(Assignment 2) Corruption and Development - Mrinalini Badrinarayanan

1.     AKSHYAH’S BLOG POST #1: NEPOTISMO, CLIENTISOMO AND CORRUPTION IN ITALY:

This post takes the case of Italy to examine the phenomenon of corruption and cites sociological studies to explore the links between corruption in Italy to cultural and political factors. The post brings out the unique nature of corruption in Italy to question conventional understandings of corruption. The use of studies to explore the connections between family structures and social relationships, and between corruption and political legitimacy shows that the idea of corruption has to be problematized to lend a sociological aspect to it. Clientism in particular, is an example of this, as it shows the connection between reciprocity and legitimacy. So, one can understand that that it is social norms, and not the mere breaking of laws, or the application of a universal notion of merit that determine how people perceive and react to corruption.

The author does not attempt to give a coherent structure to the different studies that she has cited and summarized. Hence the article seems disjointed to an extent. The socio-political causes or conditions that enable corruption could have been better linked and explored to a greater extent to give the reader a better understanding.

2.     Piled Higher and Deeper – An analysis of Denmark-ANAND SREEKUMAR:

The second post problematizes the logic of the corruption perception index and the Transparency International by taking the case of funding for political parties in Denmark. Here, one can see the tilt towards public sector corruption as opposed to the ethics of campaign funding. Legal loopholes complicate the legal aspect of corruption. The author of the post associates Denmark with the concept of ‘influence markets’, saying that political parties allow private interests to access their influence on policy. He cites Aristotle’s call for subjectivity- the need to examine individual circumstances before arriving at general universal principles as a way of understanding the manifestations of corruption. Going from this idea, the author asks for a change or ‘malleability’ in the concept of corruption due to a changing socio-political scenario.

The article induces one to think about the role of social consensus in setting norms for ethical behavior, especially in democracies. 

3.     Assignment No-1-Indonesia: A Social Perspective of Corruption - Angitha S M:

The author takes Francis Fukuyama’s concept of social capital and trust to apply it to the corruption scandals in Indonesia, specifically to the Suharto and Hambalang corruption cases. Family members play a major role in these corruption processes, and the author equates such a phenomenon to particularized trust among family members (familistic associations), and a lack of generalized trust between non-kinship agents (voluntary associations) is associated with these cases. Voluntary association is assumed to be present in societies where there is a sense of shared fate among communities, and Indonesia is not considered a society where the people give importance to ‘shared fate’. The author thus roots corruption to loyalty which is group-based, and cites the feudalistic political structure of Indonesia as a cause for group-based loyalty.  

It would be interesting to see the public perception of corruption to see if social capital and trust in Indonesian society can change or has changed at least to an extent. The role of civil society in Indonesia would be a potentially useful avenue to explore the possibility of change.