zlacker

There's more than one type of government that can resist corruption, since much that drives corruption is extra-governmental (populace education level, media environment, trust in institutions, wealth equality, etc).

So it's unsurprising there are different optimal anti-corruption government types for different combinations of those qualities.

>>ethbr1+(OP)
Yes. But, I don’t think a single one of those “least corrupt” top contenders could be described as:

> The solution is really to keep the scope of government small so that any corruption isn't detrimental to the populace, and they can handle it in the next election.

Which was kind of my point. In reality, the least corruptible types of governments tend to be ones libertarian-skewing Americans would crassly describe as socialist.

>>the_ga+Bf1
I'm not an expert, but aren't Switzerland and Singapore pretty lightweight governments?

>>ethbr1+Jn1
Singapore is strange place - aside from being a city-state. You'll get sent to the gulags for being in possession of a joint, but prostitution is legal. I know a guy who once got in a bar fight there, and he immediately packed up and went to the airport.

I wouldn't exactly call it lightweight government.

>>RajT88+Lv1
I have heard the policing is very strict, but I thought on the business side they were extremely laissez faire.

>>ethbr1+Jn1
The graph here can get a bit wonky. And Switzerland is definitely the closest example of “limited government” working, I’d agree. But both of those countries, e.g., have universal healthcare. Switzerland through a more strict version of something like the ACA. Singapore, state-funded. Switzerland has compulsory military service, higher taxes, more gun regulations, etc. than the U.S. I think the U.S. beats these two on having a more conventionally “limited government” design.