Corrupt governance: Self-defeating anti-corruption rhetoric and initiatives in Russia

Abstract

Resilience theory has been used to describe the “bounce back” effect—a system’s ability to recover to its normal state after a shock. While this usually applies to systems whose survival is seen in a positive light (such as democracy), this article emphasizes the other, darker side of this phenomenon. I demonstrate how anti-corruption discourse can support certain practices that actually contribute to the resilience of corruption. By comparing the anti-corruption discourses of the Russian government and its political opposition, this article shows the interdependence and mutual reinforcement of two practices: (I) the pervasive resolution of everyday problems by corrupt methods and (II) focusing on the corruption of particular actors as the main obstacle to the development of the country and society. The effect of this interdependence is ambivalent, as both practices challenge corruption and contribute to its resilience. In effect, this becomes a mode of government and I link the concept of resilience with the literature on governmentality to better illuminate the endurance of corruption in Russia despite sincere (and even well-intended) anti-corruption campaigns. This model of rethinking the resilience of corrupt practices with the special focus on anti-corruption rhetoric can be applied to other countries where corruption serves as a pivot of the social and economic system, as it does in Russia.

Looking Back on Corruption: Representations of Corruption and Anti-corruption in Czech Party Manifestos between 1990–2017

“…Nevertheless, political discourse is the most crucial here, as it is the very discourse from which specific anti-corruption measures are derived. A recent study on corruption discourse in contemporary Russia (Pavlova 2020) points out that the political elite of Russia's current regime directs their anti-corruption rhetoric solely toward specific individuals (politicians or officials) and not toward the everyday corruption practices of the Russian public. This suggests an inconsistent and unpredictable approach when adopting and enforcing anticorruption measures.…”

Urban Activists from the Perspective of Anti-Corruption: A Framing Approach

“…From the interviews it emerges how activists associate the lack of transparency in the decision-making process to the corrupt behaviour of public officials, reflecting an understanding of the problem supported by the anti-corruption discourse of both the government and the opposition that focuses mainly on high-ranking officials (Pavlova 2020). Discussing the situation with the Dvukhyarusny Bridge in Kaliningrad, an activist of an urban initiative explains:…”