Not sure this makes sense to me? There's corruption in every system, regardless of the ideology behind it. Are you saying there's no corruption in communism? Because I have news for you, if you do.
It seems like corruption is simply endemic to the human condition. It has nothing to do with capitalism/communism/etc. Whatever the system happens to be, we will find a way to corrupt it.
It doesn't appear to be what this person is saying. Rather, that we can't deflect from flaws in ideology having to do with the system in place, and the issues that stem from that.
Having said that, I find it to be rather unproductive and pessimistic to assert corruption is endemic to humanity and has nothing to do with ideology. Instead I would argue that the nature of the corruption has everything to do with the ideological foundations of said system.
> Having said that, I find it to be rather unproductive and pessimistic to assert corruption is endemic to humanity and has nothing to do with ideology. Instead I would argue that the nature of the corruption has everything to do with the ideological foundations of said system.
This kind of blank-slate, "New Soviet Man" idea has been tested and found lacking.
> Instead I would argue that the nature of the corruption has everything to do with the ideological foundations of said system.
How so? Is corruption different somehow depending on the ideological foundations of the system? Corruption is corruption. Every system has rules. When you subvert those rules for personal gain, that's corruption.
>How so? Is corruption different somehow depending on the ideological foundations of the system?
Of course.
Different systems enable, empower, and encourage, different types of corruption.
(Corruption being an abstract word, in programming terms there's no corruption "class", just corruption instances. So the nature of those corruption instances depend on the classes defined in the program -e.g. capitalism.c- you're running...).
(And of course share some basic corruption types, present in all societies/systems, e.g. theft -- the POSIX of corruption).
We've started the thread with concrete examples...
Check the @pjc50, @Traster etc comments at the top.
And @humanrebar already put this in abstract form: "It's worth noting that luminary capitalists like Adam Smith were very much concerned with privately enabled rent seekers in addition to government enabled ones"
> Check the @pjc50, @Traster etc comments at the top.
Those are specific examples of corruption here in the US. Are you asserting that you wouldn't be able to find the same corruption, for example, in China?
Please provide a single example of corruption that can occur under capitalism, but wouldn't occur under another economic system. Because I'm asserting they do not exist.
> And @humanrebar already put this in abstract form: "It's worth noting that luminary capitalists like Adam Smith were very much concerned with privately enabled rent seekers in addition to government enabled ones"
Yes, he was perfectly right to. There are always private parties. Even under communism.
>Not sure this makes sense to me? There's corruption in every system, regardless of the ideology behind it
I'm saying that some types of corruption are endemic to certain systems. And if we see these types of corruption time and again on a system, then the system enables that type of corruption.
>It seems like corruption is simply endemic to the human condition. It has nothing to do with capitalism/communism/etc. Whatever the system happens to be, we will find a way to corrupt it.
My argument wasn't about corruption in general (which we will always have under every system), but about a certain type of enterprise-related corruption, that can't be brushed away by "no true Scotsman/capitalism", as if 'truly adhering' to the ways of capitalism would eliminate it.
> a certain type of enterprise-related corruption, that can't be brushed away
If a system of government promotes X then there will appear X-related corruption. Capitalist governments promote enterprises, thus appears enterprise-related correction. Governments which promote the church will foster church-related corruption, etc. etc..
I don't see how this observation about capitalism is a particularly interesting one. Perhaps you could make some ground with "and capitalism uniquely allows this corruption to flourish on a scale never seen before" but that's not what I've seen in these kind of kneejerk criticisms.
Capitalist governments promote enterprises, thus appears enterprise-related correction. Governments which promote the church will foster church-related corruption, etc. etc..
Governments which are the party will promote party corruption. [looks at China] Yup. Checks out.
I wasn't making a no true capitalism argument. I was responding to the implicit straw man that ties capitalism to apathy or complicity about corruption. Capitalists care about private corruption. They always have. That's why there are laws and norms around fraud, nepotism, embezzling, and white collar crime in general.
Just because people are creative and invent new ways to be corrupt doesn't mean captilist societies are indifferent.
I would expect people skeptical towards corporations to see some common ground here.
It is. That's the whole point of having systems to regulate it. When those systems are overridden by, in effect, collective freeloaders, any system breaks down.
It seems like corruption is simply endemic to the human condition. It has nothing to do with capitalism/communism/etc. Whatever the system happens to be, we will find a way to corrupt it.