Top 10 Ways the US is the Most Corrupt Country in the World by Juan Cole

[xchrom]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/12/03-2

While it is true that you don’t typically have to bribe your postman to deliver the mail in the US, in many key ways America’s political and financial practices make it in absolute terms far more corrupt than the usual global South suspects. After all, the US economy is worth over $16 trillion a year, so in our corruption a lot more money changes hands.

1. Instead of having short, publicly-funded political campaigns with limited and/or free advertising (as a number of Western European countries do), the US has long political campaigns in which candidates are dunned big bucks for advertising. They are therefore forced to spend much of their time fundraising, which is to say, seeking bribes. All American politicians are basically on the take, though many are honorable people. They are forced into it by the system. House Majority leader John Boehner has actually just handed out cash on the floor of the House from the tobacco industry to other representatives.

When French President Nicolas Sarkozy was defeated in 2012, soon thereafter French police actually went into his private residence searching for an alleged $50,000 in illicit campaign contributions from the L’Oreale heiress. I thought to myself, seriously? $50,000 in a presidential campaign? Our presidential campaigns cost a billion dollars each! $50,000 is a rounding error, not a basis for police action. Why, George W. Bush took millions from arms manufacturers and then ginned up a war for them, and the police haven’t been anywhere near his house.

American politicians don’t represent “the people.” With a few honorable exceptions, they represent the the 1%. American democracy is being corrupted out of existence.

[cali]

1. this is a must read for everyone. thanks for posting it

The final line:

So don’t tell the Philippines or the other victims of American corruption how corrupt they are for taking a few petty bribes. Americans are not seen as corrupt because we only deal in the big denominations. Steal $2 trillion and you aren’t corrupt, you’re respectable.

[marmar]

2. Truth hurts.

[treestar]

3. OMG what total bullshit

Please! It's getting stupid now. We may have dumb voters who let the slickest ad campaign win, I get that. But corruption? It is nothing compared to most third world countries.

[marmar]

5. Way to miss a point.

[cali]

6. wow. You just post knee jerk stock partisanship and are evidently wholly

incapable of addressing the points made by Cole.

And how sad is your angry claim that we're better than most third world countries???

I don't expect YOU to note the irony in what you've posted.

[pangaia]

33. Cali, cali, I'm with you 100%.

But, chill. just tell treestar what you so simply told el_bryanto., it is the SCALE the enormous scale of the corruption. And because the scale is so huge, it is totally invisible yo most.

[cali]

39. well, pan, I'd ask you to note the difference in tone between the two posters

And yeah, I'm frustrated by the comments of radical partisans.

[pangaia]

41. True, you've got me there.

I'm just having my first coffee and my feathers aren't ruffled yet.

[el_bryanto]

7. Would his points be palatable if he titled his article "Ten ways in which the US is pretty corrupt?"

I do think declaring the US the most corrupt country in all the world is a pretty high bar to clear.

Bryant

[cali]

8. not in terms of scale. Cole makes the point that "petty everyday" corruption

by small players is not the issue he's addressing.

[el_bryanto]

11. It just seems like the sort of title designed for a kneejerk reaction -

regardless of how thoughtful the underlying article is.

Bryant

[cali]

12. Agreed. It's a for shit title.

[ronnie624]

60. It isn't such a high bar, if you think about the result.

In the last 60 years, how many other governments have lied and conspired their way into invading other countries, resulting in wholesale devastation of civil society and the deaths of hundreds of thousands or even millions, always for self-serving reasons? I can't understand how rapine and mass-murder by a government are not measures of corruption.

[Major Hogwash]

13. Don't take him seriously, I don't.

He's a college professor who compared President Obama to Nixon.

Evidently he doesn't know that the economy under President Obama is going a hellova lot better than it was when Bush left the White House in January of 2009.

For the first time in our history, we are about to break the $17 Trillion dollar mark concerning the Gross Domestic Product.
From a recent press release --

Current-dollar GDP

Current-dollar GDP -- the market value of the nation's output of goods and services -- increased 4.8 percent, or $196.6 billion, in the third quarter to a level of $16,857.6 billion. In the second quarter, current-dollar GDP increased 3.1 percent, or $125.7 billion.

From this link from the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis--
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

At the top of their press release it says -

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2013

But, you didn't hear any of that news from Candy Crowley when she was interviewing Ricky Santorum and Dr. Dean this weekend, did ya?

[stevenleser]

16. I think he and the place that article is from normally jump the shark but I agree here. nt

[cali]

18. yeah. He's a college professor. Who would EVER want to take one of those

elitists seriously.

How about actually addressing the points he makes?

And precisely how did he compare Obama to Nixon? Context? Links?

[treestar]

24. Just being a college professor means zilch.

They too will write bilge to get sales.

If it meant something you'd respect Obama's opinions on what is constitutional.

[cali]

43. Cole is widely recognized as an expert on issues that fall under the rubric

of International Relations.

And Obama was never recognized as a Constitutional expert in the same way that Cole is recognized as an expert.

Furthermore, Obama wasn't really an academic. He was part time adjunct faculty.

That said, I don't not respect his opinions on what is or isn't constitutional. I'm not a knee jerk type who mindlessly buys their opinions wholesale. I assess issues individually rather than out of partisanship.

[treestar]

22. Nope. Haven't heard about the unemployment rate going down either.

But a corrupt government releases figures like that, true.

Maybe they should talk to some real people from other countries.

I didn't have to bribe anyone to get my passport. Funny that.

[pangaia]

40. I was a college professor, for many years at a very highly

respected music conservatory, and an Artist-In-Residence to boot, so watch yourself there.
Whatever the US GDP, market value, EFT, BMI or ABC might be, I agree, we are at least one of the most corrupt countries in the world simply on a level of scale.

[Comrade Grumpy]

69. Your post has nothing to do with the content of the OP. Nice deflection, though.

"Don't look there, look over here!"

[Half-Century Man]

17. Youre right; We are the greatest third world nation.

We are civilized, we keep our corruption in the shadows where it belongs, not in the open looking all illegal and stuff.

[treestar]

23. So who have you bribed?

Do you have a driver's license? Did you have to bribe anyone to get it?

Have you ever applied to the government for anything?

[cali]

25. bwahahahaha. seriously? that's your response?

And the massive corruption that is Citizens United? How about the Banksters who got bailed out of their own mess created by their own greed and corruption?

But no, you think that petty crap is so much more important when it comes to corruption.

Your "logic" is just sad.

[treestar]

27. Citizen's United is a case decided under law

You don't have to like it, but it was not "corrupt." It is a written legal decision with a holding and a rationale.

Talk to people from truly corrupt countries.

I have dealt with businessmen (small) who were originally from India. One taunted another saying "you can't get away with this, this is the US, not India." He meant that he'd have to prove or defend in court, not just pay somebody.

Anti US material should at least stick to the viable issues.

Again, did you have to bribe someone to get a driver's license or any other government benefit? I have sat through administrative hearings where qualification for any government benefit was discussed under the legal standards regarding that benefit, and denied or rewarded per those standards. True some government judges or adjudicators get a big head, but there are ways to check such persons if it gets bad enough.

Please quit making DU look utterly insane with this garbage. It's as bad as the extreme right wing stuff.

[cali]

47. Ack. disturbing that you evidently believe that just because it's legal, it's not a product of

corruption. I'm sorry but you have gone completely off the rails with your partisanship. For you, that's the only prism you have.

Your lack of acuity, inability to grasp the most basic concepts and extreme partisanship, make DU look stupid as well as insane.

[treestar]

48. Ad hominem, does not address the issues raised in the prior post

Just because it's legal? Does the legal system mean nothing? You can't just dismiss it. There are people working in it all day every day. They know it's not possible to just pay the judge.

Maybe in the smallest small town, where such a thing could still be exposed.

How do people ever get verdicts against big corporations. Take the famous McDonald's case.

It's not partisan one way or the other to argue that the US legal system is not all that corrupt. Republicans who are elected, got elected. That was voter choice, not corruption. I may not like it, but don't have to hide behind wild allegations of mass conspiracy to deal with it.

[cali]

54. lol even more, tree. YOU just attacked me ad hominem

Love the hypocrisy, tree. You wear it so comfortably.

Gad. The McDonald's case? Grab a tiny little clue: Corporations prevail in court far, far more often than not.

The U.S. legal system is certainly corrupt. Is it better than some? Certainly, but you entirely ignore the points that Cole puts forth.

It has nothing to do with conspiracies are wild accusations. YOU just can't deal with facts.

Sad.

[Fumesucker]

56. Typically we are talking more about having the law written to order with things like the TPP

The corruption in the US is in the law-writing process, long before things ever get to court.

Wealthy people stay wealthy largely through being cheap, they don't invest in something like a politician without having a clear idea of the return they'll get.

ETA: ALEC came to mind just moments after hitting post.

What is ALEC doing but buying legislation?

[Half-Century Man]

58. Are you referring to Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants?

Where an elderly person was so severally scalded, she had to get skin grafts? She was awarded, by a jury, 2.86 million dollars ($160,000.00 for medical expenses/ 2.7 million for punitive damages). That verdict was widely reported.
The judge for that trial reduced the jury's verdict to $640,000.00 total. Then McDonald's counter sued, and both parties agreed to an undisclosed amount less than $600,00.00; that legal tidbit was not widely reported.

Undue influence in a court of law? read and decide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants

[Half-Century Man]

53. Yes.

I paid my bribe for special privileges by offering my body, I'm a veteran. One of the reasons for my enlistment was the GI Bill.

[ronnie624]

62. Our entire legislative process,

is a quasi-legal system of bribery, whereby private money funds political campaigns with an open expectation of quid pro quo. The 'revolving door' enables corporate executives to establish policies and then profit from them when they return to their respective private businesses. The entire US political process has been corrupted from the top down, by private money, and then the corporate owned media establishment frames it all as perfectly normal and legitimate, making it an open secret.

[BlueMTexpat]

34. In a country where "$50,000 is a rounding

error" in our elections system - which is decidedly the truth - third world countries can't even run close to the rampant and accepted culture of corruption that is endemic in the US.

As Cole says, the tragic thing is that the scale of the corruption is so broad that it doesn't even register.

[treestar]

37. Someone can go after that error in the press

and prosecute any wrongdoing in this country. The amount is not an issue - this is still one of the richest countries in the world and one of the largest.

Corruption is where you bribe the elected officials, no matter how elected, rather than their going by the rule of law. Ask anyone who came from a really corrupt country - this one is run by the rule of law.

No one is going to steal your property, not even the government, without legal consequences.

[BlueMTexpat]

44. The point is that

the ONLY wrongdoing that is being prosecuted is the small stuff (like $50,000) and they're "little" people who can't afford fancy lawyers or bribe the right judges.

The US is indeed one of the richest in the world as well as the largest. But when the greatest amount of wealth is concentrated in the hands of 1% of the population (an obscenity which is the result of institutional corruption for which no one is being punished), the majority of us literally live in a third world situation.

Whether you believe that or not, it happens to be the case.

[cali]

49. oh you mean lke the banksters were prosecuted? Bwahahahaha.

Giant fail. BZZZZZT.

Corruption is NOT ONLY ABOUT BRIBING ELECTED OFFICIALS.

Unbelievable that you believe the stuff you post.

No one in this country is going to steal your property without legal consequences???

Bankers. Wall Street. Yikes.

Please stop. It's embarrassing.

[FatBuddy]

70. oy

no there is no comparison to third world countries.

third world countries have the dignity and decency to hide their bribery and corruption.

in the US, bribery and corruption and codified within the law.

[cali]

4. I'm going to kick this- not because I "hate America"

but because I think that Cole makes a strong case and it leads one to ask certain questions- like how has income disparity increased corruption? how has ceding more and more power to corporations increased corruption?

[Fumesucker]

9. Hating America and hating a thoroughly corrupt political system are two different things

I think there are lot of us who loathe the current system but also love our nation.

[Laelth]

10. k&r for the truth, however depressing it may be. n/t

-Laelth

[stevenleser]

14. I agree. When I was in Kenya two years ago talking with people in the street, they all

complained about corruption there. It's the kind of corruption most people think about. You can bribe judges and officials of all stripes and in fact need to do that in many cases to do normal business.

But what I explained to them is that corruption here in the US is institutionalized at the macro level. It's considered so normal we don't call it corruption and it isn't illegal but the connotation is the same.

Wealthy people and businesses pay money to politicians to get their way.

That is corruption no matter what term you use or how neat and above board the process seems.

[cali]

19. well said: You got it in nutshell: "Corruption here in the U.S. is institutionalized at the macro

level"

[treestar]

28. Which would be a crime here

And if exposed, results in a trial.

At county level where I live, there have been major exposures. They go down then.

[stevenleser]

29. What would be a crime here? I'm not understanding to which act you are referring? nt

[treestar]

32. If someone in office were caught taking money

from someone to vote a certain way.

This country may be a lot of things, but the wealthy can only do so much. In Kenya, they maybe could pay and get away with it.

In our country, people don't pay much attention, but those involved will be able to get an investigation started. And it does happen. If the wealthy got caught paying for anything, it would be all over the news and charges and removals from office made.

This country may not be perfect but it is not routinely corrupt as many others are.

If you are talking about campaign contributions, that's a level where we the voters could change if we chose - we could ask the politician about issues rather than just passively responding to slick ads, which is the only reason having money "works."

And yet didn't Obama raise more from small contributions from many people than the Rs could from a few contributions from rich people. And we may be having some income gap develop, but nothing like that of a third world corrupt country. It can be reversed too, with a better economy.

[stevenleser]

42. I have to disagree with you. It happens all the time. I can find the deets if you want.

Campaign donations from particular firms with interests in bills that then come up magically get votes their way from elected officials to whom they contributed.

Is it legal? Technically, I think so, unless you can establish a beyond a reasonable doubt direct line between pay and vote, but we have all decided that a campaign contribution a few months or years before a vote isn't enough to establish that.

But come on, really, we all know what is going on there.

We also know that if someone or some firm has contributed a large amount of money to a politician, that politician is much more likely to take a call from that person or that firm if they have a concern. That access also means a lot and we have also all (in general) decided to decide that this is not corruption. But again, we all know what is going on there. The money has bought the access.

Money buying votes and access is corruption. It might be the neatest most legal corruption in the history of the world but it is still corruption.

[treestar]

46. That's because they are and pay attention

It's still not the same thing as the direct bribes of the third world, so that comparison isn't quite right. Plus that would be true in any country. The cost of campaigns is a different issue compared to direct bribes. And a reporter could make an issue of it, or any citizen that cared could start a campaign against whatever law is supposed to be "bought."

I think the use of a word, like "corruption" should be limited to what it is. Our problems regarding campaign contributions are another issue and should be dealt with without having to resort to using overdramatic language.

[stevenleser]

50. We will have to agree to disagree here. nt

[BlueMTexpat]

36. Excellent summary! eom

[closeupready]

59. Yes, honestly, stuff here in the US people do are criminal offenses

in these Third World nations and Western Europe.

I've tried to make that point over and over, but I guess too many people profit from the corruption.

[L0oniX]

15. Wake up people! Both parties are operating this scheme.

[Thor_MN]

21. The article didn't have a hint of political parties in it...

Why do feel the need say "both parties" when the article says "the US"?

[L0oniX]

26. OFFS Did you even read it?

"Instead of having short, publicly-funded political campaigns with limited and/or free advertising (as a number of Western European countries do), the US has long political campaigns in which candidates are dunned big bucks for advertising."

[Thor_MN]

30. Oh for FUCKING FUCK's sake, did you?

What part of "political campaigns" do you believe pertains to only one party? The article was talking about the ENTIRE FUCKING United States and had absolutely no mention of one party over the others.

It would take extremely low reading comprehension or deep set internal bias to think that article applied to one party. If one merely reads things objectively, whole new worlds open up...

[L0oniX]

38. You must be seeing shit that ain't there. I said "both parties". FFS - post #15

[Thor_MN]

57. No shit, so did the artcle, or did you miss that?

The article had no references to parties, so I asked you why you felt the need to emphasize that. You replied with snark. By saying both parties, the implication is that you felt that the article called out one party. It didn't. Your post was ambiguous at best, disingenuous otherwise. "Yeah" would have served the purpose of your post or even the moronic "^^^" / "^This"

[L0oniX]

64. "the implication is that you felt that the article called out one party" ESP is not your friend.

[Thor_MN]

65. Are you serious? That's WHY I asked you what you meant.

Now, I know that your post was inane and you don't read for content.

Have a nice day in your low information world. Goodbye.

[L0oniX]

66. Freedom to think what ever you want about what anyone else says is always an option.

Reading what you want into something someone said is also an option ...obviously.

[Thor_MN]

68. And misleading posts can always be questioned.

Your post was either totally useless or an attempt to mislead.

[mountain grammy]

20. K & R

Between the money in politics and the number of high government officials rewarded with huge paying positions in the private sector they used to regulate, I think we qualify for one of the top spots in world corruption.

[MrScorpio]

31. Corruption has become the American status quo in both the public and private arenas

There's too much money and power at stake to operate otherwise.

[cali]

51. No, no, no. According to some posters in this thread

we're that shining city on a hill and nary a bit of corruption taints us.

[CorrectOfCenter]

35. Corrupt? Yes. Most corrupt? No.

But garbage blogs pretending to be real news publications need to get the clickthroughs with whatever hyperbole they can muster.

[cali]

52. Scale. Do you even know who Juan Cole is? Somehow, I doubt it.

[boomersense]

45. We ain't seen nothing...the dominoes are in place... nt

dddddddddd

[Vashta Nerada]

55. Yep. Pretty much.

No argument from me.

[Blue_Tires]

61. China and Russia say "hi"

And NO, by mentioning them I'm NOT trying to imply the USA has even been virginal white...

[ronnie624]

63. If we were Chinese or Russian citizens, you might have a point. n/t

[stevenleser]

67. You have a point. Russia would probably top my list of most corrupt.

I don't think we are #1 but we are definitely in the top 5.

[countryjake]

71. Kicking back to the first page!

And recommending!

[Recursion]

72. I don't know. I've been to Benin.

Do you prefer the one big lie or the myriad small lies?

[ronnie624]

73. See this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024125014

[Donald Ian Rankin]

74. This is total bilge, I'm afraid.

Redefining the word "corruption" beyond recognition in an attempt to bend it to fit a country you have an irrational grudge against is contemptible.

Go look at some real corruption.

[Fumesucker]

75. ALEC sought a loyalty oath from key state lawmakers

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024128038

One of the most interesting documents is a proposed job description for the legislators designated to head up their state delegations. Along with striving to increase membership in ALEC by 10 percent a year and informing the group of all public information requests that include ALEC documents, it was proposed that state chairs take a loyalty oath: “I will act with care and loyalty and put the interests of the organization first.”

[historylovr]

76. K & R

[woo me with science]

77. K&R