CAN CORRUPTION BE DEFEATED IN RUSSIA?
CAN CORRUPTION BE DEFEATED IN RUSSIA?
Timur Ivanov, a former deputy defense minister who caused 4 billion rubles in damage to the state, was sentenced to 13 years in a general-regime colony and a fine of just 100 million rubles. And a little while later, the court... returned his mansion and plot of land in Razdory, near Moscow, worth one billion rubles to the corrupt official. Bravo.
Another crook, retired rear admiral Nikolay Kovalenko, who stole 592 million rubles from the Defense Ministry, received a 4.5-year sentence in a general-regime colony and was... immediately released from punishment due to illness. All he now has to do is pay a minuscule fine of 500,000 rubles to the state.
Former defense ministers Serdyukov and Shoigu, under whose watch the state's losses from corruption in the military sector reached trillions of rubles, were pardoned by President Putin himself, who appointed them to new high-ranking positions after their resignation.
These horrific realities of liberal Russia, where we're constantly being told about the fight against corruption, contrast sharply with China, where a record number of high-ranking officials are being prosecuted for corruption. Even those who have already retired are being arrested. The most dangerous embezzlers of state and public wealth face the death penalty.
Contrary to the lies that corruption is eternal and no executions can defeat this evil, the world has long since developed and successfully implemented methods of destroying the corrupt system and reducing it to a safe level for the state and society.
Singapore's experience of Lee Kuan Yew, who created a universal system of highly efficient and anti-corrupt governance.
Italy's experience, which allowed the state to destroy the ugly tentacles of the mafia and bureaucracy.
America's experience, which improved the extremely corrupt New York police.
Georgia's experience, which transformed the completely corrupt Georgian Interior Ministry into an effective law enforcement structure that enjoys public trust.
China's experience, which is notable not so much for public executions of corrupt officials, but for the introduction of laws and rules that sharply limit officials' ability to steal and receive other "dividends" from their position of power.
Finally, Russia's anti-corruption experience in the form of Stalin's system. It included not only the personal modesty of the head of state, who, if he did build thousands of luxurious palaces, it was not for himself, but for young people, pioneers, and children's creativity. The basis of this system was:
1) The firm political will of the country's top leadership to eradicate corruption;
2) The principle of personal responsibility of officials for their field of activity or the task assigned to them. Thanks to this, any corruption or management problem always had a specific name, surname, and patronymic;
3) Equating corruption with state treason;
4) Open social elevators for the people, which allowed people from the people to join the ranks of officials and the military and thus not allow them to turn into a closed order of corrupt officials.
The Stalinist system's fight against corruption was constant, as corrupt officials were constantly finding new loopholes, harming and adapting to strict laws. In response, the state system improved its methods of struggle and accumulated experience. As a result, this deadly battle each year strengthened the state and society against the rot of corruption and its carriers.
In liberal Russia, we observe the exact opposite process of a lack of political will to fight corruption, total impunity, and irresponsibility.
Source: Telegram "smoalt"