More on Corruption...

While expressing his views on my recent post on corruption, my friend Pranav brought up the topic of 'inequality' and many interesting issues related to it. The following were the main points he made:

1. The root cause of corruption is economic inequality - Countries like Sweden which have lower levels of economic inequality seem to be more prosperous and less corrupt. However, I was not totally clear on the directions of causality, if any, between inequality, corruption and prosperity here. One can have views, but I think we need a more detailed study to come to a conclusion. Apparently, it seems economic equality among the masses can be managed to a good extent by smart policy; and at the same time, if economic prosperity of the country as a whole is managed through aggressive economic activity (the tendency for which might lie in social attitudes), the propensity for corrupt actions can be minimized to a great extent.
2. Economic inequality comes naturally and is unavoidable, yet manageable to a certain extent - This point was made independent of the last set of points, and was substantiated by an excellent thought experiment by some great guy, whose name Pranav mentioned by I don't remember now. The thought experiment was to have a world with a group of people, equal in the way humans are (with our unique and different personalities and abilities), and then give them all an equal amount of money (or I would say some equivalent of money in such a world at a kick-start stage). The result of that experiment, according to the thinker of the thought experiment, is that with time, the world will work in such a way that the equality of the distribution of wealth will vanish and eventually a small minority shall hold most of the wealth. Pranav fit in the 80-20 principle there, but I think we see a far higher concentration of wealth in very few hands in the real world. As I see it, wealth is an indicator of a sum of all abilities a person has, through which a person stakes his/her claim for a share of the resources of this world. This is literally a fight for what is there. And since we humans are not at all equal, it is not possible to achieve economic equality either. That is, as long as we stake a claim on the resources of the planet. If we all give it up, and become saints, then perhaps we'll be equal. As long as there is competition, there can't be economic equality. But lack of competition is probably not good for human progress. And so is equality.
3. Tendency towards wrongdoing is directly related to nature and deep rootedness of social value systems - If the social values we imbibe as we grow up are so strongly against doing things that are conventionally wrong, that they can induce a deep sense of guilt even upon slightest slip in behavior, the chance of an average citizen indulging in such activity is highly remote and unlikely. Pranav elaborated this point with three kinds of wrong actions as per the norms of any society in this world - taking bribes, cheating on spouse and murder. I agree with Pranav, and we can clearly see, that this is the intent with which most of our social and religious institutions, stories (mainly mythological), relationships, etc., are designed and developed. And we, as common people, adhere to most of all that just coz we want a safe and comfortable life, and no threats on us because of anybody else, and in return we assure the same to others from our side. But at the same time, on second thoughts, I feel that this adherence is because of a deep-rooted fear - of death, painful life, etc. If somehow this vulnerability goes away for a person, or something can shield him/her from all human threats to life, will he give a damn about the value systems of society? Not to a very great extent, I feel. And that's why they say 'Power Corrupts'.