49 ms·
Imagine that, by default, there's a level playing field for everyone, but a subgroup of people share some common background and therefore they can form trusted
by RhysU 7y ago
Imagine that, by default, there's a level playing field for everyone, but a subgroup of people share some common background and therefore they can form trusted connections amongst themselves at lower cost vs the overhead to establish such connections between any two parties who don't know each other from Adam. I claim this not nefarious situation is indistinguishable from your sinister finger pointing.
- neilv 7y agoHow do you mean "trust"? Possibilities include: 1. Trust that the person is capable at particular things. (This you might get from credentials, which perhaps also defines a group, and accomplishments.) 2. Trust that the person is truthful with you, and will honor agreements with you. (This you might get from their reputation within your network/group.) 3. Trust that the person will give preferential treatment to you/group, and that they do this because there is mutual advantage to a subgroup doing that, separate from trust in ability and honesty. (Maybe sometimes this is called loyalty to the group, though you might say you trust in their loyalty. Or maybe it's merely understood.) I'm pretty sure I've seen #3 happen in business/opportunities, read about it in news, and heard people talk firsthand about it, in ways not always covered by #1 and #2.