Political and Governmental Corruption
Everyone knows what political corruption is, but it is notoriously hard to define. Different cultures have different conceptions of corruption: what would be considered corrupt in Denmark might be seen as simply polite in Indonesia. This understanding also varies across time: buying office was standard procedure in eighteenth-century Britain but would be inexcusable today. Arnold Heidenheimer has divided corruption into three categories (Heidenheimer et al. 1978). "White" corruption includes acts that a majority of people would not consider worthy of punishment. "Gray" corruption includes acts that "some elements" would want to see punished, but others would not. "Black" corruption includes acts that a "majority consensus . . . would condemn and would want to see punished on the grounds of principle." Heidenheimer suggests that as societies modernize, behavior that was once seen as "white" becomes "gray," and may eventually turn "black." Others have suggested that the concept of "corruption" develops as societies move from seeing governmental offices as private property to believing them to be public trusts.
The American political scientist V. O. Key Jr. (1936) defines graft as "an abuse of power for personal or party profit." Joseph Nye, another American political scientist, calls corruption:
[B]ehavior which deviates from the formal duties of a public role because of private-regarding (family, close family, private clique) pecuniary or status gains; or violates rules against the exercise of certain types of private-regarding influence.
This is a free page. This page contains 201 words. This
article contains 10,043 words (approx. 33 pages at 300
words per page).
Read the rest of this Article with our Political and Governmental Corruption Access Pass.
