TLDR: Public officials lose their right to privacy and are subjected to surveillance. Corruption is impossible if they cannot make private deals.
Preface: The American government has been rolling out mass AI surveillance systems with facial recognition much like we've seen in China. There are currently 5,000+ cities in America that are covered, roughly 1/3 of all law enforcement now uses AI cameras. These databases recognize and keep track the movements and behaviors of literally everyone, the systems are incredibly expensive to install and maintain (we foot the bill) and they are often misused or compromised. It's a huge ongoing issue in America that very few people know or care about so it's been growing and expanding over the passed few years and, if not stopped, will eventually become a beast. This got me to thinking about what an ambitious goal they have: to create such a powerful a system to track and predict patterns of half a billion people; and it's possible with enough energy into a data center but would take a lot of energy and a lot of cameras (currently there are 100k cameras by Flock and a partnership that takes footage from everyone's Ring doorbell).
The solution: Flip the system around. It's much easier, much more doable, much less ambitious, much much cheaper, to surveil politicians than it is to surveil everyone else. Public officials lose their right to privacy and are subjected to surveillance. They cannot have a conversation with their wives without everyone citizen hearing it, they cannot take a bathroom break without everyone knowing exactly how long it took, they cannot exchange a nickle without the whole world seeing the receipts, they cannot receive a gift without the everyone knowing exactly what it is and who its from. Corruption requires privacy. Without privacy, corruption is impossible.
In the simplest terms, we have the Private citizen & the Public official. Citizens have a right to privacy, politicians don't.
Can you find a problem with this idea? I still need to think of a name for this political system, has anything like this ever happened in the past?
Scientology is a prime example of how corruption is reduced and destroyed when brought into the light. Looking into this you'll find only lost legal battles against those who expose their corruption, you won't find any example of corruption without total secrecy, and this destroys your main point that corruption does not require privacy. It does.
I have 0 sympathy for the "victims" of Scientology that you speak of, look into this and you'll see that they all willingly donated their wealth to the organization and then regretted it, and that's the extent of their victomhood. These idiots have nothing to do with the clear correlation between corruption and secrecy. Maybe you can think of a second example, you did say "Plenty of corruption is right out there in the open," and I disagree. The spotlight is where corruption ends.
Its an original idea I had based entirely on the modern technology that we have today. I brought up multiple historic examples of entire societies of men willing to sacrifice privacy to best serve their nations, because you claimed that "You will not get intelligent or talented people to serve under these conditions." Point demolished, unless you can think of a response beyond an insult and "the internet exists"...
You keep bringing up the internet and how the tech makes everything different today... Well that's exactly my point with the predictive AI surveillance state. The technology today is so advanced that ending corruption is doable, so much so that people say things like "the internet exists so why is this still happening", or "why, in the age of the internet, are things still this way".
And lastly, I still don't understand what you are saying about young people facing emgencies and having value for privacy. The system I am proposing is one that grants citizens privacy, it is a counter to the current system that tracks my daughter and keeps a database on her doctor visits, the AI company knew she had cancer before she told anyone and sold that data to ad agencies. What are you saying and what relevance does it have to the topic at hand: the idea of ending corruption using the same surveillance technology that they use on us.