Interesting topic Seb .... I have a couple of thoughts on this that are quite a different point of view.

While I absolutely would not accept bribing a police officer in my own country, my view in other countries is totally related to the local culture. If it is a normal process there, then I do feel that its culturally arrogant to not play by the local cultural rules.

I used to go to a bar I liked in the Moscow, and used to tip very well. The tip was not to make the barman happy, it was because the bar was often very crowded, and if that barman saw me, he would serve me first at a crowded bar, cause he knew he would get a big tip if he did that. I am paying money to get something done more quickly.

Is that me not having self respect?

I was paying for priority service. I was paying to have the process of buying a drink in a crowded bar sped up.

Some people pay for priority boarding on Easyjet.

I am happy to pay to speed up the process if I get caught speeding in Russia or Ukraine or Kazakhstan or wherever. The full process, of having a full ticket written out, going to a bank, queueing to pay the fine is long, slow and economically inefficient (it wastes half a day of your travelling time). Paying half the fine to the policeman on the spot saves my time, saves the banks customers time(they dont have to queue behind a wall of speeding fine payers) and saves the state the money it would need to pay the police if that process wasnt normal.

At the end of the day thats all anything in the economy is. Your employer bribes you to come to work. You bribe a plumber to fix your broken pipes. You bribe him more if he can come more quickly, serving you first, and leaving his other customers who arent willing to pay a premium to wait.

I think you need to define exactly what you mean by bribery and what is specifically negative about it in a case by case basis.

I used to take clients out to nice restaurants so that their firm would deal with me and not a competitor. Investment banks take clients to the Monaco Grand Prix - it isnt cause they like them. Its cause they are trying to manipulate their choices by the application of money.

Corporate entertainment is bribery, pure and simple. You offer expensive gifts and services (but theoretically not money) to encourage an individual who works for another entity, to make that entity spend money with your entity. You are trying to affect that persons choice by means that have nothing to do with the quality or price of the product or service you are offering. - You are trying to affect the outcome, and what you are offering is personal enrichment. i.e. bribery.

Thats something that is a keystone of western business, yet is 100% bribery. Why is western style bribery acceptable and eastern style bribery not?

what concerns me in this story is no one seems to care whether or not the guy has broken the law. If he was pulled over by the police, its not for something or another. Its cause he was caught speeding, or he crossed a white line or some other breach of the traffic laws. Or possibly for no reason. But it is relevant. You actually implied he was pulled over for speeding. If he was pulled over cause he broke the law, and he made life difficult for the cop to get out of paying a fine (whether to the cop or to the state) then HE is the guy who has no morals in my book. If he was speeding, and he knew it, then he was just trying to weasel out of a penalty that he genuinely deserves. He broke the law ... AND he was caught doing it. Thats plain and simple. He broke the law and he was pulled over for it by local cops. Natural justice implies he owes someone somewhere a penalty. You can argue all you like about who and where, but him trying to get out of it is him trying to get out of a perfectly just and fair penalty, for being caught breaking the law.

I strongly disagree with the notion of western superiority. That because our police are less corrupt than in other parts of the world, then we can ignore local rules, local police and act as if we have impunity. I think thats cultural arrogance.

While we are on cultural arrogance, I think its important to recognise there is more than one culture in the world. I think its not credible to say one culture or another is inherently superior to others. We might do things differently in the west, but when we travel to these countries, we should accept the way things are done locally and not try to impose out culture. If you dont like eating dog meat, then there is no point going to Korea and complaining about it. If you are female and want to sunbathe topless, then dont go to Iran or the USA.

If you go to Russia / Ukraine / Kazakhstan etc, then I think you have to accept the system works a certain way. The speed traps are not there to catch foreigners. They are not biased against foreigners. A radar catches all people equally. They catch locals and they catch foreigners - equally. The locals pay the fines a certain way. In the back of the cop car. Its the system. Why do you think as a foreigner you dont have to? What makes a westerner immune to following the system? What makes a westerner able to speed, and think he doesnt have to pay fines, when the local have to when they get caught. Does the westerner think he is a superior human being? Above local laws? Above the local system?

I think its very easy to fall in to the habit of thinking "everyone should be like us". "Everyone should do things the way we do". I think its a dangerous way of thinking. And I think its culturally imperialist.

If certain countries are going to change the way they do things, its for THEM to change their system, from within. Its not for us to travel to other countries and feel that "this is the way I demand to be treated". You are in their country. You are not entitled to be treated as anything superior to how they treat locals. You are not special nor do you have more rights because you are a foreigner.

As for us, the travellers, I feel its for us to either accept their system as it is, or not go there.

__________________