[flagged]
>Corruption is a form of dishonesty or a criminal offense which is undertaken by a person or an organization which is entrusted in a position of authority, in order to acquire illicit benefits or abuse power for one's personal gain.
>In politics, lobbying or advocacy, is the act of lawfully attempting to influence the actions, policies, or decisions of government officials, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies, but also judges of the judiciary.
From those descriptions, it seems pretty clear that corruption is a bad thing, but it's not really clear that lobbying is a bad thing. Sure, trying to influence people could involve corruption, but at the same time don't you want your representatives to be responsive to their constituents? Is a hypothetical world where politicians can't officially be influenced at all really better?
I'm sure plenty of what you'd consider corruption in Russia is both obviously corrupt as well as de facto legal.
You realize that the word "lobbying" isn't limited to activities that occur in the US? It's a generic english word. Moreover, "lobbying" includes any sort of influence operations, not just the ones you hate that were legal after Citizens United v. FEC. As I said earlier, trying to redefine "lobbying" to mean "influence operations that I oppose, like what corporations are doing in the US" is sloppy writing and playing fast and loose with existing definitions.