03/20/2014
Reading up on the Ukraine in order to say something about it on Radio Derb, I checked the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for 2013 compiled by the think tank Transparency International.
The CPI ranks 175 nations by how corrupt their public sector is perceived to be. Ukraine came in at 144, tied with Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Iran, Nigeria, and Papua New Guinea.
For countries with European populations, Ukraine is the lowest-ranked — that is, most corrupt. Next lowest is Russia at 127. The lowest-ranked nation that (a) has a European population and (b) is not ex-communist is Greece at 80.
The U.S.A. ranks 19th, although Puerto Rico, listed separately, ranks 33rd.
Why are some countries corrupt and others not? Looking at the map on the Transparency International site, a number of general and approximate rules stand out.
There are exceptions all over, of course: Botswana ranks better than Italy; North Korea ties with Somalia; Uruguay (heh) ties with the U.S.A.
Furthermore, that map is of today. Some of those virtuous north-European countries could, in the past, have shown Somalis and Afghans a thing or two about corruption.
Here, for example, is historian E. Royston Pike on Sir Robert Walpole, Britain’s first Prime Minister:
But, it will be asked, did not Walpole practice corruption on a very large, even an unprecedented scale? Yes he did: no doubt about it … But his contemporaries thought nothing of [his misdeeds], or not very much. Almost the only people who complained were those who felt that their services had not been well enough rewarded.[ Britain’s Prime Ministers from Walpole to Wilson p. 23]
Similar things could of course be said of the 19th-century U.S.A. One of the greatest achievements of 20th-century civilization in First World nations was the near-total banishing of corruption from public life.
So far as the U.S.A. is concerned, my guess is that this high level of political virtue peaked, like so many other good things, in the two or three decades after WW2 and has been gradually declining since.
If that’s right, no doubt the causes are manifold, but it’s hard not to think that grievance culture, increasing racial diversity, and enforced looking-the-other-way at minority misbehavior have been factors.
Critics of my infamous 2012 TakiMag column The Talk: Nonblack Version took particular umbrage at the following two advice points:
(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.
(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.
Those followed an earlier observation that the higher levels of antisocial behavior among blacks are manifested, among other places, in political corruption. [Racial disparity: All active ethics probes focus on black lawmakers, by John Bresnahan, Politico, November 3, 2009.] All three points were inspired by years of reading about local corruption scandals in the New York Post.
To see how things have been going since I wrote “The Talk,” I have just read back through the last 23 daily issues of the Post tallying all local corruption stories. Bear in mind that the NYP mainly covers New York City, which is 28 percent Hispanic, 33 percent white, 23 percent black, and the rest mostly Asian.
Here are all the corruption stories from the past 23 days (February 25th to March 19th).
His name showed up in a March 8th Post story about districts unrepresented in the state legislature following the conviction of …
In case you missed the links, the races there are black, black, black, black, and black. The odds of that happening on a chance basis are one in fifteen hundred.
If you throw in Adams’ senior advisor, who is also black, the odds are one in 6,700.
New Yorkers can take some small comfort from there having been actual indictments and actual convictions. Philadelphians have not been so blessed.
The Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office ran an undercover sting operation over three years that captured leading Philadelphia Democrats, including four members of the city’s state House delegation, on tape accepting money, The Inquirer has learned.
Yet no one was charged with a crime.
[Kane shut down sting that snared Phila. officials, By Angela Couloumbis and Craig R. McCoy, Philadelphia Inquirer, March 17, 2014.]
Why not? The Inquirer continues:
Prosecutors began the sting in 2010 when Republican Tom Corbett was attorney general. After Democrat Kathleen G. Kane took office in 2013, she shut it down.
In a statement to The Inquirer on Friday, Kane called the investigation poorly conceived, badly managed, and tainted by racism, saying it had targeted African Americans.
“Tainted by racism”! You have to marvel at the brass audacity of Ms. Kane, asking us to believe that under the exquisite guilt-racked racial protocols of early 21st-century America, thirty years after Tom Wolfe put the phrase “great white defendant” into the language, the Attorney General’s office of a northeastern Obama state would deliberately single out blacks for investigation.
So who was caught on tape accepting bribes?
People with knowledge of the investigation said those caught on tape included former Traffic Court Judge Thomasina Tynes … Four state lawmakers took money, the sources said. State Rep. Ronald G. Waters accepted multiple payments totaling $7,650; State Rep. Vanessa Brown took $4,000; State Rep. Michelle Brownlee received $3,500; and State Rep. Louise Bishop took $1,500, said people with knowledge of the investigation.
Black, black, black, black, black.
So … shut down that investigation!
You could call it “black privilege.”
John Derbyshire writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. His most recent book, published by VDARE.com com is FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle).His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.
Readers who wish to donate (tax deductible) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire’s writings at VDARE.com can do so here.
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.
