The way we live influences how we think and how we act. This is basic materialism. However, “power” is not the moving factor, class is. This is why administration has changed dramatically based on modes of production and distribution. Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries. This isn’t because socialism is more resistant to corruptive forces like “power,” but instead because the class relations are different.
I call the idea that “power corrupts” supernatural thinking because it erases the actual materialist cause, and injects a vague and nebulous concept of an evil corruptive force. Administration is not the enemy, class is.
It isn’t merely wishful thinking, it’s based on actual analysis of socialist countries. Administration is a necessity for large scale production, without which we cannot abolish class, unless you wish to turn to early communalism.
Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries.
Corruption is always a problem, but “power” is not a corruptive force. This is why we must return to class analysis, and how this impacts people.
I read the study you linked, not only was it largely based on lab studies and not the real world, it also entirely erased class from the experiments. Much of what it contributed to “power” is in actual fact a result of differences in class, and erasing this essential function from how class dynamics shape differences in individual authority fundamentally paints a massive hole in the experiment and conclusions.
Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries.
Hundred of thousands of trials for corruption 63 years after the foundation of the People Republic (this declaration is from 2012)… it does look like a pretty huge scale to me. There’s corruption in my capitalist country, but far less than in China.
is in actual fact a result of differences in class
You’re pointing to China actually punishing corruption in a country of billions, and France for example deliberately not punishing corruption, as an example of socialist countries being the same as capitalist when it comes to corruption. This is absurd.
As for your study, it equates income to class, which is just wrong.
You pointed to China punishing corruption as evidence of “your capitalist country” having “less corruption.” Capitalism itself is a system where socialized production produces private profits, it’s by definition a “corrupt” system.
As for your study, we are talking about class, not income, which is not useful for our purposes at all.
Also not sure why you abandoned the point about large industry and administration being necessary, did you just silently concede that point?
The way we live influences how we think and how we act. This is basic materialism. However, “power” is not the moving factor, class is. This is why administration has changed dramatically based on modes of production and distribution. Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries. This isn’t because socialism is more resistant to corruptive forces like “power,” but instead because the class relations are different.
I call the idea that “power corrupts” supernatural thinking because it erases the actual materialist cause, and injects a vague and nebulous concept of an evil corruptive force. Administration is not the enemy, class is.
Wishful thinking, again.
Both are.
It isn’t merely wishful thinking, it’s based on actual analysis of socialist countries. Administration is a necessity for large scale production, without which we cannot abolish class, unless you wish to turn to early communalism.
It’s totally wishful thinking. Even Xi Jinping recognized that corruption was an “existential threat” for China. Or isn’t China socialist?
Corruption is always a problem, but “power” is not a corruptive force. This is why we must return to class analysis, and how this impacts people.
I read the study you linked, not only was it largely based on lab studies and not the real world, it also entirely erased class from the experiments. Much of what it contributed to “power” is in actual fact a result of differences in class, and erasing this essential function from how class dynamics shape differences in individual authority fundamentally paints a massive hole in the experiment and conclusions.
Hundred of thousands of trials for corruption 63 years after the foundation of the People Republic (this declaration is from 2012)… it does look like a pretty huge scale to me. There’s corruption in my capitalist country, but far less than in China.
In fact, both play a role.
You’re pointing to China actually punishing corruption in a country of billions, and France for example deliberately not punishing corruption, as an example of socialist countries being the same as capitalist when it comes to corruption. This is absurd.
As for your study, it equates income to class, which is just wrong.
It would be right? It’s not what I did.
It’s in theory. In practice it’s a good way to have data. Not perfect data, but meaningful trends.
You pointed to China punishing corruption as evidence of “your capitalist country” having “less corruption.” Capitalism itself is a system where socialized production produces private profits, it’s by definition a “corrupt” system.
As for your study, we are talking about class, not income, which is not useful for our purposes at all.
Also not sure why you abandoned the point about large industry and administration being necessary, did you just silently concede that point?
God I hate Europeans.
Are you for real saying that France has less corruption than China?
Don’t hate who you envy.