3.3.3 Political Corruption
Political corruption is generally the misuse of public power for private profit. Although no political group has been entirely free from jobbery ( unfair means employed to secure some private end) , corruption has not prevailed to an equal degree at all times or under all conditions. It has responded to various opportunities for the misuse of power reated by various governmental institutions. Any analysis of the prevalence ( common) of political corruption, therefore, must regard it as a phenomenon of group psychology, conditioned by the entire cultural setting of the group. Thus, no remedial programme to eliminate political corruption can be fully successful if it limits itself to the prosecution ( persevere with ) of individual offenders or even to administrative organisations. Political corruption requires the existence of public officials with power to choose between two or more courses of action and the possession by the government of some power or wealth, which can be used for private gains. These two prerequisites are found even in relatively simple primitive societies. However, corruption was generally scarce ( by no means plentiful ) in primitive societies, primarily because of the dominance of tradition in determining conduct and the promptness of punishment. It was the British historian Lecky who remarked in his book History of European Morals that "It is possible that the moral standard of most men is much lower in political judgements than in private matters in which their own interests are concerned". It is doubtful, however, that political morality is worse than average business morality. In modern societies, business and government are increasingly placed in direct relationship with each other through various government contracts, which are becoming more and more important with the growing scale of governmental activity. Especially conducive to corruption are contracts for military supplies, particularly in times of war. In modern times, war involves huge expenditure under conditions of relaxed public control since public attention is focused on supplying the soldiers with what ever they need regardless of cost. After the war, surplus war materials are disposed of at a fraction of their cost. Thus, recognition by businessmen of the opportunities for tremendous profits during and after the war increases the strain on the honesty of public officials. It goes without saying that corruption is not restricted to any particular country or society. Corruption is an international phenomenon. However, developing countries are generally found to be more corrupt than developed ones. A recent survey of 50 important nations of the world has shown that India, Pakistan, Nigeria, China and Russia are among the most corrupt countries in the world, while Switzerland, Singapore, New Zealand and the US are among the least corrupt countries. The exposure of corruption may come through individuals (investigative journalists) or organisations. Under the party system of governments, exposures of political corruption result from the desire of opposition parties out of power to obtain power. In many Latin American countries, where elections may not be very fair, revolution is the only way to accomplish the change of government. While some improvements in conditions often result from such revolutions, corruption generally continues for the benefits of new governments. No particular system of government is a guarantee against political corruption. Corruption can be eliminated only where the power to do so is linked with the desire to crush corruption . But power itself is an inducement to corruption. As the saying goes, "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Little progress in getting rid of corruption can be expected where those in power either benefit from corruption or fail to recognise the necessity for its elimination. Ignorance of the existence of corruption, widespread benefits derived from the lavish ( to waste ) distribution of goods, political indifference (or lack of political will) and materialistic culture are the major factors which contribute to corruption in the political
life of a nation and create tension in society.
3.3.4 Crime
Antisocial conduct (known popularly as "crime") may be regarded as a universal phenomenon or a function of group-life. Its extent, particular form it takes and the reaction it provokes ( to call up or evoke (feelings, desires, etc)) are intimately dependent on the cultural status and social organisation of the group. The term "crime" is used indiscriminately by the layman to denote antisocial, immoral or sinful behaviour. What the law calls crime is merely conduct, which is declared to be socially harmful by the groups, which are powerful enough to influence? legislation in a state. The existence of crime in a community is a challenge to its members since crime is harmful for ordered social growth. Combating ( a struggle) crime involves huge economic burden and enormous waste of misdirected energy. The progress of the science of human behaviour in the last several decades has increasingly centred its attention on criminal behaviour. As a result, the last half century has seen the development of the science of criminology- Official and private agencies for the study of criminals and their treatment have also multiplied rapidly during this period. The reason is that the task of dealing with crime and criminals is such that it demands knowledge of facts upon which an intelligent programme of study and treatment may be based. Given the serious nature of crime and its adverse effects on society, much thought has been devoted to its control. Two general lines of thought have emerged for the purpose of controlling crime, the ameliorative ( to improve) and the repressive ( to keep under control;) philosophies. The ameliorative philosophy asserts that as the ranks of the middle class grow in a society, fewer and fewer people commit crime. Moreover, as the middle class grows, more people may become intolerant ( too bad ) of crime and they commit offences more frequently. As a result, criminal acts that do occur can be treated more effectively. In order to control crime, it is necessary to bring about the middle class by upgrading socio-economically the lower class. In contrast to this, the repressive philosophy regards the modern society (especially in developed nations) inherently prone to criminal behaviour due to the decline of informal community control, greater secularisation ( pertaining to the present world ) and more egoistic ( the 'I' or self, that which is conscious and thinks) moral code. Consequently, modern society may at best be expected to produce an affluent population lacking in personal restraint ( forcible control ) and civic consciousness. In the first place, punitive ( punishment) methods must be employed to redress offences and efficient organisation must be used to prevent crime. Regarding enforcement of law, administration of justice and rehabilitation ( restore to former privileges, rights,) o f criminals, the above two contrary lines of thought have given rise to three strategies (or policies) to combat crime. These three strategies are referred to as punitive, therapeutic ( relating to the curing of disease ) and preventive respectively. The punitive approach regards the offender not. Only as justifying punishment morally, but as being also susceptible to deterrent measures. Punishment is, therefore, exercised to incapacitate the criminal for the present and to keep him away from engaging in any criminal act in the future. In many developed countries, the punitive method has lost ground to the other two ameliorative methods. As a result, the capital punishment has already been abolished in most countries. The therapeutic approach, on the other hand, deems the offender to be malfunctioning and is in need of psychological or sociological treatment. In the US, about 20% of the staff employed for law enforcement and administration of justice deal with corrections, with rehabilitation as their primary goal. The preventive approach centres on modifying the interaction of social and individual conditions to forestall offensive behaviour. This method calls for improvement of sociological environment, strengthening of social structure and development of conforming personalities. Education and recreation can play a vital part in this respect, and so can a wide range of other practices like vocational placement and community organisation.
3.3.5 Competition
Competition is an important term in social theory. It is by competition (of persons, firms, industries, nations, races or cultures) that the fittest survives. Competition arises out of rivals ( a person pursuing an object in competition with another) , which is a universal fact in life and society. Rivalry ( competition) is manifested in a struggle among germ cells among plants for sunlight and growth and among animals, for food and mates. Rivalry is evident in the striving in our daily life and appears in every social order under which men live. It is due to rivalry that conflicts occur among primitive tribes for hunting grounds and among capitalists to bag huge profits. In the march of history, a machine process wins its way against ancient crafts, a novelty called "business" displaces custom and authority in the control of industries and a modern creed ( any system of belief or set of principles) replaces outworn dogma in domination over human mind. The subject of competition has invited varied and often conflicting statements from various authors since a single explanation of a complex social phenomenon like competition are inadequate. Competition is hardly distinguished from free enterprise and capitalism. On the one hand, competition is the gigantic/ huge motor which causes the individuals to use their mental and physical powers to the best advantage to go ahead. Competition develops in the individual the habit of self-reliance. Competition has lifted the human race to a standard where the mode of living of common labourers in developed countries is more comfortable than the daily existence of ancient kings. On the other hand, competition is a nice new name for the brutal/ senselessly cruel; fact of all against all, without pity or mercy. Carried to its logical conclusion, competition may turn into anarchy. in recent times, competition has invited attention of social thinkers and activists. One group demands that competition be preserved in all its native simplicity, while another group would like to eradicate/ to destroy or get rid of the evil of competition and substitute it with a moral economic order. But since the shortcomings of competition lie in its specific performance, the general demand has been to mend the system and make it work. As a result, the arrangements of competition have been modified from within in many cases. Businessmen, for example, form trade, industrial or commercial associations (e.g.. Truck Owners' Association) with an aim to make Competition less ruthless and more rational. Similarly, farmers organise co-operatives (e.g., Anand Milk Union Limited, better known as "AMUL") to escape the tyranny of an uncontrolled market. Labourers form trade unions only to secure a bargaining power equal to that of their employers. Often, the state interferes in private matters for several reasons, to conserve natural resources, to ensure the quality of goods by standardisation, to fix hours of labour, to provide compensation for accidents and so on. But even the use of formal authority in such cases leaves the rival firms in an industry as free to compete as before. In the wake of collective action and state intervention/ interference , competition is not eliminated; it merely becomes more regulated. A constructive effort has been made to maintain competition. An inherent weakness of competition lies in its dependence upon contract. So long as buyers want goods and sellers are willing to accept money, the liberty of contract promotes order. The greed for more money makes it advantageous to the producers of goods to agree among themselves to control production capacity, to regulate output and to stabilise prices. In such cases, the state is invoked to make the rivals compete rather than co-operate. Freedom of contract is encouraged along vertical lines (i.e., between buyer and seller) and has to be prohibited along horizontal lines (i.e., between buyer and buyer and between seller and seller).]
Next |
