thereby gaining strength in our systems.
  • Mar 18 2014: I dont know what is corruption exactly, or how much we must acept or extingsh completely.

    But in my opinion, to solve the problem is by changing the system to not let any open for corruption

    But to reduce a critic level of corruption in meanwhile, must be:

    1- Vigilance or anything that raises the amount of important cases we can catch.
    2- A good Punish that makes people dont want to do again
    3- That punish must include shared responsability and social pressure (mom, dad, brother, boss, everyone expressing how disapointed, and how they will never forgive the resposables nor themselves for not have stoped this somehow)

    People will change and do things if they find it is very important
    • Mar 18 2014: Raymond,

      sort of yes… just change the punishment to incentive and rather than don't want to do again to seek to do it again… in other words reframe the ideas using a positive encouragement stand… people will want to do things if they find it is very important , appreciated and desired by others and themselves… be vigilant or anything that raises the amount of importance cases we can catch is already framed in the positive form! always remember this notion of suing the positive framing from this point forward...
      • Mar 19 2014: I think positive frame is better for somethings like giving someone confidence or when you dont know exactly what you want, or there is not much right or wrong
        It is wondefull for brainstoming, exploration of new ideas and finding new ways doing something

        But i think that for inibition of behavior, getting control in precision environment, things like that, negative frame is better.

        Better yet would do both, but a simple negative frame is easyer to implement and normally is cheaper

        For this case i believe there is a lot of incentives alread, you can do good politcs to get re-elected, reduce crime to not be robbed or killed o streets, improve transit to dont get stuck on it
        Giving them more of our money to make they do their job, is itself bribe and corruption
        • Mar 19 2014: Raymond,

          paying the extortioners not to extortion may seem like the cheaper way to deal with the situation at least in the short term but eventually it becomes the most expensive way to deal with the situation. I think that positive frame of asserting and calmly following through with the assertion is vital. Let me give a rather childish example… If we 'bribe' our children to behave say by giving them a candy to stop crying, they will cry whenever they want candy… If we 'educate' them to behave by showing them the consequences of properly doing stuff and improperly doing stuff we give them a much better handle on reality… A teacher once told me of the difference between european and american parents in a particular situation where the child ran into pole. Both would look to see if the child was ok and upon seeing that the situation was rather 'insignificant' would blurt something to the child to appease them. One would say 'better what out for them poles next time' while the other would say "what a bad pole let me go punish it for hurting you"…

          I think that a positive frame is actually easier to implement and can be the cheaper alternative… like I said to someone … sometimes the better solution to the problem involve not having the problem … in other words it may be simpler to just keep from getting sick than it would be to cure the sickness… in a more drastic manger it may be easier to stay/keep alive than to resuscitate the deceased . It can be easier to do preventive actions that maintain and keep operation something rather than to allow it to break and then fix it. Of course better yet to have framework that enables preventive operational and corrective actions that kept under constant review what happens and adjust in light of the experiences gained and desirable worthwhile objectives.
    • thumb
      Mar 19 2014: Good points Raymond...."People will change and do things if they find it is very important" and recognizing our interconnectedness and a shared responsibility sometimes helps facilitate uncovering corruption.

      When we recognize our interconnectedness, it may feel more important to be honest rather than corrupt. When we take from others in a corrupt way, we are hurting ourselves as well. There may be a financial, political, or some kind of superficial gain, and underlying that, the integrity of the person practicing corrupt behaviors is compromised.
  • Mar 18 2014: So long as there is an expectation of corruption, corruption will exist. You admit to being corrupt yourself, and although many may be corrupt it is not the same for everyone, I would not classify myself as corrupt. Telling a little lie is not corruption and comes to harm no-one, but grand scale corruption leads to unregulated murders, the unequal treatment of people, imprisonment of innocent people, etc... but the worst type of corruption is by people that judge others for misdemeanors, yet commit the biggest of atrocities. i.e. the government and their associated organisations or churches and religious organisations that judge peoples behaviors, yet behave with complete dishonesty.

    The best way to change corruption is to change yourself and decide not to be corrupt. If we all focus on changing ourselves instead of trying to change others, we will as individuals become better people and encourage better behavior in others.

    Corruption basically starts of with a lie (usually to ourselves) and then expands to grand covert affairs.
    • Mar 18 2014: Do them both… one and the other
    • thumb
      Mar 19 2014: Good point Mint Thinny....."BE" the change we want to "SEE" in our world. It starts with us as individuals.
  • thumb
    Mar 16 2014: Hello Kamran:>)

    I use the accepted dictionary definition for corruption..."impairment of integrity, virtue, or moral principle; depravity; decay, decomposition; inducement to wrong by bribery or other unlawful or improper means".

    Most of us seem to know what corruption is, and I do not agree that almost everyone is corrupt. If we do not question and evaluate our life practices, we have the ability to be corrupt in some ways. If we do not recognize that taking from others to benefit ourselves, is an impairment to our integrity, we can become "corrupt" in various ways.

    You ask the question about a strategy for elimination of corruption.....

    One strategy we can use as individuals, is to evaluate ourselves, our thoughts, feelings and behaviors. Why do we practice certain corrupt behaviors? My personal belief, is that we are all interconnected, so when we practice corruption, we are hurting ourselves AND the whole. Why do that to ourselves?

    On another level, an effective strategy is transparency. Corruption, generally thrives better in isolation. If nobody knows about corruption, it continues.....right? Corruption has been accepted in our societies for a very long time, and people have supported it by looking the other way...don't make waves...that sometimes seems more "safe" for some people.

    We went through a stage when whistle blowers were considered the bad guys...we were stirring the pot..causing people to face corruption, and lots of people didn't like that at all, so the whistleblowers were blamed rather than the corruption we were unraveling.

    Now, it seems that whistleblowers are becoming a little more accepted and appreciated for what they/we are doing, and more people are realizing that in order to eliminate corruption, it first has to be uncovered. We cannot eliminate something that we are not aware of...right?

    I believe our improving awareness and advanced communication systems are facilitating some elimination of corruption......what do you think?
    • thumb
      Mar 17 2014: Dear Colleen, I appreciate your points and strategies. I also believe that if every individual start realizing that why he is doing such wrong to himself, his family and with society similarly the effects of corruption will be multiple as well.

      But it is natural that when a person will see money (bribe) his/her mind will be focused on evil doings (here I am talking about majority).

      Every coin has two sides, some where these advance communication systems are ruining us and some where they are helping us.
      • thumb
        Mar 17 2014: Kamran,
        I respect your points as well, and I do not agree that corruption is a natural focus with the majority of people in our world. I agree....every coin has two sides....every issue probably has many perspectives. I suspect that in different areas of our world, circumstances are very different?
        • thumb
          Mar 17 2014: Colleen,
          I have used natural word for money only,,, and it is true.. and money is the major player in corruption.
          I agree that circumstances are vary in different corner of the world, but some things are certain and corruption is one of them.
      • thumb
        Mar 17 2014: I do not understand, Kamran,whether you are saying that it is natural for people today to be inclined to be corrupt (with which I do not agree) or to be very concerned about corruption when they see it. I think there is plenty of research to support the latter- that being disturbed at things that are not fair is deeply ingrained and demonstrated even in infants and toddlers, according to research I have read recently.

        I think the proportion of people attracted to corruption is a *small* minority in most places. I think corruption is normalized in some settings and in those people may consider it part of doing business rather than a problem, whereas in places where corruption is not normalized, the majority of people will find it highly disturbing.

        Here is another pertinent link about perception of corruption by country. http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview

        It is important to note that these are the perceptions of people who actually live and work in those countries- including whether bribes are part of doing business and so forth. This does not attempt to capture things like what people who do *not* live there assume, based on what they learn from media and so forth.
        • thumb
          Mar 17 2014: I do not agree with your point that only small proportion of people is attracted towards corruption... Let me tell you my experience.. I live in Pakistan with neighbor countries like India, China, Iran and Afghanistan... I have learned from teachers who had lived many years in different countries like USA,KSA,UK,Australia,China,Malaysia etc..
          They all say and I also say that in all mentioned countries corruption is in majority.
        • thumb
          Mar 19 2014: I agree Fritzie, that corruption is normalized in some places more than in other places. The more it is accepted (normalized) the more possibility that people will take advantage of the acceptance of corruption.

          When I was a whistleblower for a toxic business locally, many people protested my action with arguments like.....this is how it's always been done.....these are "normal" business practices.

          It appeared that I was the bad guy for bringing the issue to light! And so it was with many other situations in this region. That was about 14-15 years ago, and I am happy to say that with persistence, and continually reminding people about conflict of interest (corruption) things have changed in this area:>)

          Part of the strategy I used, was to become part of the system, because I believe that things change more effectively from within a system rather than complaining and criticizing from the outside. Many times, people do not have all the information, which might contribute to transparency, so it helps to provide accurate, informed information.
      • thumb
        Mar 17 2014: I would ask only that you regard even what your teachers say as more their specific impressions than verified fact and that you remain open to the alternative.

        It may be very common to be suspicious of others in this regard and in particular to have a negative view of what "the masses" are like. This does not mean that it is, in fact, what "the masses" are like.

        You may be able to assess for your own country but I would be cautious of drawing these conclusions for other countries.
        • thumb
          Mar 18 2014: Corruption is every where my dear, the speaker who give talks they give their opinions because they have live there, I have also heard from such people (My Respectable Teachers) who have lived in countries for study.

          Well yes, I know my country best, but in this global world we can easily keep an eye on other countries specially who are in surrounding or famous one.

          In every corner of the world and in every country there are "Good and Bad People"
      • thumb
        Mar 18 2014: I understand this. But, for example, if you look at the data linked above collected by Transparency International and you look at corruption indices, you will see there are differences among countries. It is not about whether people are good or bad but rather what the business climate and so forth are like that provides the context for people's behaviors.

        You will see there that the corruption indices for different countries are quite different. Here are some, where high scores mean less corruption and low scores suggest more corruption. Australia has a score of 81. Germany has a score of 78. The UK is at 76. The USA is at 73. Pakistan is at 28.

        So what you see around you in Pakistan does not necessarily reflect the culture surrounding corruption worldwide.
  • Mar 16 2014: Esteban
    A much more coherent post then your first. You seem to maintain a consistent lack of reason however. I do feel that you are well intention-ed, but committed to a point of belief that is unsustainable. This deity belief served humanity, not well, perhaps, but answered questions of who, what where and why. Our knowledge base has grown tremendously over the last 100,000 years or so, especially over the last few hundred.
    What is it that makes your 'right' a truer 'right' then that of the warden? Because you believe it to be? This is not good enough and, most certainly, it lacks any discernible 'truth', a verifiable substantiated truth. Should we go into the definition of truth? Believing that a goat is a cow does not make it so and does not carry any 'truth'.
    You mention 'love', as the most important part of being human. Other animals have demonstrated compassion and even a love, perhaps. It is more important however, to note that love, a most difficult word to define, and I am not sure if you are confusing love with adherence to a belief, that for whatever reason gives you purpose. That is acceptable, but in no stretch of the imagination does it carry any truth and should not be presented so.
    Believe in whatever deity you choose; for whatever reason. This is freedom, but when it is promoted, as a truth and the only truth, it now becomes dogmatic and totalitarian, a theocracy. Is this where you think your deity belief belongs
    You failed to answer the question of Christian Principles to the Founding principles of this country. Would you like to do so?
    Our conversation is not relevant to the fellow who made the original post and unfair to him. We can carry on this conversation, if you like, by contacting me through my profile.
    For definition purposes. I am an American of the Constitution, as opposed to an american by birth only. I am Atheistic in philosophy and very opinionated, but than, I am old and normally right.
    • Mar 16 2014: Charles et all,

      Talking about the uncorrupted truth here seems to me a valid enriching matter related to the strategy to eliminate the corrupted truths. Being right is what makes my 'right' a truer 'right' then that of the warden. Of course it's not because of a belief to be so, it is because it happens to be so. Yea lets go into the definition of truth? Please provide it and then provide your definition of truth and finally compare your definition of truth with the definition of truth. Of course we may also have to get through and transcend the constitutive nature of language. For a goat is a goat and not a caw because of it. Defining the word 'love' is a rather simple task if one know how to do it. If you find not being sure acceptable and that for whatever reason gives you purpose so it be for you. I prefer better alternatives. I do agree that not being sure should not be presented as not carrying any truth. Better to present the truth and carry the truth. adhering to the truth. You ask where I think someone's deity belief belongs … well evidently to it belong to someone.

      It seems that you recached the conclusion that I failed to answer a question you posited even though I did answer it. I could repeat the answer I gave, though I won't. I would let the fellow who made the original post resolve if this conversation is or isn't relevant to the topic of corruption. I find it to be quite relevant for as I said : Talking about the uncorrupted truth here seems to me a valid enriching matter related to the strategy to eliminate the corrupted truths. That helps to eliminate one kind of corruption and paves the way to truly understand what is right and who is right.

      (my next response will have more of a delay)
  • Mar 24 2014: Kamran, thanks for an interesting topic.

    I suppose we could put up against the wall all the corrupt people.
    Then, get the Tommie guns out and eliminate the problem.
    But being an old Crook myself, I don't much like that idea.

    Prosecutors could refuse to prosecute because corruption is malignant.
    It wouldn't stop corruption, but you wouldn't worry about a knock on the door.

    We could just offer Corrupt people more money to stop stealing,
    much more money than they can steal.
    That would start a cottage industry overnight.

    We could try to shut down Wall Street, and send the SEC home.
    We have enough city parks to hold all the homeless investors for a while.

    Maybe try the easy way, recall Obama.
    But, he might use the NSA's Star Wars program on everyone, just to get even.
    And the CIA might decide to bug the entire Senate or both house of Congress.
    Worse than that, he could convince the voters to re-elect him again.

    I guess Corruption is inherent in America and the World.
    We just have to learn to live with it.
  • thumb
    Mar 20 2014: For me, corruption is any deliberate attempt by a person, or group of people, to improve their own circumstances by undermining the well-being of another person, or another group of people.
  • Mar 19 2014: The exploitation of complacent laws can be prevented by laws with integrity.
  • thumb
    Mar 19 2014: Let's bear in mind that the most corrupting influences of al are arrogance and self-righteousness. A common excuse we hear is "everyone is doing it" and it is one that is hard to argue with when faced with how badly the democratic process has been gamed and co-opted in virtually every corner of the planet by the greedy and the self-important who seek to commodify every living thing on the planet. .
    • thumb
      Mar 20 2014: Thank you, William, for highlighting an extremely important issue when you wrote "A common excuse we hear is "everyone is doing it." The (exaggerated) perception that "everyone is doing it" is highly destructive. It provides an excuse for those who find justification in this assumption and denies acknowledgement to the vast majority who are not corrupt but are accused of being so by such an exaggeration.

      There is a TED talk I am now unable to find about how the best way of getting people to conserve energy, I think it was, is to show that their neighbors have made that transition. There may be a similar phenomenon at work here, that the normalizing of corruption- the marketing of the idea that corruption is normal- encourages corruption.
  • thumb
    Mar 19 2014: How I am defining, corruption is enemy of the state, deadly disease (virus).
  • Mar 18 2014: we can never eliminate corruption no matter oh hard we try because it is just like police are always going to have criminals to catch also it depends on what is the corruption used for good or bad purposes
  • thumb
    Mar 18 2014: in different ways, the best way to eliminate the corruption is changing the government or the way to how to educate the population. The most of the schools teach to the students to be the best and not to be the cooperative" this little mistake makes the change the society around the world, and upgrade the bad values of the people , just for gain everything without care to anything under him.
  • Mar 18 2014: When bacteria live IN and works FOR the benefit of a human, there is NO division between the two organisms. Both benefit and there is Wholeness.

    When a bacteria live IN and works AGAINST the human, there is clear DIVISION between the two organisms. There is corruption within BOTH seemingly separate systems (the human and the bacteria) and a fight and mucho suffering ensues.

    BUT! Clearly, the Human, as seen as a separate system in and of itself, is only PART of a larger system of humanity. And, the system of humanity is, itself, only PART of a larger system which is this little floating petri dish called Earth. Who can truly say that corruption, even in government, is BAD? Who can truly say it is GOOD? Bad and Good are very much a matter of perspective and vantage point, are they not?

    So now to your question as to strategy for eliminating Corruption. This applies to corruption of anything in society, at any level...even the individual:


    Notice it with intensity and without reacting to it. Transformation always emerges from that very basic fact.

    Governments are corrupted because the EMERGE out of society which is, itself, DIVIDED...........and thus corrupted. Tolerating corruption is, itself, corrupt. Evolution is a slowwwwwwww, and often painful process. We are still Kindergartners blaming others for our woes. There is no 'other'
  • Mar 18 2014: Fritzie:
    You said, "I think the proportion of people attracted to corruption is a *small* minority in most places."
    Would it be fair to say then, the 1%?
    If not, then whom?
    I think you would admit there is corruption in every country, government, corporations and so,
    and at every level of our lives. Yes?
    So, how could it be a small minority, and if it is, then it must be the 1% because they are the ones who are
    benefiting from it. The benefits are definitely not going to those who are looking up.
    Think of a project in your own country and try to remember, were there problems with budgets,
    where the costs went higher and higher, far beyond what was originally determined to be the cost?
    What kinds of choices were made regarding projects and who benefited from the problems that occurred during
    until their completion?
    Corruption is everywhere and in every institution in every country, and at every level.
    Strange you want so bad to deny the truth.
    People don't lean towards corruption but to survive in a system that is totally corrupt one must
    become corrupted to flourish, Some make it without becoming corrupted but most do not.
    A small minority in most places? C'mon! One must first be able to admit there is a problem before they
    can begin to do something about it.
    You need to admit it.
    • Mar 18 2014: Corruption is not a crime! Most corruption is by law-abiding people!
      • thumb
        Mar 19 2014: Good point Rodrigo.....much of the corruption we see in our world is done by seemingly law abiding people, which often makes corruption difficult to recognize. Many times, it is a crime, depending on the circumstances of the corruption.
  • thumb
    Mar 18 2014: Corruption results from any thought, comment, or act that benefits one or a group of people; i.e, person, family, business, political party, which is either known or should be known that will unreasonably harm; i.e., mentally, physically, emotionally or financially, an individual or group of individuals.

    Though most likely simplistic to the well educated and well meaning; memorize Christ's words in Matthew 5:3-12, believe them, love them and live by them. The Apostles and early Christians adhered to the teachings of Christ because they knew him personally and saw that he had risen from the dead and disappeared in thin air and then the received the Holy Spirit in the form of tongues of fire as Jesus had promised. Then the Thomas syndrome infiltrated the Christian Church; e.g., Jesus said to Thomas, "have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed."

    We criticize gangs and gang wars, but the whole world is made up of gangs and gang wars; they're just more "civilized and sophisticated" than the street gangs.Christ explained in one sentence how to end corruption; i.e, "be like these little children." I test children all the time to reinforce my belief. Several years ago I was at a meeting in a hotel and a 5 year old was walking down the hall with a bowl of cereal stopping from time to time to take a bite. I said, "young man could I have some of your cheerios,".He looked up at me and didn't say no, but said, "these aren't Cheerios they are Fruit Loops." I believe this is the imagine of God in all of us. That image either grows brighter if we allow grace into our lives or fades to the evils of the world.

    if you are not familiar with Scripture, then watch the Movie, "Forest Gump," and treat everyone as he did in the Movie. "And that's all I have to say about that."
  • thumb
    Mar 17 2014: Who are more corrupt? Literate people or Illiterate/Less Literate people?
  • Mar 17 2014: Corruption is just necessary for humanity survival in quite all their systems , and from allways.
    There are few examples without corruption like somes amazonians tribes, when they are too much in the group, they separe and make 2 groups....small group are easiers for suppression of corruption I think
    • Mar 17 2014: You get me interest, can you elaborate more?
      I think most of behaviors had or still has a important reason for survival, and there is lots of them that looks counter-intuitive and seams destructive but in fact it helps us out in our daily lives and/or make the world more liveable, like envy http://www.ted.com/talks/parul_sehgal_an_ode_to_envy

      But dont get me wrong, i am against corruption in any level, whatever corruption really means.
  • Mar 16 2014: For me, there are two types of corruption: corrupting minds and corrupting the system. You will get the answer if you ask why its done.
  • Mar 16 2014: Coming from a country where corruption is very common and open, I believe like you said, that we are all corrupt in a way. We always love to get things for free. We always brag about the perks we get from each other for being family, or friends or coworkers. We only call it corruption when a) the person gets caught. and b) one of the parties involved or even a separate party is hurt economically in the process. If these requirements are not met, it is not corruption, it could be labeled "looking the other way" if you will. But I would like to challenge anyone to explain how getting in for free in the movies or getting drinks for free at a bar is not corrupt.
    Corruption like all "negative" terms we use to describe what we perceive as injustice, is nothing but an ancient human practice where men and women are judged and labeled for acts in which we all participate in one way or another. The unlucky ones to get caught pay the price, many times it is intense greed what brings them down. Whatever the case, I would like to mention also that it's funny but whenever someone or some entity is found corrupt, the investigative and prosecution processes are delayed or unclear. I believe it is because many times someone is found corrupt, there are many more involved who do not want it to be uncovered.
    How do you get rid of the label "corrupt"? You get rid of the label "family" or "friends".
  • Mar 15 2014: 1.Corruption is dishonest actions that destroys people's trust in the person or group, like the news of corruption in how your bank is run, that makes you close your account and invest your money somewhere else.

    2.Lack of integrity or honesty (especially susceptibility to bribery); use of a position of trust for dishonest gain

    3. Moral perversion; impairment of virtue and moral principles

    4. Inducement (as of a public official) by improper means (as bribery) to violate duty (as by commiting a felony)
  • Mar 15 2014: Is corruption an individual, circumstantial or systemic 'pathogen' ?
    How to define Corruption?
    Any strong strategy for effectively dealing with Corruption?

    Yes, corruption can be define in many ways, which be the most appropriate and useful way to define it?
    Does corruption vary from person to person?

    like Kamran stated - People only define this in a way that they neglect their own corruption and include the corruption done by all other people - . I believe its time to define corruption as an absolute objective distinction that each can employ to determine whether something be corrupt or honest.

    I too have thought a-lot about this and other matter… this may be the time to establish once and for all some ground-rules each one and everyone embraces.
  • Mar 15 2014: When you follow your inner voice of conscience,you will eliminate the thought of corruption within yourself.
    Problem is, our mind is clogged with so many thoughts that many times we never listen or fail to listen to our inner voice & hence fall prey to corrupt thinking.
  • thumb
    Mar 15 2014: CUT THE MIDDLEMAN :)
  • Mar 14 2014: corruption to me implies an illegal action. Like two competitors price setting and decide who will get a competitive contract by matching their bids, or bribing people.
  • Mar 14 2014: Corruption is invisible to the have-nots but visible to the haves who don't need more but want more because they are bored. Corruption is a symptom of boredom. It is boring at the top of the food chain.