Corruption and the Utopia as Remedy

Corruption and the Utopia as Remedy

The Crafting of an Actionable Global Definition

By Robert Bacon

The universal ought-to-be of polity, among many things, is the primary yardstick necessary to conceptualize in an appropriate form the problem of global corruption. ?The levels of corruption seem to be increasing since integrating the whole World into a global economy.?As Marshall McLuhan said decades ago, we live in a global village. ?Corruption is symbiotic with crime and grows as illicit networks expand with mighty strength and wealth.??State capture is evident in many places of the World, and this is the most unmistakable evidence of the seriousness of the threat.

How can we develop a practical or select an optimized course of action against corruption if we need to understand the problem better to tackle it??We can only measure if we have functional definitions that enable us to parse corresponding data. ?We need measures to plan. ?We can only define the problem if we develop a sound theory.

It seems that empiric-anthropological theoretic reductionism provides an unstable and limited concept that disables a global systemic approach to combat the toxicity of corruption. ?This view is quite common throughout the World. ?Corruption has many definitions and is highly relativistic. ?We need something else.?Concepts are more relevant to daily life than what many professionals are willing or capable of admitting. ?Relativistic definitions degrade public policy and enforcement actions focused on curtailing corruption and fraud. ?It affects the daily life of us all.

Corruption for us (Rothstein 2014) is a one-dimensional problem in the Global Village that we live in. ?What occurs in Nigeria can have repercussions on Long Island. ?We exist and live within a system of systems. ?Consequently, we need a universal and consistent definition of corruption.?With a universal and consistent definition worldwide, we will have the targeted capability to identify when and how corruptive actions occur.

Corruption is not only the abuse of public trust, a product of moral decay, limited to the public sector, or a consequence of excessive greed. ?Conceptualizing and defining corruption require thought emanating from an interdisciplinary approach. ?This approach should include the ought-to-be -the utopia in strict sense-that philosophic reasoning can provide. ?And it must be universal. ?

To develop a universally valuable theory and definition of corruption, we need to factor in the ought-to-be of society, in contrast to the as-it-is is.?We must evaluate and identify that which is unacceptable and act.

Is this an elitist posture? ?Well, it is.?Political science, philosophy, anthropology, sociology, economics, and criminal justice are the primary fields that must be integrated to challenge corruption and fraud. ?Scholars need to work on this.?We cannot expect populations disgusted with the outburst of bribery and fraud to think clearly about the threats to society while being influenced by the local bias of culture, customs, and habits or any collective subconsciousness that enables corruption. ?We need clarity of thought.?Objective clarity.

Making sense of corruption and analyzing it requires academic commitment and systematic discipline.?We recommend that those interested in thinking about this phenomenon revise the works of Dan Hough, Bo Rothstein, and Aiysha Varraich.?We need to act; we need our plan; we need to understand the threat.?Do you recall the famous maxim of Sun Tzu?

We need to know the enemy and then craft our stratagem objectively…

For this, before we engage, we must have designed our utopia. ?Political philosophy is needed! ?And… a consistent universal definition.?For all.