Corruption is devastating for society. It robs communities not only of resources but also of possibilities—the possiblity of growing to full social and economic development. One of the best ways to understand corruption, hate, and their consequences is through a story. It is a running story that helps us gain additional insight. Take it with a grain of salt because it is focused on exploring and learning. There are many things one may agree with and there are things that people will not agree with (...that is often defined by your personal background so it is beneficial for people to reflect). The goal is to simply just think about the underlining fundamentals to what is likely to bring the most people forward and what things could hinder or slow societal development.
The Story of the Clan is a hypothetical, philosophical, and theoretical thought experiment designed to help us explore how hate and corruption can undermine entire systems. It also sheds light on how people can change that, how communities can improve these systems, and the need for new perspectives on solutions when and if things are not up to par. Along the way, we’ll touch on economic impacts, psychological motivations, financial incentives, and broader social impact. After all, who doesn’t enjoy a good crime story? 🤷 Might be a future book idea to teach certain leadership values and impacts of those values hmmmmm.........
The Story of the Clan
In this story, justice and moral conscience have collapsed. Bad actors spread hate-fueled rumors and exploited existing corruption networks to maximize harm against victims. Financial and social incentives encouraged these behaviors, sparking a wider corruption network that manipulated differences (race, religion, etc.) to justify coordinated aggressions and human rights violations. Perpetrators were coached and the outcomes known before even knowing the questions or the facts. This is often why people have said some are protected, immune, and above the law within these social circles.
Other disturbing behaviors soon surfaced from other victims—alleged sexual assaults of minors, financial exploitation, misuse of public resources, using positions for self-enrichment, putting kids at risk through manipulation, isolating and manipulating the sick for financial gain, and targeted hate-based actions. Human and civil rights mocked and social contracts trampled. Witnesses, victims, and whistleblowers who tried to raise concerns were instead betrayed; their complaints were funneled back to perpetrators, who placed them on secret harm lists.
To make matters worse, let us pretend a judge/decision maker with distorted social beliefs (in theory)—and personal ties to the perpetrators—used his/her position to shield and incentivize poor actors, despite clear conflicts of interest. Eventually, more victims came forward, and many complaints were found to be substantiated. Initially the victims had no recourse because of the process of dehumanization launched by the goal directed hate rumors.
This represents a worst-case scenario, where sacred institutions are misused to protect corruption and crush accountability. If such a “clan network” dominates a system, victims are left with no recourse. In such cases, outside oversight becomes essential to restore integrity and prevent abuse. However, this is not the end of the story. We can write it anyway we want. So will start to discuss improvement, reconciliation, higher moral conscious, and adaptability as people profess in deed what they profess on their lips. A positive upward economic and social outcome could be realized in our learning story.
Why This Matters
This is, of course, a learning story. Readers may agree or disagree, or find alternative interpretations. But the broader lesson is clear: when hate and corruption become normalized, the consequences ripple across society for generations. It can impact economic outcomes and social development.
Most societies uphold oaths, social contracts, and legal protections to prevent corruption from taking root. Yet systems are run by fallible people—some of good character, some of bad. This is why the intent of law (its higher philosophy) should always outweigh the tool of law (its flawed, worldly application).
Philosophical Questions
-
Are values subjective, or should they align with a higher moral goal?
-
What happens when certain harmful values are normalized? What are the economic and social consequences?
-
How important is it to elect officials who act with integrity and treat all people equally?
-
How can we ensure greater alignment between the intent of law, the application of law, and the values of society?
-
How do we support the many good men and women who serve their communities—while still holding “bad apples” accountable? (Make a distinction between mistakes and intent to harm).
-
Can communities themselves push back against corruption by embedding stronger shared values in local institutions? (Think of what happens of a group of actors is not in alignment with society's values or the official values of an institution.)
An Interesting Perspective
Research suggests that some forms of corruption become normalized over time, embedded into culture, norms, and expectations.
The Importance of State Capacity in Fighting Corruption- Gülise GÖKCE
