As I #amwriting about "corruption" (imperfect term, I know) in the early modern Caribbean (pre-17th c.), I can't help but thinking that illicit behavior was something social actors identified either in those socially inferior or in social/political rivals.

In other words, there were very few acts that were categorically and overwhelmingly viewed as corrupt. And even those may vary according to time and place. Sociopolitical context dictated what was illicit (just like the law was casuistic, so was the views on corruption) Thoughts?

Amendment: I meant pre-18th c. Sorry.