Topic: hypothetical solution of corruption in politics - page 2. (Read 356 times)

I agree with idea that simple people should be the highest supervision over politicians. Well, it is just like that in democracy, unfortunatelly it doesn't work - but I don't think that because all people are corrupted. They aren't - truth is always a little bit more complicated.

Lots of people are just too stupid to distinguish evil and good or it is simple to deceive them. Lots of people just don't care - because they do not undestand politics (who really does?  ) or they just want to live simple lifes (IMO not bad). And yes, lots of them are corrupted (but definitelly not all).

There are one other aspect of all this. What we consider as good and as bad? It is just our subjective point of view. Do you think that people of (for example) Islamic State consider themselves as bad? IMHO they don't. Maybe they think about themselves as saviors and warriors of justice (exactly as our politicians). Another example. Do you know Star Wars? Great Jedi warriors, keepers of the peace, featuring as good. Oposite of them are Sith Lords, generally considered as bad. But what is the final goal of the Sith? Peace, exactly as for Jedi. It is just fictional story, but reflects the truth - the concept of evil and good (which is so often used in discussions even on this forum) is just reflection of our own selfish and subjecive valuation of what we see around us.

And what I want to say? Maybe bad politics are just trying to survive, to win endless fight of evolution in overpopulated Earth just like everybody. They choose tools as they did maybe because they suffer from messiah complex or maybe because it is very pleasant to have a power. It looks like a irrelevant detail, but it helps from going crazy - there are no bad nor good and maybe all this is natural as whole evolution.

Politicans should be regarded only as administrators who govern and legislate within a remit under the framework of a nations constitution and should be held to account not be a controlled opposition or through a party procedure but by the electorate. There should be a strong oversight board with the power to dismiss and prosecute those who abuse their populations through corruption and overreach the same way there should be an independent policing body to police the police but unfortunately men and women are corrupt themselves deep down and always end up choosing to collaborate with evil rather than confront it.

Hypothetical solution,for corruption,base in our country BIG YES,if the leader not serving good idea and good planning in one country never can solve the corruption,but even the leader in one country trying stop ,that situations still a lot of people or some of them who sit in politics ,hiding and abusing the government rules to continues what they wanted to be in the government.Must the leader good advocacy

Well, that's some idea for sure and it's a good thing your thinking towards abetted world and not just folding hands. For this, I applaud and encourage you!

Though, one thing I know for sure is about humanity is the fact that, man will always want to find a way. Most times, the looted funds used by politicians in office for the acquisition of certain properties are mainly funds gotten from contracts and not there salaries alone. In the case of trying to keep them away from accessing these funds, you directly hinder any form of developmental ideas with regards to infrastructure and basic/social amenities and one wouldn't want that for a country. Hence, you give the free hand.

Now, virtually everyone or most persosns has three price. Given this notion, the individual in office could go about trying for officers with corrupt triats and even not within the political system. Even entrepreneurs that seek to expand there business. A partnership could be done secretly following legal processes or even buying of shares in someone else's name and the trend continues.

So, one can only try, through series of exposing the corrupt in office and pursue for justice because, we can't just fold our arms. While we hope that, one with good morals standard gets to occupy the seats some day and his predecessor follows suit.

Well, public service in my theory is hard and probably not for everybody. If you want to serve and have family, you will have to count with this. If you raise your children in material way so yes, maybe children can have a problem with that. But I think that it is everybody's choice how he/she raise own children. Maybe lot of public servants (in the meaning of politicians) would decide to not have a family at all.

Ohhh, so all of their assets that they deemed "necessary' will be confiscated after their term? is that how will this work?, so even if the family is living a luxary life while the politician is in position, they will go back after the term ends. Oh nice

But doesn't that will affect their children mentally, and emotionally as their items will be gone without their knowing, thus having issues.

It's a good proposal and helps rule out the monetary reward motivation factor. It could work once they are moderate and have no extremist leanings towards right or left spectrum and are absolutely subject to a strong constitution that protects the individual freedom of it's citizens and their nations public assets and natural resource wealth.

Well, this won't work. Maybe they will gain some wealth, but they cannot keep it after next elections. Politicians simply cannot buy anything - because they do not have any money. Politicians will be a special kind of servants - they get humble living, some clothes, food to survive...

I think this is a good idea, but politicians will find a way to use this concept for corruption, and I envision how will they do it...

Politician 1 will claim an essential need for their family (Obviously not needed) but claimed to be essential, and politicians 2 3 4 and 5 will be his backer that it is essential thus will be approved. And this will go on and on, and by the end they will have high end gadgets, house and lots for their children's, multiple luxary cars, etc.

IMHO money is just part of all this. Politicians are powerful because they can creates laws and people obey those, doesn't matter how stupid they are. Politicians have police in hand so they can force you to obey. And finally - they have money, so you cannot do anything with it - it is simple too hard to show politicians that you do not agree and not to be ignored.

What I can think of it is that every position in the highest place in the government should be paid little and above minimum for each country. This will determine who really have the heart of public service.
They won't be stopped on how they'll allocate the budget but all will be transparent and it's just the salary of them won't be that much.

Full transparent use of government money which public can access it anytime. Applying blockchain technology for all the government expenses with detailed attachment of the expenses. This will help to avoid corruption and abuse on power. Politicians are just powerful because they can use the government money as they own without being notice. But if imagine if they can't use the money, They will become just a normal employee with normal salary.

Yes, it is obvious. That's why I called it hypothetical. It is just a theory.

No matter what you change in the rules, since they are going to be in control of all those things then you can't expect to be corruption free but instead of giving certain time period as ruler people can remove them from leader position at any time of majority people don't like them but no democratic country will implement this because it is going to cause danger to the politicians.

You might be able to mitigate risk to some degree by having an "ombudsman" type of oversight body where the members are freely elected and NOT appointed. Appointments to boards are open to corruption as opposed to democratically elected member who can serve no more than 1 year without then having to be relected. Similiar to how state sherrifs in the US  are elected instead of nominated maybe as one example but there are other options. The key point is to ensure there is no political extremist allowed to sit in office or on an oversight board and only people without any conflict of interest whatsoever who cannot be biased for exampe siding with a far left politican because they too have similiar views etc. They should be thouroughly vetted to even pass as candidates and the vetting process most importantly must be without any corruption or bias and simply based on the constitution and its protection and in turn by default protects the rights of all citizens under its protection. This is just a general idea off the top of my head but the actual process would be simple in theory but complex in implementation to ensure double speak and the law itself is not twisted to suit any particular narrative. Third party interests disguised within populist narratives pushed through media upon ignorant masses are just as dangerous a threat to democracy as political corruption.

Well... I am a simple men, maybe don't understand these things very well. But back to topic - you were talking about some kind of independent oversight body. But how would it be possible to implement such a thing without risk it will become - lets say - less independed?

Noted.Yes to a degree but the law societies of various countries are corrupt in themselves whereby legislators and those who sign off on proposed legislation collude to implement the policies of third parties outside of a nation states jurisdiction . There are many "private clubs" where both attorney general and "democratically elected" officials along with the "opposition" are invited to hear the "proposals" of those who believe they are the rightful owners of earth inc and are given incentives to impose policies rubber stamped to ensure they are bound by contractual laws whereby the next "democratically elected" reps will have neither enough years in office or the litigation skills to unravel such a legal contract not to mention the fiscal penalties involved. Most of these policies ensure control through government borrowing to spend on useless social policies that will insure a bloated public debt which will incrue interest ( imagine for one outrageous example in some fantasy world where guberment shut vast sections of the economies of the world and paid people to stay at home   ). Privatisation of assets and resources then comes along to pay for this spending on worthless trinkets and services that are rolled up into financial instruments and sold to the people who end up owning the key assets and infrastructure through medium term notes,bonds,bank guarantees etc.

So the edu problem has two simple and elegant solution.

Granddaughter tuition will be paid from public funds as other life costs of whole family. Still much cheaper than coruption, but we can insure that - if granddaughter do not use her education in future (she won't have a job related to education), family will returns all edu costs.

Or we just won't care about it at all. If politician will try to do a dirty business (push some law in accordance with some private interest for example) their family just loose living, practically becomes homeless without protection - so anyone can just hang them about their necks until their die . IMHO some granddaughter education is not worth of it.

OP is on the right path in some ways.

The 'killer app' for politics would be a public A(sk)M(e)A(nything) with the candidate subject to sophisticated neuro-analysis (and the readings available for open-source analysis.)

"If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen."  Any potential candidate is free to make that choice and encouraged to do so.  Just go be a corporate CEO if you don't want to take the test...but be advised that if your corporation is going to go for tax-payer funded contracts you'll end up back in the hot-seat.

This technology exists.  In fact, the very (and very sophisticated) monitoring and control frameworks designed to keep the plebs in check could easily be reversed to 'clean up' politics and make 'democracy' work.  This nightmare scenario has been recognized by the folks populating WEF, CFR, UN, etc for a number of years now and they are documented to have been discussing it at the highest levels.  The potential catastrophe may indeed be one of the major motivating factors in the timing of the kick-off of the scamdemic.

I don't see this as problem - it is by design. You have to loose something to gain power instead. It is proof that you mean it seriously when you are prepared to sacrifice something valuable to you. The gap beetween politician and simple people will be smaller in that case too. If you don't want to give up your wealth and you have some good idea, you can always promote it in other way without power to push it by force.


Yes indirect bribes are problem I dodn't thought about. In my country the majority of universities are public and the study are basically for free. There are some private universities too, but in general those are just for too_stupid_so_have_to_pay_it people. But yes - globally this can be a problem. Can you think up some other form of indirect bribe in this hypothetically scenario? I am sure that edu problem can have some simple and elegant solution.

---

This oversight body you are speaking about - aren't those courts?

---

Nice. But it assumed technically educated people. And we need to solve the problem of buying/selling votes.