What’s more troublesome:
A) That Wal-Mart executives reportedly paid bribes to Mexican government officials in order to get required permits and special treatment?
or
B) That in America, the situation is different only by degree — Wal-Mart hires well-connected lobbyists, contributes to local politicians, and promises all sorts of politically popular concessions in order to open stores and get government favors.
But here’s the real question: Who is the real offender, both in Mexico, and the U.S.? It is the company that plays ball in an ugly political game in order to be allowed to even conduct business? Or is it the politicians, Mexican and American, who demand favors and contributions from businessmen who just want to do business — and who offer subsidies and special favors to those businesses they favor most?
Nick Schultz at Forbes puts it well:
The upshot is that politically well-connected local stakeholders – unions, community organizers, and other interest groups – get cash, hiring promises, and other benefits from the retailer in exchange for dropping any opposition to a new store.
Among the possible benefits are “assistance to community organizations and programs.” These organizations can, in turn, use this “assistance” to support the political candidates who push this kind of legislation in the first place.
It’s not bribery, of course; but it’s corrupt nonetheless; and too often it’s politics as usual when it comes to major urban area retail and development markets.
In bribery, like in the games of lobbying, campaign contributions, and political influence, the corrupting factor is typically the “public servant” who serves himself rather than the public. The businessman who pays the bribes, hires the revolving-door lobbyist, and greases the skids with contributions may not be behaving honorably, but at least he isn’t violating any fiduciary responsibility.
So before we go cursing Mexico’s political system, let’s look at our own. And before we hate the player, to use an outdated phrase, let’s hate the game.
