Trust in Government

[Michael]

In the news lately was a French general strike as well as some 15,000 workers protesting at General Motor's German headquarters. Things in the USA - where the economic crisis is arguably worse than in France or Germany - we hear of virtually nothing of the sort. Clearly different political traditions exist on either side of the pond.

Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers, said there were smarter things to do than demonstrating against layoffs — for instance, pushing Congress and the states to make sure the stimulus plan creates the maximum number of jobs in the United States.

“I actually believe that Americans believe in their political system more than workers do in other parts of the world,” Mr. Gerard said. He said large labor demonstrations are often warranted in Canada and European countries to pressure parliamentary leaders. Demonstrations are less needed in the United States, he said, because often all that is needed is some expert lobbying in Washington to line up the support of a half-dozen senators.

Professor Kennedy saw another reason that today’s young workers and young people were protesting less than in decades past. “This generation,” he said, has “ found more effective ways to change the world. It’s signed up for political campaigns, and it’s not waiting for things to get so desperate that they feel forced to take to the streets.”
emphasis added Source (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/weekinreview/05greenhouse.html?_r=1)

This is an idea I've stumbled across before - with American showing comparatively high levels of 'trust' in government - far higher levels than other western nations. This is ironic given the political origins of the USA in a rebellion against government authority (and the remarkable system of legalized corruption that passes for government in the USA).

I'm curious what people think of this. Are Americans more trusting of government than Europeans? (or Canadians for that matter - who tend to show the lowest level of government trust of all western nations).

[dilettante]

In the news lately was a French general strike as well as some 15,000 workers protesting at General Motor's German headquarters. Things in the USA - where the economic crisis is arguably worse than in France or Germany - we hear of virtually nothing of the sort. Clearly different political traditions exist on either side of the pond.


emphasis added Source (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/weekinreview/05greenhouse.html?_r=1)

This is an idea I've stumbled across before - with American showing comparatively high levels of 'trust' in government - far higher levels than other western nations. This is ironic given the political origins of the USA in a rebellion against government authority (and the remarkable system of legalized corruption that passes for government in the USA).

I'm curious what people think of this. Are Americans more trusting of government than Europeans? (or Canadians for that matter - who tend to show the lowest level of government trust of all western nations).

Another possible interpretation might be that Americans are (at least rhetorically) less desirous of government intervention. I.E. The reason they don't protest wrt to economic woes isn't that they trust the government more, but rather that they trust the government less and don't want to invite it any farther into the economy.
That's just off the top of my (currently disease-addled) head, so it might not explain anything. But I'm not sure the absence of protest alone indicates greater trust.

[partofme]

I think most American's don't take protests seriously. The image the bring up is that of a bunch of young hippies or trouble makers. Ad to that the fact that Americans are intellectually lazy when it comes to keeping up with what their government is doing. I think much of the reason for that is Americans in many cases are so damn busy that they don't have time to really get involved either.

[Greendruid]

I think this current generation of Americans and Canadians is lazy about their politics. Just look at our voter turnouts - and that's an encouraged form of political voice in a democracy. If you don't agree that we're lazy just look in your grocery stores' freezer sections. I've never been to Europe but I'm going to bet that from my exposure to food culture articles and books that Europeans take things like food choices more seriously because they see part of that choice as one of their voices.

I agree with Partofme as well in stating that Americans and Canadians are just (or feel that they are just) too damned busy to do anything about these issues. There is a tipping point though - I think that as we will see more house foreclosures, more job losses and more unemployment queues that we will perhaps see a return to the protests of the 1960s. There was a time in American history not too long ago that drew hundreds of thousands of people to the Lincoln memorial to protest for Civil Rights and jobs. There was a time when equal numbers gathered on a dairy farm to hear the most amazing concert ever concieved in the name of peace. The potential is there, there must be a flashpoint. I hope that it is not an angry or vengeful one but a peaceful one that is hopeful in government.

[wphelan]

I agree with Partofme as well in stating that Americans and Canadians are just (or feel that they are just) too damned busy to do anything about these issues.

I think a lot of it has to do with feeling powerless to change anything, especially at the federal level. As government becomes more centralized, the average citizen is more and more removed from the decision making process. As of the 2000 census, the average size of a congressional district is 646,952 people. That number is only getting bigger. I don't know what it is other countries, but this is always something that has bothered me.

Due to the sheer size of the districts, it's not practical for an average person to have any contact with his or her representative, let alone run themselves to try to make a difference. I know gerrymandering is a big factor in 'safe seats' and the relative lack of challenge incumbents face, as Michael has pointed out in the past. However, I think the increasing size of the districts and the ensuing alienation is an increasing problem.

I don't necessarily think Americans trust government more than others. Perhaps we've been worn down enough that we just accept it as it is because the effort required to change it is so great.

[SMadsen]

I don't think I can name another nation that, without being a dictatorship, has a population with such a mistrust of their own government. I'm surprised to hear of Americans and high levels of trust in government in one and the same sentence.

It's my impression that Americans do indeed trust their political system but only, or, at least mainly, in that it's a platform for securing individual rights. When it comes to actual 'governing', trust among the American populace is hard to spot. If it's there, they hide it well.

Perhaps it's a sort of psychological dichotomy with the statics of individual rights (securing rights) on one side and the dynamics of governing (risking rights) on the other. I don't know. I can only observe.

[Dominick]

I don't think I can name another nation that, without being a dictatorship, has a population with such a mistrust of their own government. I'm surprised to hear of Americans and high levels of trust in government in one and the same sentence.

It's my impression that Americans do indeed trust their political system but only, or, at least mainly, in that it's a platform for securing individual rights. When it comes to actual 'governing', trust among the American populace is hard to spot. If it's there, they hide it well.

Perhaps it's a sort of psychological dichotomy with the statics of individual rights (securing rights) on one side and the dynamics of governing (risking rights) on the other. I don't know. I can only observe.
I agree with that assessment but at the same time I know of no other culture that has such a high -dare I say blind- trust in authority in general. Cops, the military, criminal justice seem all to be held above any suspicion whatsoever.

[partofme]

I agree with that assessment but at the same time I know of no other culture that has such a high -dare I say blind- trust in authority in general. Cops, the military, criminal justice seem all to be held above any suspicion whatsoever.

That's the odd thing about many in America. People say they want small government but love the military along with strong law and order. Some how they only think of government as regulation and politicians but the other part some how seems to escape from that negative view.

[Dominick]

That's the odd thing about many in America. People say they want small government but love the military along with strong law and order. Some how they only think of government as regulation and politicians but the other part some how seems to escape from that negative view.
Yes, it's very strange. I've been reading a lot about the Mumia Abu-Jamal case (all sides of the coin). To an objective observer such as me it's blatantly obvious this man has been framed or at the very least not given a fair trial. So anyone that holds 'freedom' and 'rights' high should be supportive of at least a review of the trial. Nevertheless, specifically this crowd is frantically, if not hysterically anxious to murder the man. Partly it's explained by bland racism, partly by the political aspect (Black Panther) but IMO mostly by the fantastic idiom that all cops are as infallible as the Pope and judges holier than Mother Teresa.

[dilettante]

I can't get behind the notion that Americans think their cops are completely trustworthy or infallible. Put a police cruiser behind most Americans on the road and they'll suddenly tense up because they're afraid cops are actively looking for any excuse to hand out speeding tickets and citations. It's been a long time since the culture viewed "Mr. Policeman" as a friendly, trustworthy face.

That said, it does seem that Americans generally disregard allegations of government/police conspiracy. They're likely to accept that any one individual is an incompetent, corrupt, bastard but very slow to accept the notion of an organized system of corruption or a cover up.

I agree with SMadsen that Americans trust their political systems; they're likely to be wary of any single individual or agency, but they believe the system as a whole is sound, in part because they believe the system is designed to limit the powers of any single corrupt entity.

[The Drunk Guy]

I think a lot of it has to do with feeling powerless to change anything, especially at the federal level. As government becomes more centralized, the average citizen is more and more removed from the decision making process. As of the 2000 census, the average size of a congressional district is 646,952 people. That number is only getting bigger. I don't know what it is other countries, but this is always something that has bothered me.

Due to the sheer size of the districts, it's not practical for an average person to have any contact with his or her representative, let alone run themselves to try to make a difference. I know gerrymandering is a big factor in 'safe seats' and the relative lack of challenge incumbents face, as Michael has pointed out in the past. However, I think the increasing size of the districts and the ensuing alienation is an increasing problem.

I don't necessarily think Americans trust government more than others. Perhaps we've been worn down enough that we just accept it as it is because the effort required to change it is so great.
But that feeling of being unable to approach their representatives is false. I read a book last fall (Naomi Wolf's Give Me Liberty (http://www.amazon.com/Give-Me-Liberty-Handbook-Revolutionaries/dp/1416590560)) and it had some interviews with Washington "insiders" who say that people just aren't trying to communicate with them. That correlates with the lack of protests if the problem is that Americans are just too self-absorbed to take government seriously.

We're too worried about our day to day lives and our American Idols and all the other bullshit that gives an excuse from taking responsibility. Anyone who speaks out against the government in more than a casual nature is labeled a "conspiracy theorist" or a "lefty nutjob" and they get ignored.

Maybe the Cold War is going to take us down, too.

[Dominick]

That said, it does seem that Americans generally disregard allegations of government/police conspiracy. They're likely to accept that any one individual is an incompetent, corrupt, bastard but very slow to accept the notion of an organized system of corruption or a cover up.
But that's the whole point, isn't it ? Even when the facts of a case are all but indisputable (how does a .38 shoot .44 bullets ? :confused:) taking the side of the victim of police brutality and worse immediately puts one in the looney tinfoil hat bin. But it doesn't require an intricate conspiracy to achieve a situation such as that of Mumia. All it takes is a recognition of the nature of people that are attracted to work as law enforcers. With that recognition it's easy to see why -without any conspiracy whatsoever- the police forces in many, I'm inclinded to say most, countries are the cause of racial tensions and the criminalization of the lowest -read : poorest- classes.

[drgoodtrips]

That's the odd thing about many in America. People say they want small government but love the military along with strong law and order. Some how they only think of government as regulation and politicians but the other part some how seems to escape from that negative view.

That's the cognitive dissonance resulting from the Reagan inspired coalition. If you listen to the right-wing bloviators "small government" is one of the sacred commandments. Nevemind the fact that just about all non-libertarian/fiscal "conservatives" actually don't want this at all.

If you want to see apoplectic responses, ask nationalist right-wingers if they can explain how the military is anything but a socialist outfit that redistributes tax payer wealth. (And then stand by for jaw dropping rationalizations)

[drgoodtrips]

Or, in other words, what those types really want isn't exactly a "small government". What they want is an efficient, authoritarian government that kicks the asses of their ideological opponents, foreign and domestic, with "red tape" such as checks and balances of power removed. They don't mind the spending, or even the high taxes, so long as the money is being filtered into some operation that allows them to enforce their whims on others, either directly or by proxy.

[drgoodtrips]

It's my impression that Americans do indeed trust their political system but only, or, at least mainly, in that it's a platform for securing individual rights. When it comes to actual 'governing', trust among the American populace is hard to spot. If it's there, they hide it well.

This is an excellent summary of my personal take, as an American, on the government in the US.

[partofme]

I think the problem regarding conspiracies is that mostly Americans don't care so much. I would say that a great number of government conspiracies are actually found out and published in The NYTimes, Washington Post, and other places but people tend to be partisan or ideological about it and in many cases don't frown on actions that those of other persuasions might. Therefor any controversial act by the government is defended by roughly half of the population or so. In general I don't think many people including me think that there are nearly that many large scale conspiracy that are really kept secret other than maybe in a few intelligence agencies since this would require a large number of people to keep quiet and for the government to be much more clever and efficient than it appears to actually be. For the most part what secrets the government is keeping people usually assume it has to do with national security and would rather not know since they feel it may even be necessary. I'm not saying this is how I feel but I do think it speaks for many.

[partofme]

That's the cognitive dissonance resulting from the Reagan inspired coalition. If you listen to the right-wing bloviators "small government" is one of the sacred commandments. Nevemind the fact that just about all non-libertarian/fiscal "conservatives" actually don't want this at all.

If you want to see apoplectic responses, ask nationalist right-wingers if they can explain how the military is anything but a socialist outfit that redistributes tax payer wealth. (And then stand by for jaw dropping rationalizations)

Well that and the fact that many of these types go on and on about small government and freedom yet want the government to dictate personal decisions regarded as immoral by them.

[Michael]

If you want to see apoplectic responses, ask nationalist right-wingers if they can explain how the military is anything but a socialist outfit that redistributes tax payer wealth. (And then stand by for jaw dropping rationalizations)
According to the Forbes 500 list of the richest people in America, "government contracting" has recently become the number one most common way for new names to join that list.

That pretty much tells the story.

[Greendruid]

But that's the whole point, isn't it ? Even when the facts of a case are all but indisputable (how does a .38 shoot .44 bullets ? :confused:) taking the side of the victim of police brutality and worse immediately puts one in the looney tinfoil hat bin. But it doesn't require an intricate conspiracy to achieve a situation such as that of Mumia. All it takes is a recognition of the nature of people that are attracted to work as law enforcers. With that recognition it's easy to see why -without any conspiracy whatsoever- the police forces in many, I'm inclinded to say most, countries are the cause of racial tensions and the criminalization of the lowest -read : poorest- classes.

I'm going to give you a quick lesson on the the nature of people that are attracted to work as law enforcers in Canada and the US - they're working class and middle class poor who have no other options. I see them everyday in our school system and these are the types of kids that end up in that role. The same goes for the military. I don't know what it's like in Europe but one of the main reasons that a volunteer military works in Canada and moreso in the US is that there are active recruiters that hound kids from the ages of 16 and up to join because they're told their education will be paid for, they'll be given the option not to deploy to Iraq/Afghanistan/(place active warzone name here) and they'll be trained in a highly valuable technology career that they can apply on the outside once they serve their time. If there is an over-riding "type" to those who are police and military, it is, unfortunately, those who are in the poorest classes to begin with. You will not find a family who has a tradition of doctors and lawyers think well of a son's or daughter's choice to become a cop in Canada or the US.

[Dominick]

I'm going to give you a quick lesson on the the nature of people that are attracted to work as law enforcers in Canada and the US - they're working class and middle class poor who have no other options. I see them everyday in our school system and these are the types of kids that end up in that role. The same goes for the military. I don't know what it's like in Europe but one of the main reasons that a volunteer military works in Canada and moreso in the US is that there are active recruiters that hound kids from the ages of 16 and up to join because they're told their education will be paid for, they'll be given the option not to deploy to Iraq/Afghanistan/(place active warzone name here) and they'll be trained in a highly valuable technology career that they can apply on the outside once they serve their time. If there is an over-riding "type" to those who are police and military, it is, unfortunately, those who are in the poorest classes to begin with. You will not find a family who has a tradition of doctors and lawyers think well of a son's or daughter's choice to become a cop in Canada or the US.
The type I was referring to had nothing to do with social background.
The type I had in mind is socially challenged and lends its entire personality solely from their uniform and position of authority, can't and doesn't function outside of it, does not partake in social activities that are unrelated to their job, has serious self-esteem issues which they overcompensate by brutality and abuse, verbally and physically, is not only undereducated and ignorant but also plain stupid, is barely capable of writing a comprehensible report, 'resolves' problems through the conflict model and never through the compromise model, is extreme right in their 'thinking', and severely prejudiced against anything and anyone that isn't part of the establishment, notably everyone that has not the mainstream skin colour, is not part of the mainstream ethnicities, is not part of mainstream religions, is not part of the mainstream political factions, has non-mainstream ideas on a variety of things, or just plainly doesn't look mainstream enough.
In short, the arch-bigot, the type that makes authoritarianism possible at all.

Come to think off it, it doesn't matter that they may originate from the very classes they now oppress. They consider the police force their class now. They need to feel themselves superior to their original class in the strictest psychological or even psychiatric meaning of the word.

It's a cliché, but nevertheless true; it's the type of people that make Konzentrationslager or Gulags functionally feasible.

[Greendruid]

I think we probably agree on the type you're talking about but I think where you react with dislike bordering on hatred, I have to look deeper to the source of the problem and suggest understanding as the beginning of the solution to this. The very root of all of the very fine points you've made that summarise many involved in both police and military is the fact that they originate from an oppressed class that has:

- no power
- no money
- no voice
- no chance at education

The attraction of police/military to this person is that it grants them all of these things in one package. And the bureaucracy of both structures is happy to have them because for the price of discipline and a little bit of these things above, both structures receive the fodder they need to run their operations. Anyone that I've met that has survived their stint in the military and actually taken advantage of receiving a proper education after the fact is entirely bitter about their role in the structure they belonged to. Some to the point of not ever wanting to talk about the experience and how stupid they were to get involved in it. If you are a member of the class that both of these structures traditionally draw upon and you are caught in the headlights of these "opportunities" without any hope of any other legitimate opportunities, there is no rational, perceived choice.

I don't want to belabour this too far off the OP because I think we're wading into different issues. Nonetheless, there is an aspect to divisions within society that fuel the issues of distrust of governments. And, I personally am thankful for the existence of a defence force that is civil or national that I don't have to participate in. I don't know what my life would have been like without the police saving my brother's life when he fell 60 ft. off a cliff or my ancestors liberating Holland or without the police tasering Polish lunatics armed with staplers to the ground. Okay, maybe that last one I could do without.

[Dominick]

I think we probably agree on the type you're talking about but I think where you react with dislike bordering on hatred, I have to look deeper to the source of the problem and suggest understanding as the beginning of the solution to this. The very root of all of the very fine points you've made that summarise many involved in both police and military is the fact that they originate from an oppressed class that has:

- no power
- no money
- no voice
- no chance at education

The attraction of police/military to this person is that it grants them all of these things in one package. And the bureaucracy of both structures is happy to have them because for the price of discipline and a little bit of these things above, both structures receive the fodder they need to run their operations. Anyone that I've met that has survived their stint in the military and actually taken advantage of receiving a proper education after the fact is entirely bitter about their role in the structure they belonged to. Some to the point of not ever wanting to talk about the experience and how stupid they were to get involved in it. If you are a member of the class that both of these structures traditionally draw upon and you are caught in the headlights of these "opportunities" without any hope of any other legitimate opportunities, there is no rational, perceived choice.

I don't want to belabour this too far off the OP because I think we're wading into different issues. Nonetheless, there is an aspect to divisions within society that fuel the issues of distrust of governments. And, I personally am thankful for the existence of a defence force that is civil or national that I don't have to participate in. I don't know what my life would have been like without the police saving my brother's life when he fell 60 ft. off a cliff or my ancestors liberating Holland or without the police tasering Polish lunatics armed with staplers to the ground. Okay, maybe that last one I could do without.
For the record, the type I described applies uniquely to the police forces. The military is more complex.
It's actually not based on dislike but entirely on experience and observation, in four countries (BE, France, UK and Germany) and different places. Recent events in Britain (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7999277.stm) just reinforce these prior observations. Personally, I don't hate them, I play them.