Corruption

"Is Russia a fascist state? A totalitarian one? A dictatorship? A cult of personality? A system? An autocracy? An ideocracy? A kleptocracy? The best description of the Russian state is a mafia state."

"Yet we are concerned with more than just the financial impact. These groups may infiltrate our businesses. They may provide logistical support to hostile foreign powers. They may try to manipulate those at the highest levels of government. Indeed, these so-called “iron triangles” of organized criminals, corrupt government officials, and business leaders pose a significant national security threat."

"Systems of governance that are seized by a tiny cabal become mafia states. The early years —Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton in the United States—are marked by promises that the pillage will benefit everyone. The later years—George W. Bush and Barack Obama — are marked by declarations that things are getting better even though they are getting worse. The final years — Donald Trump — see the lunatic trolls, hedge fund parasites, con artists, conspiracy theorists and criminals drop all pretense and carry out an orgy of looting and corruption. The rich never have enough."

"[Litvinenko's thesis] said the Kremlin, its well-resourced spy agencies, and the Russian mafia had merged. In effect, they formed a single criminal entity, a mafia state. Litvinenko's reward was a radioactive cup of tea, delivered to him by two Russians in a London hotel bar."

"Litvinenko’s theory was that Putin and the intelligence services have taken over, manipulated and absorbed the criminal groups... We had accepted the idea that the world of the Russian mafia was like that. But it’s true that the case made other people think this gentleman [Alexander Litvinenko] had told the truth, because now he was dead."

"Grinda stated that he considers Belarus, Chechnya, and Russia to be virtual "mafia states" ... One cannot differentiate between the activities of the government and OC [organized crime] groups."

"As Castro’s swearing-in ceremony on Jan. 27 approaches, the new president faces a daunting question: How do you rebuild democratic institutions in a mafia state?"

"I kept reminding your government on the appointment of Lokpal and Lokayukts as for three years now. I have also been reminding about the welfare of farmers. But neither did your government reply to my letters, not did you take any action"

"I used to believe then and I continue to believe now that it was not a movement about Lokpal (anti-corruption authority) but Lok-pal (pulse of the people). It was about the strength of the people and that people can do something about the issue. This is what the movement was about and it played a critical role in taking the re-engaging decisions with public affair. The decade prior to that saw sectional movements, which brought people to public life, such as the Mandal Commission, the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, among others. There was no movement which brought the general citizen into public life as a citizen, and not as a member of a section."

"In hindsight, there are two things that I do regret. One is not seeing that the movement (IAC), to a large extent, was supported and propped up by the BJP and the RSS for their own political purposes to bring down the UPA government and get themselves in power. I have no doubt about their [RSS and BJP] role today. He (Anna Hazare) was also probably not aware of it. But Kejriwal was aware of it and I have little doubt about it."

"Capitalists preach "the market" for the working class – stand on your own two feet, don't rely on the government – but themselves sponge off the public big time. Just look at the billions in subsidies and tax concessions the fossil fuel companies, huge enterprises for the most part, extract from state and federal governments in Australia. The vehicle manufacturers raked in hundreds of millions a year from the for decades until deciding it wasn't enough and went overseas. This is why big companies and industry groups hire armies of former politicians to lobby on their behalf in the offices of premiers and prime ministers – there's money in government coffers and they want it."

"Increasingly, our large corporations have been abusing the awesome power that they have amassed. [...] This abuse of power shows itself in many ways. Particularly disturbing have been the efforts of the corporations to conscript the political process for their own benefit through their large financial contributions, both legal and illegal. Although corporate political influence became more pronounced under President Ronald Reagan, it has long exercised a heavy hand over the , the Congress, and the state governments. Former top corporate executives often hold many of the most powerful cabinet and top agency positions in the executive branch of government. Politicians listen when large corporations speak. They have enormous advantages in influencing political decision-makers."

"No abuse of power has so tarnished the corporate image or shown the need for government legislation as the numerous public revelations of wholesale political and foreign bribery that came to light during the 1970s. These revelations are one of the most sordid chapters in American corporate history."

"The destiny was fulfilled which the father of the gods, Enlil of the mountain, had decreed for Gilgamesh: "In nether-earth the darkness will show him a light: of mankind, all that are known, none will leave a monument for generations to come to compare with his. The heroes, the wise men, like the new moon have their waxing and waning. Men will say, 'Who has ever ruled with might and with power like him?' As in the dark month, the month of shadows, so without him there is no light. O Gilgamesh, this was the meaning of your dream. You were given the kingship, such was your destiny, everlasting life was not your destiny. Because of this do not be sad at heart, do not be grieved or oppressed; he has given you power to bind and to loose, to be the darkness and the light of mankind. He has given unexampled supremacy over the people, victory in battle from which no fugitive returns, in forays and assaults from which there is no going back. But do not abuse this power, deal justly with your servants in the palace, deal justly before the face of the Sun."

"Our founders were insightful students of human nature. They feared the abuse of power because they understood that every human being has not only "better angels" in his nature, but also an innate vulnerability to temptation — especially the temptation to abuse power over others."

"Abuse of power has become the norm in Moon's South Korea, and Koreans are taking notice."

"Just four months after winning the April 15 general election by a landslide, and securing 176 seats in the 300-seat National Assembly, Moon Jae-in and his governing Democratic Party (DP) are faced with an alarming change in public sentiment. [...] This drastic decline in public support for the president and the government illustrates not only the volatile nature of South Korea's democracy, but also the growing backlash against their attempts to make abuse of power the new norm in the country. Indeed, since their stunning election victory in April, President Moon and his party have repeatedly undermined the rule of law, ignored the procedures put in place to ensure the separation of powers, and made controversial moves to further their populist agenda and help their allies escape accountability."

"Since the election, the DP government also made several moves to bring the Supreme Prosecutors' Office (SPO) fully under its control. [...] The government's attempts to shield its members and supporters from being held accountable for alleged abuses of power are not limited to bringing the SPO under control either. President Moon and the DP's silence on and apparent unwillingness to get to the bottom of the sexual harassment allegations directed at powerful heads of local government, including the highly influential , is yet another example of their desire to make abuse of power and impunity the new norm in South Korea. In light of all this, it is hardly surprising that Koreans are starting to turn their backs on Moon and his party who were elected on a promise to end corruption and abuse of power - ills that have beset Korean governments since the country's successful transition towards democracy in 1987. The alarming decline in the public's support for Moon and the DP is a clear warning that Moon risks becoming a lame duck in the fourth year of his five-year presidency and in the lead-up to the April 2021 by-elections and the 2022 presidential election."

"Corruption and misuse of power are widespread phenomena. They are one of the major, if not the major, threats to democratic government and the rule of law. But at the lower ends of the power hierarchies as well, in society as well as organizations, the abuse of power is a major obstacle in the way of many people's pursuit of happiness. Moreover, the diversion of official organizational power for the selfish ends of the powerholder is necessarily detrimental to the aims and goals of the organization or society."

"Even among the working class, concentration of power leads to its abuse, and there is no restraint on [civil] rights violations."

"Constant experience shows us that every man who has power is inclined to abuse it; he goes until he finds limits."

"It is certain, higher powers are not to be resisted; but some persons in power may be resisted. The powers are ordained of God; but kings commanding unjust things are not ordained of God to do such things; but to apply this to tyrants, I do not understand. Magistrates in some acts may be guilty of tyranny, and yet retain the power of magistracy; but tyrants cannot be capable of magistracy, nor any one of the scripture-characters of righteous rulers. They cannot retain that which they have forfeited, and which they have overturned; and usurpers cannot retain that which they never had. They may act and enact some things materially just, but they are not formally such as can make them magistrates, no more than some unjust actions can make a magistrate a tyrant. A murderer, saving the life of one and killing another, does not make him no murderer: once a murderer ay a murderer, once a robber ay a robber, till he restore what he hath robbed: so once a tyrant ay a tyrant, till he makes amends for his tyranny, and that will be hard to do."

"The concrete does specificate the abstract in actuating it, as a magistrate in his exercising government, makes his power to be magistry; a robber, in his robbing, makes his power to be robbery; an usurper in his usurping makes his power to be usurpation; so a tyrant in his tyrannizing, can have no power but tyranny. As the abstract of a magistrate is nothing but magistracy, so the abstract of a tyrant is nothing but tyranny. It is frivolous then to distinguish between a tyrannical power in the concrete, and tyranny in the abstract; the power and the abuse of the power: for he hath no power as a tyrant, but what is abused. [...] It is altogether impertinent to use such a distinction, with application to tyrants or usurpers, as many do in their pleading for the owning of our oppressors; for they have no power, but what is the abuse of power."

"Increasingly, our large corporations have been abusing the awesome power that they have amassed. [...] Former top corporate executives often hold many of the most powerful cabinet and top agency positions in the executive branch of government."

"Companies like Booz Allen Hamilton and AT&T employ hordes of former top government officials, while hordes of current top defense officials are past (and likely future) employees of those same corporations. Constantly growing the surveillance state is a way to ensure that the government funds keep flowing, that the revolving door stays greased."

"Bush DOJ lawyer Jack Goldsmith hailed what he called "an underappreciated phenomenon: the patriotism of the American press". [...] The revolvind door moves the media figures into high-level Washington jobs, jut as government officials often leave office to the reward of a lucrative media contract."

"The factory farm industry and its armies of lobbyists wield great influence in the halls of federal and state power, while animal rights activists wield virtually none. This imbalance has produced increasingly oppressive laws, accompanied by massive law enforcement resources devoted to punishing animal activists even for the most inconsequential nonviolent infractions. [...] Though it receives modest attention, this revolving door spins faster, and in more blatantly sleazy ways, when it comes to the USDA and its mandate to safeguard animal welfare. The USDA is typically dominated by executives from the very factory farm industries that are most in need of vibrant regulation. For that reason, animal welfare laws are woefully inadequate, but the ways in which they are enforced is typically little more than a bad joke. Industrial farming corporations like Smithfield know they can get away with any abuse or “mislabeling” deceit (such as misleading claims about their treatment of animals) because the officials who have been vested with the sole authority to enforce these laws — federal USDA officials — are so captive to their industry. Courts have repeatedly ruled that private individuals, animal rights groups, and even state authorities have no right to sue to enforce animal welfare laws, because the “exclusive authority” lies with the U.S. government, which has no real interest in actually enforcing those laws. [...] In sum, with industry insiders dominating the sole agency (USDA) with the authority to regulate factory farms, animals that are captive, abused, tortured, and slaughtered en masse have little chance, even when it comes to just applying existing laws with a minimal amount of diligence. The politics of the U.S. — including the fact that a key farm state, Iowa, plays such a central role in presidential elections — means there are massive forces arrayed behind factory farms, and very few in support of animal welfare."

"Here’s a story that would be reported only in passing and remain remarkably uncommented upon by the punditocracy or anyone in Congress: seven months after that resignation, Mattis took up a position on the board of , one of the nation’s largest defense contractors, with all the perks involved. (Admittedly, he had been on that same board from the moment he retired from the military in 2013 until the president gave him the proverbial Trumpian bear hug and appointed him secretary of defense in 2017.) There were no columns about it. No pundits raised a storm. Nobody of any significance said much of anything. Oh, let me amend that for accuracy’s sake. There was indeed a public enthusiast quoted in the media: General Dynamics Chairwoman and CEO , the head of a company that, just after Mattis's resignation, landed a $714 million delivery order to upgrade 174 Army s. [...] On the very board that Mattis rejoined sit six other former military officers and officials, including a former Navy admiral, a former Air Force general, a former deputy secretary of defense, and Novakovic herself who once worked for the CIA and . And while we’re on the subject, don’t forget about all those figures from the world of the weapons makers who have headed the other way like , the current secretary of defense, who was previously a lobbyist for Raytheon."

"Much of Narendra Modi's legitimacy among the Indian public comes from the perception that, unlike most of the political class, he is personally beyond reproach when it comes to financial corruption. Moreover, it was he who declared a war on corruption, the most emphatic example of which, the government claims, is the demonetization exercise. But Mr. Modi's silence on the corruption story finally exposed the hollowness of the government’s crusade against corruption, which in any case, has so far amounted to nothing more than targeted attacks against rival politicians. In politics, perceptions play a huge role. This is the first time that Mr. Modi's carefully crafted image as incorruptible and as a crusader against corruption has taken a considerable beating. WhatsApp messages, tweets and Facebook posts were rife with jokes about Mr. Shah’s businesses, and Mr. Modi’s silence. As examples from history show, when jokes start circulating about a powerful leader, cracks in political legitimacy begin to appear."

"Generally, the death of a judge, in what seem to be mysterious circumstances, while presiding over a case against the second most powerful person in the country, and the closest associate of the head of the government, would be make prime-time television in a democracy. Similarly, the allegations of corruption against the family of the same person would have garnered media attention. But recent events in India prove otherwise. [...] Despite the explosive nature of the story and its potentially unprecedented implications for Indian democracy (in independent India's history, to my knowledge, there is no instance of a judge being assassinated) there was a stunned silence in the mainstream and big media, especially, the English-language television channels that have a disproportionate influence in the setting of the political ."

"And yet, corruption was there, well-grounded. The reason was that autocrats could not always behave as autocrats, and in matters of government there is above all laws the law of expediency.... Corruption in medieval India could not be stamped out because it was perhaps never meant to be stamped out..."

"Sultan Balban was struck by the fact that many military grantees of land were unfit for service; they never went out on campaigns and yet had continued in possession of their land and its revenues. ... "Some of them went leisurely to perform their military duties, but the greater part stayed at home making excuses, the acceptance of which they secured by presents and bribes.... to the Deputy Muster-Master and his officials."... [Balban] left the above mentioned corrupt practice to continue unchecked, although its defects were more than obvious."

"[In a veiled criticism of the removal of Hindu clerks (mostly Xayasthas and Xhatris), and appointment of ‚unprofessional men‛ in their place, Bhimsen in NuskhÁ-i-DilkushÁ writes,] ‚There is a great difference between (hereditary) professional writers and unprofessional. Those who are of this profession are not wanting in generosity, while unprofessional (writers) disregarding the good and harm of the soldiers extend their palms for bribes. In the present age, unprofessional men having learnt the art of arithmetic have become master of authority, and engage in plundering the public. The mansabdÁrs have been thus reduced to the extreme point of poverty; how can they keep troops? I wished to name in detail these writers who (have risen) to the rank of Assistant Peshdast, to the Diwani (revenue) officer, bakshÍ and others, who accumulate large sums and give improper bribes. But I proper.‛"

"In 1989, Rajiv Gandhi lost the election because he was seen as corrupt by ordinary, rural Indians who made up ditties about the ‘son-in-law of Italy’. The Congress party has never explained why the best friends of Rajiv and his wife, Mr and Mrs Quattrocchi, were bribed in this deal. Nor has there been a credible explanation for why Rajiv did not make public the names of those bribed in this deal, even after Bofors officials came to Delhi and offered to give them.... whoever advised the Congress president (Rahul Gandhi) to continue charging Modi with corruption should have reminded him that the ghost of Bofors still lurks in the shadows of 10 Janpath."

"You said I am not a challenger this time. That is not true. I am a challenger who is fighting against those things that harm India. Corruption weakens our country from within, I am challenging it. Dynasty politics weakens our democracy, I am challenging it. Terror threatens our nation’s very existence, I am challenging it. ‘ Chalta Hai’ attitude held our nation’s progress hostage for a long time, I am challenging it. Forces of negativity try to obstruct an aspirational India from rising, I am challenging them. The people of India too are challengers. Along with us, they too, are fighting parties like Congress that want to take India back to the era of corruption and loot."

"The ecclesiastical authorities, for all practical purposes, acted as servants of the State in the confrontation with Jesus. In one version, the chief priest protests: "Caesar is our king, we have no other king but Caesar." In the dispute over jurisdiction between Pilate and Herod, they warn: "If you release him, you will not be Caesar's friend." The ecclesiastics were, practically speaking, surrogates of the State. That is an all-too-familiar situation for chief priests to be found in."

"James W. Fifield Jr. ... convinced the industrialists that clergymen could be the means of regaining the upper hand in their war with Roosevelt in the coming years. As men of God, they could give voice to the same conservative complaints as business leaders, but without any suspicion that they were motivated solely by self-interest."

"The teacher is a royal functionary, steadily promoted, making a career—and now be dramatically plays Christianity, in short, he plays comedy. He lectures about renunciation, but he himself is being steadily promoted; he teaches all that about despising worldly titles and rank, but he himself is making a career."

"I will not seek bribes"

"I will not pay bribes"

"Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges."

"If some infringement of traditional liberties and privacy is involved, then I believe it is a price which the community ought to be prepared to pay, if it really wishes to see corruption ousted from our public life. If it is not ready to surrender some of these liberties, then it cannot easily, in the future, complain that the Government is reluctant to tackle the evil with sufficient vigour."

"A corrupted mind can't recognize the beauty of the world."

"At length corruption, like a general flood (So long by watchful ministers withstood), Shall deluge all; and avarice, creeping on, Spread like a low-born mist, and blot the sun."

"None of the governments, as they now exist, is worthy of the philosophic nature, and hence we see that nature warped and corrupted; just as a foreign seed, when sown in an alien soil, generally loses its native quality, and tends to be subdued and pass into the plant of the country, even so this philosophic nature, so far from preserving its distinctive power, now suffers a decline and takes on a different character."

"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil."

"What about the other parts of the world? The criminologist Gary LaFree and the sociologist Orlando Patterson have shown that the relationship between crime and democratization is an inverted U. Established democracies are relatively safe places, as are established autocracies, but emerging democracies and semi-democracies (also called anocracies) are often plagued by violent crime and vulnerable to civil war, which sometimes shade into each other. The most crime-prone regions in the world today are Russia, sub-Saharan Africa, and parts of Latin America. Many of them have corrupt police forces and judicial systems which extort bribes out of criminals and victims alike and dole out protection to the highest bidder. Some, like Jamaica (33.7), Mexico (11.1), and Colombia (52.7), are racked by drug-funded militias that operate beyond the reach of the law. Over the past four decades, as drug trafficking has increased, their rates of homicide have soared. Others, like Russia (29.7) and South Africa (69), may have undergone decivilizing processes in the wake of the collapse of their former governments. The decivilizing process has also racked many of the countries that switched from tribal ways to colonial rule and then suddenly to independence, such as those in sub-Saharan Africa and Papua New Guinea (15.2)."

"In 2004, Transparency International listed the ten worst kleptocratic rulers of recent times. Mobutu came in third, followed by Sani Abacha (Nigeria, 1993-98; stole US$2-5 billion); Slobodan Milošević (Serbia/Yugoslavia, 1989-2000, US$1 billion); Jean-Claude Duvalier (Haiti, 1971-86, US$300-800 million); Alberto Fujimori (Peru, 1990-2000, US$600 million); Pavlo Lazarenko, Ukraine (1996-7, US$114-200 million); Arnoldo Aleman (Nicaragua, 1997-2002, US$100 million); and Joseph Estrada (Philippines, 1998-2001, US$78-80 million). Second was Ferdinand Marcos, Philippine president from 1965 to 1986, who with his wife Imelda — famed for her vast collection of shoes — plundered the Philippine economy through a system of ‘crony capitalism’, amassing a vast fortune while ordinary Filipinos went hungry. Opponents were arrested by the military — over 60,000 from 1972 to 1977 —- and many tortured and murdered, including opposition leader Benigno Aquino. A popular rebellion in 1986 finally forced him from office and he fled with his wife to Hawaii. Transparency International put his stolen wealth at US$5-10 billion, others much higher. Marcos died in 1989 before he could stand trial. The worst kleptocrat was Mohamed Suharto, Indonesian president from 1967 until 1998 but virtual military ruler from 1957. His brutal regime saw 2 million massacred following an attempted Communist coup in 1965, 250,000 killed in his 1975 invasion of East Timor and hundreds of thousands tortured and murdered during his dictatorship."

"The level of corruption we're seeing now... I'm a nonpartisan attacker of the corruption I see. I've been doing it for 40 years, and what you're seeing in the public space now is the type of arrogance and criminal activity that we were always working our way towards. Now you see it. ...[H]ow do the people at large respond to this? ...The judicial system is not saving us the way it should. ...[W]e have to wake up and say "we're tired of this..." And... if we don't, we're going to be just like all the other things that could've been something."

"We are in the midst of formulating laws and ways of administration so that we can reduce corruption and maybe even eradicate corruption in Malaysia. We see the US which has a system of lobbyists and they are paid to influence the government to do certain things for the people who paid the money. That, to us, is corruption. We will not allow that in Malaysia."