Why Anti-Corruption Strategies May Backfire
I dispute that corruption is inevitable and propose that its origins lie the violation of a foundational moral at the heart of most religions:<p>In Christianity, this is the commandment: Thou shall not steal. 
In Buddhism, the precept is more explicit: Do not take that which has not been freely given.<p>If we live in a society where the majority of people are willing to violate this rule by directing the state to steal from those who have more and redistribute to those who have less, those who are being robbed will naturally seek to find a means to defend themselves and their families from the predation of the majority.<p>Being outnumbered, they do not have the votes to defend themselves at the polls. Naturally, they will use the resources they do have. They can bribe those who are tasked with committing the theft. This is entirely rational. 
No matter how many prohibitions against corruption are erected, those who are being preyed upon will seek to defend themselves and there will always be people willing to help them, especially in exchange for cash.<p>The origin of corruption lies in the decision to violate the prohibition against theft. 
The violation of the prohibition against theft creates a need for bribery which would not otherwise exist. When a need is created, market forces will move to ensure the need is met.<p>One way to create a society free of corruption is for the majority to voluntarily commit to the prohibition against theft and to enforce the prohibition against those who choose to violate it.<p>I would further propose that this could lead to a more general replacement of zero sum games with positive sum games. This, in turn, would serve to further accelerate the rate of innovation and thus speed the rate at which all,human needs are met. 
When trust is strengthened, instead of seeking to meet our needs at the expense of each other, we are naturally more willing to work together to solve the larger problems which afflict us all.