First, the decline in trust correlates with the professionalization and expansion of conservative propaganda organs owned and run by plutocrats who wish to keep the public divided. Not just Fox News, but the entire conservative ecosystem which includes hundreds of radio stations, hundreds of thinktanks, and production of cut-and-paste propaganda for innumerable right-wing politicians.
Second, a smaller effect might be due to the well-known biases instilled by economics 101 courses. Smaller because only a small segment of the population actually takes these courses in high school or college.
Nice work rounding up the research, but again the lack of cultural context negates the value of any conclusions.
Japan is a totally different society. Among other things, it is so safe that car accidents where someone is injured (not killed, just hurt) show up on the evening news in Tokyo. Compare that with LA where at least 5 dead and a fiery explosion is required for a 2 second mention.
I've left a computer bag (with a then $3000 laptop) on the Yamanote train line - the circle one going around central Tokyo - and was able to claim it from the termination train station the next day. In the US, it would be either stolen within seconds or blown up by Homeland Security.
Taiwan isn't quite as extrame safety as Japan, but it isn't that far away either.
I can't speak to Korea.
But overall, decline in trust is always a function of decline in prosperity. We're getting close to a generation during which the overall average of American male wages has been flat. When there isn't enough to go around, people get suspicious of others and jealous of their own prerogatives. Nor is it inaccurate to say that ongoing diversity campaigns combined with open advocacy of illegal aliens isn't helping. Let's not forget that union leaders of all races have openly stated that incoming immigrants depress existing union member wages.
Here’s a rose-colored-glasses interpretation: Is it possible the poll results are just because people’s standards have risen? I tend to think Americans’ expectations for how perfect a match their spouse should be, how non-racist a white acquaintance can be before a person of color can call them a friend, and in general how supportive friends are have gone up. (So many people in 20th-century media are SO MEAN to their supposed friends!) And consider also the evolving norms around kids committing physical violence against one another, which I think there was a viral Twitter thread about the other day. Is it possible the same dynamic applies with social trust? Maybe the changing poll numbers show people becoming more sensitive, more empathetic, and thus more shocked and discouraged by others’ failures of empathy, or failures to live up to the high standards people set for themselves.
I think the masks are an interesting real-world instance where people do trust government and others. While people might complain about the CDC and messaging, most people have also been wearing masks even today. So there's some sort of deeper core trust that remains.
First of all, nobody goes bowling alone unless they're practicing for a tournament; it's just that "Bowling With Family or Friends Instead of in An Organised League" or "Bowling Loses Popularity Compared to New Activities" makes a less snappy title.
Secondly, is media partly to blame ? Until the recent spike coinciding with Covid, murders, violence and crime in general had been dropping for years since the mid-90s, but every year people reported it was getting worse- because they watched the nightly news with its "if it bleeds it leads" coverage
As a data point: I live in Vietnam where trust levels are pretty low. I don't have any survey data showing that, just anecdotally it is clearly the case. Just as an example: when you buy something at a store (like a major, national electronics chain), you're expected to open up the box and inspect it before taking it home to make sure it is what you think you've bought.
There is, obviously, zero polarization since there are no other political parties and I've never heard anyone ever discuss politics. (Which probably sounds like a totalitarian nightmare to most Americans but actually is really, really nice to not have to listen to politics take over every aspect of every conversation.)
Yet trust is still low with no polarization.
Also, there is a ton of homogeneity since (to oversimply somewhat) everyone is the same ethnic and religious background here so even the "cultural homogeneity leads to high trust" explanation doesn't really hold much water, IMHO. If anything, the weird sectional distrusts between North and South Vietnamese over honestly trivial differences would seem to argue against that. A (North Vietnamese) friend once bought an apartment from a (North Vietnamese) elderly couple that said that would only sell to North Vietnamese.
If it’s a question of trotting out our hobby horses, my first reaction is to blame the media in general and the Internet in particular. People are taught to be afraid, be it about terrorism, crime, child abductions, or Covid mortality rates. The average Joe is lucky to be within two orders of magnitude of the actual figures. And once you sell the fear, the anger is only a putt shot away. After that, who has the bandwidth to worry about the environment, the new Gilded Age, right-wing extremism, etc, etc?
As for the issue of trust, there’s a real distinction between trusting the guy on the street to be a decent guy and follow the laws, and trusting him to vote along the spectrum of what you feel is acceptable (in the largest sense). Thirty years ago, backing the wrong horse in a presidential election took a day or two to bitterly digest. Now it’s a four-year white-knuckle ride.
Democracy needs trust. And trust needs a sense that with enough access to truth and education and dialog, that we can reach a modus vivendi. Two decades after the Internet burst upon the scene, we find ourselves in a post-truth world. At this rate, I doubt democracy has another two decades in it.
I wonder if electoral system is partly involved here. Winner-take-all systems (France, Canada, most of the East Asian examples here) push a sort of political zero-sum narrative, that you wouldn't see in more coalitional proportional systems (like superstars Sweden/Norway)
Obviously Germany cuts against this, but I don't know how the broader study looks (couldn't figure out where it was linked with cross-country comparisons). STV (or other PR) is the drum I keep banging for eternity as a solution to everything, so I'm particularly keen to confirm/deny my priors.
Met the manager of a high-end Northeast restaurant this weekend. They have literally shut down for a few weeks per quarter to keep revenues from getting so high that it'd shut off the covid emergency money. I don't trust the welfare system. A better functioning government would go a long way towards better trust in general.
You may not have solutions, but at least you characterized the landscape and the problem pretty well, with lots of interesting and well-sourced facts and data. Thanks for that. This trust issue is something I'm engaged with as well, from a sociological viewpoint. I found this really helpful and good food for thought.
You probably don't want to say so, but the answer is simple. Since the Republicans stoke hate constantly by lying constantly, are promoting racism and sexism, are supporting insurrection and terrorism, are lawless, and are trying to sabotage basic government functions (see: debt limit) -- get rid of the Republican Party and the problem is solved. The Republican Party disinformation machine is the primary cause of distrust in the US.
Shut down Faux News and Sinclair Broadcasting, shut down the worst of the crooked megachurches, arrest the criminals behind the Qanon scam, get Trump in prison where he belongs, problem will go away. What we need is exactly like de-Nazification in post-WWII Germany.
I think you and Musgrave have been very unfair to Mr Asher and priviliged-naive in missing his point. He said nothing suggesting he resented others getting freebies. He said that to change your life you must get up and do something. I remember you writing the same advice on battling depression
This has been an unusual recession when the social good called for keeping people home. Normally the issue of incentivizing people to stay home is very important - skills atrophy and connection is lost to the work force. That's nothing to with scarcity mentality, it's more about keeping laid off in and bringing people living on the margins into positive healthy meaningful activity.
There's an interpretation of the Scandinavian data which fits with the "immigration lowers trust" idea: Basically, it's that mistrust of diversity exists, but the effect is weak. What happens in this scenario is that _extremely high trust countries admit a lot more immigrants_, and then that drives a short-run decline in their trust level, but not enough to swamp the pro-immigration / pro-integration policies.
I feel like if you go spend a year in some Rust Belt mill town in decline a la Mare of Easttown with falling employment, rising drug usage, declining church attendance and stagnant educational attainment you probably won't trust the government by the end of it either.
The example of Mr. Asher is very interesting, feels like you could try to understand this mentality on multiple levels. Is he projecting? Does he see himself as a "hardworking" and "deserving" poor person but does not extend such characterization to other poor people? Does he see a lot of seemingly or actually lazy poor people in his "borderline homeless" circles? Or does he ingest a lot of Fox News and is conditioned to hating anything the big evil government does even when it dramatically changes his life for the better?
At any rate, apparently his POV tracks with the data on lower income people being generally less trusting of others. It might be important to understand how and why lower income people view government assistance so negatively even when they are the primary beneficiaries.
Another thing I wonder is how much an individuals' trust level changes if they are moved through various demographic categories. Do lower income people become more trusting if/when they get nicer jobs and become higher income? Do people get slightly more trusting as they age? Does people who get PhDs end up more trusting than their college selves? Or is there some confounding variable ("class" maybe?) that predicts both likelihood to be trusting and likelihood to get a PhD?
Nice article, brought up more questions on this topic than I had previously.
Yep. Basically echoed my reply to your tweet yesterday.
I would like to see a survey on how much people think about politics today vs in the past.
In the 80s or 90s politics was an abstract thing. When I met someone new, the last thing I thought about was who they voted for.
Nowadays, I feel like the first thing people do is try and suss out ot signal which team they are on.
I know it’s easy to blame Trump, but the dude is just a symptom… a malignant symptom, but one just the same.
All I can say is I’m an exception. I generally find people trustworthy.
Two ideas.
First, the decline in trust correlates with the professionalization and expansion of conservative propaganda organs owned and run by plutocrats who wish to keep the public divided. Not just Fox News, but the entire conservative ecosystem which includes hundreds of radio stations, hundreds of thinktanks, and production of cut-and-paste propaganda for innumerable right-wing politicians.
Second, a smaller effect might be due to the well-known biases instilled by economics 101 courses. Smaller because only a small segment of the population actually takes these courses in high school or college.
Nice work rounding up the research, but again the lack of cultural context negates the value of any conclusions.
Japan is a totally different society. Among other things, it is so safe that car accidents where someone is injured (not killed, just hurt) show up on the evening news in Tokyo. Compare that with LA where at least 5 dead and a fiery explosion is required for a 2 second mention.
I've left a computer bag (with a then $3000 laptop) on the Yamanote train line - the circle one going around central Tokyo - and was able to claim it from the termination train station the next day. In the US, it would be either stolen within seconds or blown up by Homeland Security.
Taiwan isn't quite as extrame safety as Japan, but it isn't that far away either.
I can't speak to Korea.
But overall, decline in trust is always a function of decline in prosperity. We're getting close to a generation during which the overall average of American male wages has been flat. When there isn't enough to go around, people get suspicious of others and jealous of their own prerogatives. Nor is it inaccurate to say that ongoing diversity campaigns combined with open advocacy of illegal aliens isn't helping. Let's not forget that union leaders of all races have openly stated that incoming immigrants depress existing union member wages.
Here’s a rose-colored-glasses interpretation: Is it possible the poll results are just because people’s standards have risen? I tend to think Americans’ expectations for how perfect a match their spouse should be, how non-racist a white acquaintance can be before a person of color can call them a friend, and in general how supportive friends are have gone up. (So many people in 20th-century media are SO MEAN to their supposed friends!) And consider also the evolving norms around kids committing physical violence against one another, which I think there was a viral Twitter thread about the other day. Is it possible the same dynamic applies with social trust? Maybe the changing poll numbers show people becoming more sensitive, more empathetic, and thus more shocked and discouraged by others’ failures of empathy, or failures to live up to the high standards people set for themselves.
I think the masks are an interesting real-world instance where people do trust government and others. While people might complain about the CDC and messaging, most people have also been wearing masks even today. So there's some sort of deeper core trust that remains.
First of all, nobody goes bowling alone unless they're practicing for a tournament; it's just that "Bowling With Family or Friends Instead of in An Organised League" or "Bowling Loses Popularity Compared to New Activities" makes a less snappy title.
Secondly, is media partly to blame ? Until the recent spike coinciding with Covid, murders, violence and crime in general had been dropping for years since the mid-90s, but every year people reported it was getting worse- because they watched the nightly news with its "if it bleeds it leads" coverage
As a data point: I live in Vietnam where trust levels are pretty low. I don't have any survey data showing that, just anecdotally it is clearly the case. Just as an example: when you buy something at a store (like a major, national electronics chain), you're expected to open up the box and inspect it before taking it home to make sure it is what you think you've bought.
There is, obviously, zero polarization since there are no other political parties and I've never heard anyone ever discuss politics. (Which probably sounds like a totalitarian nightmare to most Americans but actually is really, really nice to not have to listen to politics take over every aspect of every conversation.)
Yet trust is still low with no polarization.
Also, there is a ton of homogeneity since (to oversimply somewhat) everyone is the same ethnic and religious background here so even the "cultural homogeneity leads to high trust" explanation doesn't really hold much water, IMHO. If anything, the weird sectional distrusts between North and South Vietnamese over honestly trivial differences would seem to argue against that. A (North Vietnamese) friend once bought an apartment from a (North Vietnamese) elderly couple that said that would only sell to North Vietnamese.
If it’s a question of trotting out our hobby horses, my first reaction is to blame the media in general and the Internet in particular. People are taught to be afraid, be it about terrorism, crime, child abductions, or Covid mortality rates. The average Joe is lucky to be within two orders of magnitude of the actual figures. And once you sell the fear, the anger is only a putt shot away. After that, who has the bandwidth to worry about the environment, the new Gilded Age, right-wing extremism, etc, etc?
As for the issue of trust, there’s a real distinction between trusting the guy on the street to be a decent guy and follow the laws, and trusting him to vote along the spectrum of what you feel is acceptable (in the largest sense). Thirty years ago, backing the wrong horse in a presidential election took a day or two to bitterly digest. Now it’s a four-year white-knuckle ride.
Democracy needs trust. And trust needs a sense that with enough access to truth and education and dialog, that we can reach a modus vivendi. Two decades after the Internet burst upon the scene, we find ourselves in a post-truth world. At this rate, I doubt democracy has another two decades in it.
I wonder if electoral system is partly involved here. Winner-take-all systems (France, Canada, most of the East Asian examples here) push a sort of political zero-sum narrative, that you wouldn't see in more coalitional proportional systems (like superstars Sweden/Norway)
Obviously Germany cuts against this, but I don't know how the broader study looks (couldn't figure out where it was linked with cross-country comparisons). STV (or other PR) is the drum I keep banging for eternity as a solution to everything, so I'm particularly keen to confirm/deny my priors.
Met the manager of a high-end Northeast restaurant this weekend. They have literally shut down for a few weeks per quarter to keep revenues from getting so high that it'd shut off the covid emergency money. I don't trust the welfare system. A better functioning government would go a long way towards better trust in general.
You may not have solutions, but at least you characterized the landscape and the problem pretty well, with lots of interesting and well-sourced facts and data. Thanks for that. This trust issue is something I'm engaged with as well, from a sociological viewpoint. I found this really helpful and good food for thought.
You probably don't want to say so, but the answer is simple. Since the Republicans stoke hate constantly by lying constantly, are promoting racism and sexism, are supporting insurrection and terrorism, are lawless, and are trying to sabotage basic government functions (see: debt limit) -- get rid of the Republican Party and the problem is solved. The Republican Party disinformation machine is the primary cause of distrust in the US.
Shut down Faux News and Sinclair Broadcasting, shut down the worst of the crooked megachurches, arrest the criminals behind the Qanon scam, get Trump in prison where he belongs, problem will go away. What we need is exactly like de-Nazification in post-WWII Germany.
I think you and Musgrave have been very unfair to Mr Asher and priviliged-naive in missing his point. He said nothing suggesting he resented others getting freebies. He said that to change your life you must get up and do something. I remember you writing the same advice on battling depression
This has been an unusual recession when the social good called for keeping people home. Normally the issue of incentivizing people to stay home is very important - skills atrophy and connection is lost to the work force. That's nothing to with scarcity mentality, it's more about keeping laid off in and bringing people living on the margins into positive healthy meaningful activity.
There's an interpretation of the Scandinavian data which fits with the "immigration lowers trust" idea: Basically, it's that mistrust of diversity exists, but the effect is weak. What happens in this scenario is that _extremely high trust countries admit a lot more immigrants_, and then that drives a short-run decline in their trust level, but not enough to swamp the pro-immigration / pro-integration policies.
I feel like if you go spend a year in some Rust Belt mill town in decline a la Mare of Easttown with falling employment, rising drug usage, declining church attendance and stagnant educational attainment you probably won't trust the government by the end of it either.
The example of Mr. Asher is very interesting, feels like you could try to understand this mentality on multiple levels. Is he projecting? Does he see himself as a "hardworking" and "deserving" poor person but does not extend such characterization to other poor people? Does he see a lot of seemingly or actually lazy poor people in his "borderline homeless" circles? Or does he ingest a lot of Fox News and is conditioned to hating anything the big evil government does even when it dramatically changes his life for the better?
At any rate, apparently his POV tracks with the data on lower income people being generally less trusting of others. It might be important to understand how and why lower income people view government assistance so negatively even when they are the primary beneficiaries.
Another thing I wonder is how much an individuals' trust level changes if they are moved through various demographic categories. Do lower income people become more trusting if/when they get nicer jobs and become higher income? Do people get slightly more trusting as they age? Does people who get PhDs end up more trusting than their college selves? Or is there some confounding variable ("class" maybe?) that predicts both likelihood to be trusting and likelihood to get a PhD?
Nice article, brought up more questions on this topic than I had previously.