Opinion Sur
Corruption, that is, the web of illicit practices that bind economic and political systems, has many faces and different models but in every case it has disastrous effects that should be listed and analyzed: inequality, institutional fragility, lack of governability, rebellion and global insecurity. Social media and new communication technologies exhibit the phenomenon but do not correct it. Thus, they lead into a caricature of transparency that we can call the pornography of power.
World press editorials and comments are full of news and opinions about multiple corruption scandals, particularly in these past days with the revelations of hidden or concealed accounts in Panama, whose owners are shell companies formed by lawyers with the explicit purpose of hiding the true beneficiaries. In some cases, they are open to scrutiny but, in the majority of the cases, they are limited liability companies that are born and die at high speed, and change direction from one fiscal haven to the next. In other cases, they are accounts by front men act as agents for well-known figures at the highest levels of government, international agencies, sport federations or renowned artists and athletes.
The Mossak-Fonseca law firm, whose files (around one and a half million) have been hacked and exposed (in an operation the dimension of which far exceeds the earlier Wikileaks revelations by the renowned fugitive Julian Assange and are in the same league as those espionage revelations by the other known fugitive Edward Snowden), is just part of a system that covers several hundred other law firms in large and small countries, respectable or not, advanced or underdeveloped, in every continent, from great emerging powers (China), to old and austere republics such as Switzerland or Liechtenstein, or younger banana republics. Money laundering is an international industry, with its own division of labor and a long-standing tradition. The mission of this judicial specialty is to facilitate the anonymous circulation of large sums of money accumulated in both legal or dubious manner, or as profits seeking tax shelter, going from a fiscally tough place to one with minimal control or just plainly attractive to migrant capital. With the growing income and wealth inequalities everywhere, the volume of funds that go through such circulation route has reached enormous proportions. It is the paroxysm of the global ancien regime where we live today. This world cup of corruption would be appropriate for the super corrupt FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) to organize it.
For a sociologist the data that has been disclosed are a rich trove of information regarding each real country as opposed to the official or legal country. The novelty is that, like many dimensions of today’s social life, these practices are globalized now. Their exposure and diffusion (a latent function of their own globalization) unveil the pretentions of the ruling elites without making any minor distinction between governments and parties, left and right, established systems and emergent markets. In many cases, corruption flows down the social ladder; it becomes capillary and affects many classes and strata of society.
We are familiar with the most notorious corruption systems (Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Nigeria, Zimbabwe and Russia to name a few) and the rebellion against the kleptocracy in other cases (the Arab Spring in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt). But we are less aware of the corruption in better organized countries (Europe, United States, and United Kingdom). In reality practices that are illegal in some countries are licit in others, which in comparison seem more “transparent” and give away moral lessons. What is the difference between illegal corruption in a country such as Brazil and the perfectly licit influence of large sums of money in electoral campaigns in the States? Which is the distinction between personal privilege, consolidation of family power, establishment of a virtual dynasty and philanthropic actions of the Clinton Foundation? How do famous PACS (political action committees) operate in the selection of American politicians? Why does a wage-earner as the one writing these lines must pay more than 40% of his income in taxes while a large (and honest) multibillionaire as Warren Buffet pays just 17%, much less than his secretary does, as he himself admitted (and honorably he reported)? Whoever wants to know the different “models” of corruption and their incidence on global security can consult the research done by Sarah Chayes that covers from “clean governments,” passing through those that are not, until reaching the Vatican. (Sarah Chayes, Thieves of State, Norton 2015).
In this scenario, worthy of the tango Cambalache, one has the impression that “no one is safe,” that is not true but it is widespread, with a perverse effect over public opinion. The list of those involved would fill up an entire phone directory. Thus, with the discredit of the diverse political classes, a social cynicism and a political opportunism become widespread and are taken advantage by challengers of power and privilege, popular demagogues, inquisitorial judges, journalists in search of a scoop, or “nation’s saviors” of sad legacy in countries that suffered the authoritarian and military scourge at other times. Scandals stressed by media and their adventures, worthy of a soap-opera, have the same effect as pornographic exhibitionism. Hence, it is appropriate to talk about pornography of power. But just as with the original pornography, the effect over popular awareness is nerve-enervating at the beginning and tiresome by saturation in the end. That is the case once studied (1903) by the great German sociologist Georg Simmel in the social psychology of a large metropolis: over stimulation generates a sort of indifference that he called blasé (boredom and resignation).
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose (the more things change; the more they stay the same). By way of example, you may know a lion by his claw, and what I have to offer is a case in point. In the past few months, Brazil was shaken in its foundations by a series of corruption scandals whose magnitude exceeds the volume of misdeeds of other countries prone to scandals, such as Italy—a country where I have lived during the political chapter that followed the report and trials on corruption. Hence, we should draw some conclusions and learn some lessons from the renowned and already settled Italian case.
In 1992, in Italy the lid was lifted over a series of scandal practices among politicians and businessmen, practices that were regularly carried out during the four decades that followed the end of WWII, during the long one-party hegemony by the Christian Democrats. The judges in Milan prosecuted and sentenced a large number of interlinked executives and officials with bonds with the Mafia. None was immune to the inquiry and the ensuing court sanctions. Various characters involved with corruption went to prison. Others committed suicide, among them the charming, dishonest mogul and international sailor racer Raúl Gardini.
Over a period of several months, Italy turned into a republic of judges. However, despite the investigations and sanctions, in the end nothing changed in the system of favors and shady deals with ill-gotten money. Bribes became even larger and the political scenario even more somber. Just two years after the cleansing operation called Mani Pulite (clean hands) directed by judges, the multimillionaire chief and owner of a media empire (television and newspapers) Silvio Berlusconi got into politics, promising a new era of reforms and stability, and presenting himself as an “outsider” alternative to the old and corrupt postwar political class. Berlusconi was elected Prime Minister from 1994 to 1995, from 2001 to 2006, and from 2008 to 2011. His political career was rather successful and long, despite his constant presence in court defending his first mandate over various charges of corruption and aggravated corruption. As champion of the neoliberal right, he always said the charges were just a political attack by leftist judges—something like a “slow-motion coup d’etat” attempt. Berlusconi managed to get representatives and senators elected to parliament that were fond and akin of changing legislation to protect the Prime Minister. Berlusconi finally resigned under the (rather late) cross pressures of 2012, but he remains as a manager of parliamentarian political alliances and as a businessman (he is still the richest person in Italy), without suffering any conviction for proved crimes. (Regarding Berlusconi’s administrations see Maurizio Viroli, La libertà dei servi, Laterza 2010.
Many Italians argued that Berlusconi’s misdeeds were not worse than many others committed by many businessmen and less skilled, ambitious and greedy politicians in Italy. Berlusconi was considered different only in the sense of being more astute than the rest, a “cool fox” whose successes in business and love affairs, rather than crimes were exemplary actions for a sector of the population. This is a regrettable attitude, though widespread not only in Italy but also in other countries, among which we can currently find United States, particularly with the spectacular rise of the “American Berlusconi” Donald Trump, whose social base is not very different from what Eric Fromm portrayed for Germany in his famous and old book Escape from Freedom (U.S.), The Fear of Freedom (UK) (1941) ISBN 978-0-8050-3149-2
Meanwhile, the largest Latin American country is paralyzed today for a corruption scandal with an epicenter in an institution “champion” of State capitalism—Petrobras (Petróleos Brasileiros SA), that apparently was used by a progressive and popular-based government to correct inequality (one of the greatest in the world) and incorporate previously marginalized masses into the national productive and consumption system, but at the expense of “calming the markets” (i.e., the great capitalist and financers) through favors and bribes transformed in parallel payments to representatives in a fragmented congress. As a reaction, here a judges’ republic was also installed, while politicians and parliamentarians from either side exchanged complaints for corruption, alleged misdeeds, and, even worse, threats of government destitution, with coups and counter-coups that have stalled the administration ability in times of economic crisis, great decrease in exports, and the end of the super-cycle that fed the spectacular growth of the BRICS. And this happened in the middle of the preparation for hosting the 2016 Olympics which in this sense threatens to transform itself in the nonsense window display [1]. The situation is so serious that it in my imagination it affects the motto of the Brazilian flag evoking another two propositions in accordance with the political spectrum in litigation: on the right, “Orden e Progresso para uns poucos” (order and progress for a few) and on the left “Corrupçao e Progresso para muitos mais” (Corruption and progress for many more). Behind this daily or hourly soap-opera there is a real tragedy, more Greek than tropical, that revolves around a fatal impasse: the governability of a great country and the sustainability of main models of growth and accumulation. I will talk about them in a subsequent article. For the time being, for correction and redemption we are left with Michelangelo’s renowned image of the Sistine Chapel:
[1] TN: “nonsense window display” stands for “escaparate del disparate” a word game in Spanish
