ABSTRACT
While not the worst of polit ical patho lo gies, corrup tion is the one most likely to be found in demo cra cies. Corruption is not as danger ous as war, nor as urgent as terror ism. Some have even argued that the little bit of corrup tion that comes with demo cra cies makes them work better – by lower ing trans ac tion costs, redu cing the inef fi cien cies of cumber some rules and gener ally making things happen (Anechiarico and Jacobs 1996; see also Huntington 1968; Leys 1965). But, more recently, a strong consensus has emerged that polit ical corrup tion is neither a benefi t to demo cracy nor an insig ni fi c ant irrit ant: it corrodes the norms, processes and mech an isms of demo cracy itself (deLeon 1993; della Porta and Vannucci 1999; Elster 1989: 263-72; Johnston 2005; Lessig 2011; Mungiu-Pippidi 2006; Rose-Ackerman 1999; Rothstein 2005; Thompson 1995; Warren 2004, 2006). By most meas ures, the world’s democra cies are the least corrupt regimes. But when demo cra cies go bad, corrup tion (rather than oppres sion, viol ence, tyranny or related patho lo gies) is likely to be high on the list of problems, and citizens are likely to place corrup tion as high among their reasons for disaf fec tion.
