4 ms·

High Trust vs Low Trust society. Clearly we are entering a time of Low Trust Society, and the institutions have only themselves to blame as they have abused th

by syshum 6y ago

High Trust vs Low Trust society. Clearly we are entering a time of Low Trust Society, and the institutions have only themselves to blame as they have abused the populations trust for decades only now with free flow of information are regular people able to directly see the abuse that has existed for a very very long time. We used to have a High Trust society, not because the people in power were trust worthy but because the people in power directly controlled the information. This is no longer the case, and as that power is shifting we are now seeing the people that control information today looking for ways to retain that control and instead of allowing it to flow freely inject their own filters into the streams.

smhost 6y ago
you have it almost exactly backwards. we haven't lived in a high trust society (as you defined it) since before the protestant reformation, when the printing press liberated information that had been previously monopolized by the church. we're returning to a high trust society out of necessity because of economic forces that incentivize information asymmetry.
- _jal 6y ago
  Pretty sure the difference of opinion between the last two comments comes down to differing understandings of the word 'trust', and very different time scales.
- giantg2 6y ago
  Government is increasingly transparent compared to past history. You can see that in things like right to know, freedom of information, etc. There are still information issues in both discovery and presentation. The public trust is still very low. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/09/14/americans-views-of-government-low-trust-but-some-positive-performance-ratings/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/09/14/americans-vi...
- gnarbarian 6y ago
  I love that you are considering things on that scope but there are still many high trust areas in the US. Small towns that are culturally and ethnically homogenous with fewer transients are almost always high trust. It's pointless to steal someone's car in a town of 30 families. everyone would know exactly where it went. You also know exactly who you are doing harm to so your sense of sympathy kicks in making you less likely to do it. These tight knit low population towns seem to naturally create a high-trust honor culture. Small towns have a higher level of social integration so wronging someone creates repercussions that flow back to the perpetrator through every one of their social bonds.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    That might be true of the local government. Just ask them how feel about the Feds...
    - betterunix2 6y ago
      The irony is that corruption and abuse of power is far worse at the local level...
      - giantg2 6y ago
        In the small tight knit towns? I have seen some, but in my experience usually the occurrence goes up as the size of the town goes up. Rumors of any kind can spread rapidly in small towns. That can come back to bite the people (and their family) doing it.
        betterunix2 6y ago
        In my experience, corruption is worse in tight-knit communities, but because the community is so small it winds up having a tiny impact / nobody cares. You can see an example right now in the Matt Gaetz case -- he is under investigation only because a corrupt county tax collector had been under investigation; that tax collector was under investigation because he took taxpayer money and bought a bunch of servers that he planned to use for some cryptocurrency side hustle, and then wound up burning down his office (apparently did not understand wiring and started an electrical fire). To put it another way, had it not been for a fire, the fact that this tax collector was embezzling the county's funds would have gone unnoticed, as would his involvement in the sex trafficking of teenagers (which is where the story with Gaetz starts). People only pay attention when things are happening at a scale they consider worthy of their attention. The reason corruption is less common at the higher levels is that people are focused on higher level officials; meanwhile, the fact that their local officials are breaking this rule or that rule goes unnoticed, unreported, or worse, happens with everyone's full knowledge and just gets shrugged off.
giantg2 6y ago
There's still a lot that is obscured. For example, most states restrict complaint information against judges to the point that even if it contains exculpatory evidence they are still allowed to keep it secret. The reason they give for keeping it secret is to maintain the integrity and public trust. Transparency only threatens that objective if the system is inappropriately dealing with the complaints.

by syshum 6y ago

smhost 6y ago

you have it almost exactly backwards. we haven't lived in a high trust society (as you defined it) since before the protestant reformation, when the printing press liberated information that had been previously monopolized by the church. we're returning to a high trust society out of necessity because of economic forces that incentivize information asymmetry.

_jal 6y ago
Pretty sure the difference of opinion between the last two comments comes down to differing understandings of the word 'trust', and very different time scales.
giantg2 6y ago
Government is increasingly transparent compared to past history. You can see that in things like right to know, freedom of information, etc. There are still information issues in both discovery and presentation. The public trust is still very low. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/09/14/americans-views-of-government-low-trust-but-some-positive-performance-ratings/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/09/14/americans-vi...
gnarbarian 6y ago
I love that you are considering things on that scope but there are still many high trust areas in the US. Small towns that are culturally and ethnically homogenous with fewer transients are almost always high trust. It's pointless to steal someone's car in a town of 30 families. everyone would know exactly where it went. You also know exactly who you are doing harm to so your sense of sympathy kicks in making you less likely to do it. These tight knit low population towns seem to naturally create a high-trust honor culture. Small towns have a higher level of social integration so wronging someone creates repercussions that flow back to the perpetrator through every one of their social bonds.
- giantg2 6y ago
  That might be true of the local government. Just ask them how feel about the Feds...
  - betterunix2 6y ago
    The irony is that corruption and abuse of power is far worse at the local level...
    - giantg2 6y ago
      In the small tight knit towns? I have seen some, but in my experience usually the occurrence goes up as the size of the town goes up. Rumors of any kind can spread rapidly in small towns. That can come back to bite the people (and their family) doing it.
      - betterunix2 6y ago
        In my experience, corruption is worse in tight-knit communities, but because the community is so small it winds up having a tiny impact / nobody cares. You can see an example right now in the Matt Gaetz case -- he is under investigation only because a corrupt county tax collector had been under investigation; that tax collector was under investigation because he took taxpayer money and bought a bunch of servers that he planned to use for some cryptocurrency side hustle, and then wound up burning down his office (apparently did not understand wiring and started an electrical fire). To put it another way, had it not been for a fire, the fact that this tax collector was embezzling the county's funds would have gone unnoticed, as would his involvement in the sex trafficking of teenagers (which is where the story with Gaetz starts). People only pay attention when things are happening at a scale they consider worthy of their attention. The reason corruption is less common at the higher levels is that people are focused on higher level officials; meanwhile, the fact that their local officials are breaking this rule or that rule goes unnoticed, unreported, or worse, happens with everyone's full knowledge and just gets shrugged off.

giantg2 6y ago

There's still a lot that is obscured. For example, most states restrict complaint information against judges to the point that even if it contains exculpatory evidence they are still allowed to keep it secret. The reason they give for keeping it secret is to maintain the integrity and public trust. Transparency only threatens that objective if the system is inappropriately dealing with the complaints.