Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
1.Corruption.ASociologicalPerspective
11
critiqueofparticulartypesofchangetothedisturbing,destructive,shocking
effectsofthechangeperse.Theclassicalassumptionthatchangeisautotelic
valueisfinallylifted;thefetishofchangeisundermined.Itiscounteredwith
thehypothesisthatpeopleputvalueonsecurity,predictability,continuity,
routines,andritualsoftheirlifeworld.(2004,157)
Inthecaseoftrauma,corruptionbecomesasociallypracticedandculturally
sanctioned(thoughcompletelyimmoral)instrumentofcopingwithvague
mechanismsthatorchestratesocialrealities.Concurrently,corruptionbecomes
ahandymeansofdealingwiththeGhostile”realitywhoserulesandregulations
areperceivedasalienandutterlyincomprehensible.InthePolishcontext,one
mayrefertoaspecificGcultureofcorruption”involvingthegeneralizednorm
ofsocialagreementwithreferencetocorruptpracticestakingplaceinthepub-
lichealthsystem,thepolice,officesofstate,andlocaladministration(Kubiak
2001).Furthermore,oneisinapositiontoobservethattheconvolutednature
ofthePolishtaxsystemmayserveasagoodexampleoftheaforementioned
mechanism.Theobscurecharacterofofficialtaxrelegationsleadstothein-
creaseinreadinesstoperformillegalactions(e.g.taxevasion)and,atthesame
time,resultsinthedecreaseintrustvestedinstateinstitutionsandoffices
whoseauthorityisperceivedasbeingarbitrary,orlackingmoralconstraints
(Sztompka2002,318–319).
OnemayalsoobservethatcorruptioncanbeconceivedasaGshortcut
road”whichassumesaformofdeviantbehaviorundertakeninresponsetopro-
cessesofanomiethatrunrampantincontemporarysocieties.Theubiquityof
corruptionpractices,toputitotherwise,ismanifestedbythelackofculturally
authorizedruleswhichfacilitategoalaccomplishmentbymeansofdeploying
sociallyacceptableactionprocedures(Merton1986).Inthisparticularsitua-
tion,corruptpractices—torefertoRobertK.Merton’stypologyofcoping
mechanismsorientedatasituationofanomie—couldbeconceivedasaform
ofGinnovativeaction”whichpostulatesthatindividualsarewillingtoaccept
sociallylegitimizedobjectives(i.e.thevalueofsocialpromotion,wealth,or
gettingrich)but,atthesametime,areunwillingtoacceptculturalnormsor-
chestratingtheirrealization(e.g.theimperativeofhavingaGdecent”job).In
thisspecificcase,theproblemcannotbeseenintermsofanindividualconflict
ofinterest.Onthecontrary,itisatypeofculturaldissonancerootedinstruc-
turalpathologiesofaxio-normativesystemswhicharenolongerconceivedas
relativelycoherentsocietaltotalities.Hence,thistypicallysystemicunderstand-
inggoeswellbeyondtheplaneofspecific(context-related)conditioningsof
corruption(e.g.lowpay,conflictswithone’ssuperior)whichfacilitatethecon-
versionofpublicgoodsintoprivateresourcesbyindividualsactingasrepresen-
tativesofpublicinstitutions.
