Quote Originally Posted by JJackson View Post
Going back to the question of ‘is a cleptocracy a necessary step on the path to a less corrupt form of government?’ and the excellent notion that it might be a good idea to look at the existing political systems, which the population are used to and understand, and try and build on these.
OK, a note on cleptocracy from a tribal point of view. Depending on the area and the level of centralization in the existing governance system property is viewed as corporate in a tribe. What I mean by that is that all the tribes property is considered owned by the head of the tribe and is distributed for use by members of the tribe in accordance with how he or she views it as being appropriate. A person in a tribal leadership position will look at the property that they have as theirs. All tribal members under him must get permission to use it.

In my mind this creates two problems. First, since the property is essentially theirs, they can use it for anything they want including themselves. Fast-forward to a tribal leader in a government position (or a leader whose only frame of reference for how to lead is tribal ways) that person does not see spending their budget any way they want as stealing. Second, all tribal members must get permission to use the tribal property. Fast-forward to a mid-level manager in a logistics chain. He will not release any parts until he has permission from the "owner" of the property. These are not things you are going to change over night. Iraq has had the "dictatorial advantage" for many years and the tribal mindset still limits capabilities. It is something you have to learn to work with.