Why Do We Normalise Corruption?

WE BRIBE TO CUT queues, evade taxes without shame, and cheat systems with pride, yet act outraged when scandals make head lines as if corruption were despicable only when committed by others.

- Srinath Sridharan

We even avoid calling it a bribe, masking it with words like 'gift' or 'chai-paani, yet our actions betray the truth - normalising what should shame us, until corruption feels like culture, not crime.

Our two-faced morality draws arbitrary lines between acceptable and unacceptable corruption, shifting with societal moods and convenience, proving that ethics often bend to fit the shape of our desires.

We convince ourselves that corruption will end when everyone else stops - pointing fingers at others while conveniently ignoring our own complicity, as if the moral burden belongs to someone else. It isn't ignorance of its ill effects that drives this behaviour - people understand how corruption erodes institutions, undermines meritocracy, and fuels inequity. Yet many believe they are immune to its consequences: above the law, above accountability, and even above divine justice. This misplaced sense of invulnerability enables corruption to thrive, seeping into all strata of life, from the mundane conversations to the loftiest corporate boardrooms.

Is it not astonishing to see the wealth declarations of grassroots politicians, who, on paper, appear to lead modest lives? Yet, a casual conversation in their localities often tells a vastly different story. Have we, as citizens, not come to accept this as just another quirk of our political system? Do we not shrug it off as a harmless observation, ignoring the deeper betrayal it represents?

The Slippery Slope