Corruption as compensation for pathology of social relations

Abstract

The article is devoted to formulation of a new hypothesis about the essence of corruption as a mechanism and result of compensation of pathology of public life. It is noted that modern scientific research does not consider corruption comprehensively and systematically, but in its individual aspects. As a rule, the managerial and legal. Does not take into account its psychological origins and features of corrupt behavior. The article is aimed at formulating promising directions for the study of corruption, necessary for effective counteraction of this phenomenon. The relevance of the article is due to the possibility of identification of new directions of corruption prevention on the basis of revision of the causes of corrupt conduct.

Reforms to prevent corruption have been found to reduce corruption but have not had a decisive impact on corruption. In this regard, the author examines the characteristics of corrupt behaviour and concludes that it is in the mechanisms that give rise to it and it is necessary to look for the causes of corruption. However, in considering the psychological factors of corrupt behaviour, the author concludes that they are not independent and cannot be considered as a direct cause. Psychological characteristics, such as the need for moral revisions of individual values and the search for excitement in the work performed, clearly indicate the presence of contradictions or even pathologies at a deeper level. Given the high incidence of corruption, the author concludes that these pathologies are not individual, but rather indicative of systemic problems of social life. And since problems are not solved, corruption is a kind of compensation, a solution to these problems.

It formulates the conclusion, according to which corruption has a compensatory nature and is a unique indicator of the state of social relations and existing problems in them. It points to areas of society and individual members that require study, revision and correction. This approach makes it possible to understand that the direct preventive impact on corruption will not give stable qualitative results, because by influencing corruption we will influence the consequences. At the same time, the reasons will remain untouchable.