Parliamentary and other leaders often provide poor ethical examples for the community. In a world where there is a particular reliance and trust in political leaders, corruption is surfacing and the recent events seem to be the tip of the iceberg. Logan Mayor Luke Smith and Ipswich Mayor Antoniolli have been charged with several fraud allegations, revealing a rotten core. The expulsion of Ipswich and Logan Mayors have caused a series of investigation on all Gold Coast city councils. This further lead to the sack of the entire Ipswich council, displaying how corrupt leaders can infect others.
Generally, politicians are associated with mundane routines and excessive paperwork. However, the recent increase in fraudulent behaviour on the media
…show more content…
The desire and ambiguity of corrupt politicians in modern day society is an example of timeless corruption, which can be seen dating as far back as the 16th century in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. In the play, we see a corrupt and power-hungry king, who stops at nothing to acquire dominion over Denmark. Politicians develop a paramount moral of self-preservation such as “remembrance of ourselves” and “harlot’s cheek [is] beautied with plast’ring art”. For the citizens of an effective government, there should be transparency and honesty within politicians …show more content…
The effect of corruption is parallel to moral pollution. The exposure of nefarious affairs within the parliament have always received front-page attention. Although sexual relations stem from personal life and it often crosses over into their career, there is still relevance. Our leaders’ moral standards in and outside the parliament influence the conduct and perception of the community. African Philosopher, Kwame Gyeke has argued that “political corruption is a moral quandary”. In Hamlet, Queen Gertrude is quick to remarry to her husband’s brother while her husband, the ghost, claims that their relationship was “falling off” anyway. For any mistress in political cheating scandals there is certainly a degree of media attention and shame, however, the politician is usually shunned as a moral disease. Likewise in the play, Hamlet shuns King Claudius as an “incestuous and adulterate
Corruption is a persistent problem that plagues the world and it knows no boundaries. Transparency International defines it as the “abuse of entrusted power for private gain” (2013). For the purposes of this thread, ‘corruption’ is defined as any individual, collective, or structural act or process that permits the use of public authority or position for private gain. This definition captures the broad and many ways individuals and institutions abuse power and the public trust. In regard to whistleblowing, much conflict stems from the context in which the whistleblower is viewed.
When dealing with corruption, first question to ask or to clarify is what corruption is. NSW Research (2002) describes corruption anything from gaining materialistically by virtue of position (for eg. getting a special discount at stores) to engaging in ‘direct criminal activities’ (eg. selling drugs). Newburn (1999) believes that there is a thin line between the definition of ‘corrupt’ and ‘non-corrupt’ activities as at the end, it is an ethical problem. For common people, however, bribery generalises corruption.
Corruption is an individual and institutional process where there is a gain by a public official from a briber and in return receives a service. Between the gain and the service, there is an improper connection, (Thompson p.28). The two major categories of bribery is individual and institutional corruption. Receiving personal goods for the pursuit of one’s own benefit is personal fraud. An example of individual distortion is the financial scandal involving David Durenberger. Organizational corruption involves “receiving goods that are useable primarily in the political process and are necessary for doing a job or are essential by-products of doing it,” (Thompson p.30). An instance of institutional fraud is the Keating Five case. There are also times where there is a mixture of both individual and organizational corruption in a scandal. An example of this diverse combination is James C. Wright Jr. actions while he was the Speaker of the House.
Politicians many times have been found guilty of corruption. They use unethical techniques to get higher positions in an election, to gain more money, votes or to lay hands on ungotten wealth. Corruption exists in the police force, in law and order and even in the management of the Olympic Games.
Stephen Medvic, In Defense of Politicians, discusses why Americans feel that politicians are dishonest. In 2007, a Gallup poll about honesty and ethical standards for occupations, showed that only 12 and 9 percent of people felt that Congressmen and State office holders held high standards, (Medvic p. 2). In addition, Americans tend to like their representatives more than the members of Congress because they view them as actual people. Americans view Congress as a group of politicians who are greedy and not representing their interests, (Medvic p. 4).
In today’s light, the Progressive Era is seen as a time period where people’s lives changed for the better, but none of that change would have been possible without muckrakers exposing the numerous problems that lied hidden from the American public. With the corruption of government officials, dangerous and unhealthy working conditions for young children, and poverty-ridden slums in cities, this article aims to expose three of the most prominent problems of the Progressive Era.
Oddly, it appears that Gertrude possess more significance to Hamlet than one first anticipates. Her swift call to matrimony leads Hamlet into a spiraling quarry of depression and grieving. This mirrors the Oedipus complex. Gertrude sexually commits herself to Claudius causing Hamlet to feel a sense of jealousy and disappointment. In retaliation, he expresses his repressed desire of love through his unruly comments. He even goes as far as to say that the love is incestuous. Furthermore, in Act 3 scene 4, Hamlet confronts his mother directly in a closet. Addressing concern over her sexual actions, he exclaims “In the rank sweat of an enseamèd bed, / Stewed in corruption, honeying and making love / Over the nasty sty” (III.iv.104-106). Not only does this quote show that Hamlet disapproves his mother’s marriage, but also that he believes Claudius is a wicked criminal. Aligning with the Oedipus complex, Hamlet strangely obsesses over his mother’s love life while viewing his uncle in
King Hamlet’s “foul and most unnatural murder” (I.v.25) tops Claudius’ list of egregious sins, but most of his offenses are psychological rather than physical. Using his mastery of manipulation, Claudius, the “incestuous” and “adulterate beast” managed to win “to his shameful lust the will” of the virtuous queen, Gertrude (I.v.42-6). Gertrude could not be persuaded to switch husbands without a little verbal tricker...
Hamlet possesses an uncomfortable obsession with his mother’s sexuality. For this reason, Hamlet’s soliloquies provide most of the audience’s information about Gertrude’s sexual activities. In his first soliloquy, Hamlet refers to the relationship between Gertrude and Claudius when he exclaims, “Within a month…She married. O, most wicked speed, to post / With such dexterity to incestuous sheets!” (I, ii, 153-157). In saying this, Hamlet displays how hastily Gertrude has abandoned the late King Hamlet, Hamlet’s father, such that she has already married Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle. In addition, Hamlet acknowledges that Gertrude and Claudius have quickly developed a very sexual relationship. Despite the very recent death of her husband, Gertrude is unable to control her sexual desires, and she remarries less than two months after King Hamlet’s funeral.
In the beginning of the story, Hamlet’s character was struggling with the sudden marriage of his mother, Gertrude, to his uncle, Claudius, a month after his father is death. For a young man, it’s hard to believe that he understood why his mother quickly married Claudius especially since, Claudius is his uncle. Later he learned that his father’s ghost was sighted. Intuitively, he knew there had to be some kind of “foul play.” At this point, Hamlet is a university student; his morals and way of thinking are defined by books and what was taught to him. This is seen when he speaks about the flaws of men, setting a bad reputation for all, and the man’s flaws causing their “downfall.”(a.1, sc.4, l.)
Political corruption is when someone with higher power is using his or her wealth for their own interest, not for others interest. In this case people who are wealthy are using their money to buy elections for their political interest. In Kevin Phillips’ article, “How Wealth Defined Power,” he states that “[w]ith so much at stake in policy making and regulation, the rich stepped up their political involvement, and more and more money poured into congressional elections… the concentration and momentum of wealth spilled over, just as they had before, from economic self-interest and buccaneering into the corruption of politics.” All the money was not just being poured into the election, but it was also being poured into the pockets of “well-tailored politicians” (Phillips). This kind of actions also cause wealthy people to be self-centered because “financial and political corruption seem to be an inevitable consequence of psychologies and politics unleashed as a long bull market feeds a culture of money and greed,” which is due to the fact that “[w]hen money is king, politicians get bought on a truly grand scale and philosophy bows to avarice” (Phillips).
The king’s hypocrisy is perhaps most evident in his eloquent speech in Act I, scene ii in which he openly discusses his hasty marriage to Gertrude.” (Bertram 138-139) Claudius continues to mask evilness with sincerity when Hamlet refuses to obey the common theme: death of fathers. Claudius assures Hamlet that, “‘tis a loving and a fair reply. Be as ourself in Denmark. Madam, come; this gentle and unforced accord of Hamlet sits smiling to my heart...
Bribery is wrong, and it would be almost instinctive to point at the benefits of impartially functioning public servants and incorrupt corporations to our democratic society as justification. However, in this imperfect world where bribery is rife in varying degrees, is it possible to express this notion convincingly? Certainly 'because the UK Bribery Act says so' is far less persuasive to a council planning office in Shanghai than in London, and indeed in compliance with section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010 which relates to commercial offences, it is essential that this question is engaged with on a corporate scale and without assertion through dogma. Accordingly, this essay will argue that elements wrong with bribery are inclusive of both moral and economic considerations. Moreover, in conjunction with international mandates, advent of aggressive legislation such as that of the UK Bribery Act 2010 is representative of global efforts to eliminate bribery. Hence, it follows that bribery can never be considered a normal part of business because it is economically unsustainable in the long term.
The difference between ethics and morals, between unethical conduct and immoral behavior, is significant with regards to the actions of elected officials. Elected officials should be obliged to live with ethical conduct but necessary moral behavior. Obligating elected officials to live ethically exemplary lives with regards to their profession is appropriate because the officials are elected into their government positions by the nation's or region's citizens. Those denizens expect their officials to abide by the region's own ethics, by “well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ough...
Montesh, M. (n.d.). Conceptualizing Corruption: Forms, Causes, Types and Consequences. Retrieved May 4, 2014, from