Would cronyism be more pervasive under capitalism or socialism?

I don't think there's any difference. Socialism and capitalism, both can be either good or bad, depending on who's running the game, what their real agenda is.

An outfit called Transparency International (www.transparency.org) maintains an index that rates countries in order of how corrupt their governments are. We are somewhere in the middle. The least corrupt governments are all in countries that are more socialist than the US, including Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, Canada, etc. So obviously capitalism doesn't do anything in itself to curb corruption.

Under real socialism cronyism would not exist. Socialism is true participatory (not simply voting) democratic government by the working class where the interests of people and society are paramount rather than the pursuit of profits by a wealthy elite. You cannot have cronyism under a true democracy.

yet what regarding the prospect and artwork that the owner of the busniess could have put in only to make those revenue? And if the owner does not see a skill for massive revenue, then no one is going to choose to pass into busniess using fact its apprently not truly worth it, so then what occurs while there is not any busniess using fact there's a loss of busniessmen? EDIT: yet many busniessmen do place self assurance in loans in capitalist soceities anyhow, and an instituion wherein many human beings share the prospect is likewise ordinary as a company... yet while workers are going to get all the revenue somewhat of traders then why could somebody make investments interior the 1st place? I doubt many workers are going to have certainly one of those funds to actual make investments right into a business enterprise. So essentialy if no one is going to choose to take a place or take the prospect, and if workers dont have certainly one of those funds to take that danger, the place is the money to start a business enterprise going to return from?

Cronyism depends on government having the ability to dispense favors. In a highly competitive market, no matter how many cronies you have, they have no power to dispense any favors.

If you look at how Obama's main man, Rahm Emanuel, got his brother, Ezekiel Emanuel, to be the main health guy, that's probably a good example to consider for your question.

V for Vendetta is naive. Those in power are destined to be corrupt the longer they hold it. Socialism is NOT true democracy. I don't even know how you can make that statement.

i would say under socialism. however, there seems to be plenty under capitalism as well. which means it has just as much to do w/ corruption as anything else...