A Lack of Trust

8 Jan

I am often fond of reading Doctor Bart Barrett’s blog, although I disagree with some of the points he makes. One that I agree with wholeheartedly, however, is his post ‘One Dead Child, Two Foolish Parents,’ where he recounts the death of a baby of a disease that the baby could have been – should have been – vaccinated against. (It’s successor, Autism, Measles, Vaccines and Truth. Protecting the Lives of Innocent Children, is also worth reading.) Barrett’s conclusion, in which he makes it clear that he will not see any patient who has not been vaccinated, is a model for doctors everywhere. Vaccinating children – save for those who cannot be vaccinated – will save lives.

But what got me to thinking, at the end of the second article, was this point:

What has amazed me the most in my discussions with patients (and in the responses to my blog post) is the emotion and anger associated with the anti-vaccine movement. Physicians and Public Health officials are not simply mistaken or wrong, we are often characterized as evil, deceptive, “in the pockets of Big Pharma,” or motivated by greed and avarice. The most gracious of the anti-vaccine responders express pity, displayed in condescending remarks that suggest I have been duped or am simply unaware. To imply that we physicians would either knowingly harm a child or remain wilfully ignorant of information that may benefit a child under our care is an accusation I find difficult to process.”

I find it difficult to process too, but I think I understand it all too well.

Human societies are held together by either trust or force. Force-based societies (Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, etc) act on the assumption that people just cannot be trusted under any circumstances. The rulers have no faith in the people they ruled – and, unsurprisingly, the ruled tend to show the same lack of trust in their rulers. When the edifice collapses, as it always does, it leaves behind traumatized people who have no conception of the value of trust. And why should they? If you grow up in a society where the only way to get ahead is to lie, cheat and exploit those under you, you’re going to consider a trusting individual a sucker.

Trust-based societies work on the assumption that everyone is trustworthy until proven otherwise.

Societies like Britain and America rose to assume global predominance, at least in part, because they had evolved legal systems that supported trust. Breaking a contract in Britain or America reflected badly on the breaker – and the courts punished them. There were strong reasons to keep faith at all levels of society. The police, for example, were trustworthy because corrupt officers were rarely allowed to flourish. Government ministers and civil servants were regarded as fair-minded men who put the interests of their country first.

I’m not saying that everyone was perfect, or that there weren’t winners and losers. I’m saying that people were expected to act, at least in public, to a high standard; ‘gentleman’ wasn’t a rank, but a social status most men aspired to hold. The word of a gentleman was always regarded as good.

The problem facing us now is that social trust is falling apart.

Take, for example, the Catholic Church. Hit by a series of sex scandals, the Church’s first (and last) inclination was to circle the wagons, rather than rooting out the guilty and exterminating them. It lost a great deal of trust when it proved itself untrustworthy. Then there are politicians; Nixon uses the power of the Oval Office to commit crimes, Clinton lies under oath, Obama lies knowing full well that millions of Americans will lose their health plans, Hilary keeps going despite a string of criminal acts and lies that would bring anyone else down, UK MPs steal expenses, the EU allows Greece and a handful of other countries to join despite knowing that the Greeks cooked the books (accounting for the financial crisis) …

Should I go on? There are question marks raised over doctors who misdiagnose female patients. Policemen in America are either racists who gun down innocent black children for fun or unfairly hounded when they take thugs and criminals off the streets, their lives destroyed as they are chased through the courts. Politicians in Germany, Norway and Sweden seem determined to keep inviting economic migrants into the country despite the soaring crime rate and social disintegration they bring in their wake. The media fawns on its favoured candidates and attacks those it dislikes for the merest of missteps. Decent teachers are unable to keep order in the classrooms – and criminal teachers are taking sexual advantage of their charges. The bankers live large while ordinary savers lose their cash. And so on … and so on.

You can’t trust anyone these days.


Throughout the West, ordinary people are becoming increasingly convinced that society is breaking down because, at base, they no longer trust. The societies that birthed them, the governments they vote for and fund with their taxes, are no longer on their side. And why should they feel otherwise when their concerns are not just dismissed, but they are personally attacked for daring to open their mouths?

This may not be objectively true. But people are believing it in increasingly large numbers.

The point is not that there are bad apples. There are bad apples everywhere. The point is that we are no longer rooting them out. There are fewer ways to lose – and lose big – by breaking trust.

And so our society is starting to crumble. People voting for Trump or Sanders are doing it because they feel disempowered, because they feel that traditional politicians are no longer remotely trustworthy. And if we don’t clean up this mess, our society will collapse into anarchy …

I wish I felt more optimistic in this, the first month of 2016. But I don’t.


72 Responses to “A Lack of Trust”

  1. Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard January 8, 2016 at 4:30 pm #

    Good News And Bad News.

    The Good News is that Anarchy can’t last.

    The Bad News is that what ends the Anarchy may not be something we’ll like. [Frown]

  2. The Rhino January 8, 2016 at 5:06 pm #

    One can see objective evidence of this erosion of trust – every time POTUS appears on TV gun sales spike.

    • Gigawatt January 12, 2016 at 7:59 am #

      What does one have to do with the other?

      • Jacqueline Harris January 17, 2016 at 9:30 am #

        So people don’t trust the motives for banning guns. Guns are empowering for the citizens. In the declaration of Independence its states an obligation to oppose a corrupt government by force if necessary. When the British tried to halt rebellion they tried to take the guns. Modern communist and dictatorships like china don’t let private citizens own guns.
        A sign of a government becoming corrupt is the taking of civil liberties. Obama keeps talking about the kids we are saving by gun control and he is circumventing congress to pass legislation to increase control but despite mentioning all the recent attacks none of his methods would have actually stopped any of it. It’s just making it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns to defend themselves against attackers and their own government. We think are government can’t go bad but honestly the US isn’t that old and a lot of countries have lost freedoms in the blink of an eye. Look at Germany and Italy, Russia, North Korea the Middle East, China. We could easily go that route. but we want to say it could never happen here. In California anew law has passed were a neibor of family member can accuse you and a judge can just come and take your gun away. sigh

  3. David January 8, 2016 at 5:10 pm #

    Good post Chris.. here in the UK we have the main opposition party in Parliament seriously proposing ‘women only’ railway carriages, so ‘women’ can travel and feel ‘safe’.

    That makes me so sad…

    In a civilised – and therefore be definition, tolerant, society, I, as a citizen, should be able to travel anywhere regardless of my sex, religion, colour, hairstyle, dress style etc.

    Once we start engaging in apartheid, based on sex, colour, creed and so on, we end up with one of your ‘Force Based Societies’.. not somewhere I want to live in nor bring my children up in.

  4. Aileen January 8, 2016 at 5:39 pm #

    I raised two children where I did my research on the vaccinations before I allowed my children to have them. At the time one vaccination stood out as one child out of 3000 would have a side effect strong enough to give them brain damage. For me that was enough to not allow the vaccination. That and how young they were in getting the first shots. Once they were older I had no problem with the shots because I knew their bodies could handle it. What I couldn’t handle was the anger and condemnation from the MEDICAL community in my decisions. I didn’t make the choice lightly – I researched the whole thing thoroughly. And you know what? They made changes in the years after – decreasing the chance of injury or death for this particular vaccination. Am I to blame because I did my research? As far as I was concerned the odds of something happening to my child was high enough to make me hesitate and I don’t regret my decision. You have said this before – both sides need to be heard. I don’t judge the medical profession for their views – I work in a hospital environment and see all of what they do to help and heal people. I just refuse to follow blindly ANYONE’s recommendation without checking it out first.

    I like reading your blog, even when I don’t agree with you (sound familiar?) but I had to respond to this one point.

    Keep writing – love your books!


    • Gigawatt January 12, 2016 at 9:07 am #

      It’s always strange to see someone claim that a couple of minutes with Google makes them better informed than a Dr with a decades of higher learning involving the refined medical knowledge of the last two centuries.

      • scottrmeyer January 13, 2016 at 9:00 am #

        I can see where you are coming from, but if you look into how most doctors are taught then you may realize it is possible to know more about a specific subject than a doctor after googling it for 1-2hrs (and it sounds like she did more).

        Most doctors are simply people who memorized book after book word for word. They aren’t taught to think critically or to use computers and information to come to conclusions. They simply memorize a ton of facts (at the time) and can use them later.

        This type of teaching tends not to lead to people who have the most up to date information. It also tends to produce people with a lot of specific little tidbits of knowledge about a super broad subject.

        If you take your time and researching one little specific thing in the medical world, and you do it for 5+hrs, you have spent way more time learning about that than almost any doctor you meet, and your info is probably more up to date.

      • Gigawatt January 20, 2016 at 8:32 am #

        Thankyou scottrmeyer, I just laughed myself out of my chair!

        When you said, “Doctors were just people who memorized stuff out of a book” thereby tossing 90% of professional fields under the bus of your ignorant contempt, and, “They aren’t taught to think critically…” highlighting your own lack of thinking critical or otherwise.

        I really really hope you’re a poe and said that for comedic effect.

  5. gregory January 8, 2016 at 5:47 pm #

    I don’t think doctors remain wilfully ignorant but doctors do not trust patients and visa versa. I personally know of numerous examples of where doctors have blamed patients deaths on being Jehovah’s witnesses to cover up their own negligence. A woman dies from blood loss it’s ‘leaked’ to the press its because she refused blood and not the hospitals fault for leaving her to bleed to death for hours. Stafford hospital has shown how ‘institutional’ incompetence can exist. It’s nothing personal by anybody but the natural result of having large institutions where the left hand doesn’t know about the right because they are afraid to talk.

    I do agree that the world is experiencing ‘bad faith’ but would point out that there is a corresponding rise in selfishness. Cover your backside has become very important.

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 6:02 pm #

      Can you provide examples? Because refusing blood and dying from it are if not common certainly not unusual.

      • gregory January 8, 2016 at 10:00 pm #

        I won’t provide specific examples as its not my place to drag the families back into it and some was told to me in confidence. While refusing blood and dying can be the cause of death it has been used as an excuse. If somebody refused penicillin but wanted another antibiotic then people would ask more questions about that death.

      • Gigawatt January 12, 2016 at 9:13 am #

        Gregory is just plain lying. He’s obviously a member of the twisted cult. Every death in a hospital goes before a review board, doubly so when someone dies in surgery. When a patient foolishly refuses medical treatment they are the only ones to blame for their deaths.

      • gregory January 12, 2016 at 10:44 am #

        Cleary Gigawatt you know nothing of Stafford Hospital.

      • Gigawatt January 12, 2016 at 8:51 pm #

        Clearly gregory thinks everyone is engaged in a massive conspiracy against JW’s.

        The doctors, hamstrung by the wackaloon regligious beliefs of their patients, the nurses, the assistants and caregivers, the documentation, the administrators, the review board, the second review board, the insurance companies, the ethics committee, and even the ambulance chasing lawyers who would love to get a piece of a malpractice suit are ALL engaged in a massive conspiracy to cover up the actions of a doctor who “accidentally” let a patient, who specifically demanded substandard medical care, bleed out.

        This has all happened once but multiple times.

        regory definitely knows what he’s talking about and is completely trustworthy.

    • chrishanger January 8, 2016 at 8:52 pm #

      The world has become a great deal less tolerant of innocent mistakes.


      • gregory January 8, 2016 at 10:02 pm #

        People also seem less willing to apologise for mistakes, perhaps because of the increased consequences of doing so.

  6. Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 5:56 pm #

    no mention of modern right wing lies? Come on, you HAVE to look at the smoking gun of the lies that lead to the Iraq War, that pointless bloody mess with no victory.

  7. Don Miller January 8, 2016 at 6:03 pm #

    I think your comments about American cops enjoying gunning down black children are misplaced.

    I think that there is a deeper problem with how US Cops are trained. To try and make US Police Officers safer, They are trained that every interaction with the public is potentially fatal to themselves. They are supposed to be suspicious and think that anyone can turn on them at any second and kill them.

    Reality is, police officer deaths in the line of duty, are very rare in the US. Only about 100 per year. Over half of those are due to traffic accidents. So figure 50 fatal incidents involving police officers and the general public, where are police officer comes out on the losing end.

    Every police officer death is tragic. As is every civilian death. Instead of looking at how the police could have calmed down those situations, maybe making some of them less than fatal, we train our police officers to be paranoid and treat everyone as a threat.

    This makes every interaction with police less enjoyable, because you can sense the officer is on edge about something, but also more dangerous, because the officer might overreact to something.

    In other words, I believe the US has a training problem with their police that results in more civilian deaths, but I don’t know how to fix it.

    • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard January 8, 2016 at 6:09 pm #

      Well Don, most (if not all) of the unwarranted police shootings happen in high crime areas.

      IE Areas where police being killed by criminals is more likely to happen.

      Of course, there are the cases where some idiot is playing with a “toy” gun in such a manner that civilians are worried so we get “child killed by the police” stories. [Frown]

      • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 6:18 pm #

        yes, a 12 year old CHILD, who being a CHILD cannot be expected to be fully responsible, was gunned down in 2 seconds by a police officer who, in an open carry state, made no attempt to speak to him, or indeed fully assess the situation, or we had a man, gunned down in wallmart for carrying a toy gun sold in that wall mart. In neither case where the trigger happy psychopaths prosecuted, sending a clear message: if you want to murder black people, become a cop and kill as many as you like, no one goes to jail for it, killing blacks and latinos is a perk of the job. Or indeed our very own Police Force who despite 1538 deaths in custody since 1990 have had 0 successful prosecutions, not a single one. One could almost believe the prosecution was deliberately making such a bad job of it that it failed.

      • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard January 8, 2016 at 7:18 pm #

        Then there’s the lack of trust of people who have “made up their minds and can’t be convinced of anything that conflicts with their narrative”.

    • chrishanger January 8, 2016 at 8:53 pm #

      It’s not that I think they do, it’s that there is a perception that cops kill for fun OR that cops are unfairly persecuted for doing their jobs. Either way, trust dies.


  8. Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 6:05 pm #

    Also please list Hilary Clintons criminal acts, with sources other than far right propaganda mouth pieces like Fox or Breitbart.

    • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard January 8, 2016 at 6:12 pm #

      Another case of “Lack Of Trust”.

      Liberals don’t trust information from “Right-Wingers” and Conservatives don’t trust information from “Left-Wingers”.

      Tribal Thinking. [Frown]

      • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 6:19 pm #

        That and politfact finding that both those sources lie thru their teeth,

      • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard January 8, 2016 at 7:19 pm #

        And of course, your side never lies. [Frown]

    • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 7:33 pm #

      What is on the emails recovered so far prove she’s committed various crimes already. For example, she outed a CIA operative’s cover in one of them. Remember how Scotter Libby was thrown to the wolves for supposedly doing the same to Valery Plame? Shrillary did the same thing to another, yet not a peep from you or the libtard press you soak up w/o nary a critical thought. Instead, you bash Breitbart and Fox which I seriously doubt you even watch/read.

      • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:04 pm #

        Source? I am seriously interested, last I had heard she had sent some things that became classified later, which since they where not at the time she sent them was not illegal.

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:25 pm #

        ” last I had heard she had sent some things that became classified later, which since they where not at the time she sent them was not illegal.”

        Yes, ALL of the Libtârd rags pushed that garbage.

        Documents that meet a certain criteria are considered classified material because of their content even when not expressly designated as such, for one thing. This is true whether the person handling them is aware of that fact or not. She exposed many of those. The count so far is over 400 of such documents.

        As to her outing the identity of a CIA operative, this was widely reported. The fact that you are unaware of this speaks volumes about where you get your ‘news’ from.

        Or rather, where you get your propaganda conditioning from, I mean.

        So here it is mentioned in two sources I easily found just by googling — which you apparently can’t do for some reason by yourself because Chris Matthews or Paul Krugman didn’t tell you to, I guess.

        One is DailyKos. The other is the Politico. Neither is hardly a bastion of ‘right wing propaganda’ — a term which you more or less have proven to really mean “Any sources that expose altering views that Rob Godfrey can’t handle”, apparently.



        Don’t bother responding with excuses, BS posted by Clinton cronies, or just outright fantasies fueled by your denialism, either. Yes, I know your type.

      • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:06 pm #

        About laws not applying: like the right then, who cry about gun controls then applaud black kids getting murdered? Or scream about OWS then applaud militias taking federal land at gun point?

    • chrishanger January 8, 2016 at 8:54 pm #

      Keeping an illegal server (which she would have known was a criminal act), using it to store/send classified info and (now) removing classification markings from documents. Anyone else would be in jail by now.


      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 9:51 pm #

        THAT too. But the Left has developed this ‘philosophy’ that laws and even the Constitution somehow magically don’t apply to them and their own.

        This is a common step towards a left-wing dictatorship, like seen in Venezuela and Argentina.

    • Jim January 11, 2016 at 4:17 am #

      How about her own words ” I have snapchat now nobody can know what I am saying”

      or her crack about using a rag to wipe her server.

      These type of “cute ” comments are the hallmark of a nine year old not a prospective President.

  9. Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 7:03 pm #

    “Politicians in Germany, Norway and Sweden seem determined to keep inviting economic migrants into the country despite the soaring crime rate and social disintegration they bring in their wake.”

    Well, PC is just an enabler for the real reason they want them in: To shore up the demographically dead funding sources for their Welfare States (although Norway doesn’t need that, I believe). BUT, that assumes the Muslims they let in work their butts off and pay the outrageously high payroll taxes.

    And that really isn’t turning out to be the case at all, as Dan Greenfield so eloquently puts it:

    “Mohammed is Fritz’s retirement plan. But Mohammed has a very different type of plan. Fritz is counting on Mohammed to work while he relaxes. Mohammed relaxes and expects Fritz to work. Fritz is not related to him and therefore Mohammed sees no reason why he should work to support him.

    Why should 23-year-old Mohammed work for four decades so that Hans or Fritz across the way can retire at 61 and lie on a beach in Mallorca?

    Europe expects the Muslim world to bail out its shrinking birth rate by working and paying into the system so that its aging population can retire. The Muslim migrants however expect Europe to subsidize their large families with its welfare state while they deal some drugs and chop off some heads on the side.

    Mohammed isn’t staking his future on the shaky pensions of European socialism. He invests in what social scientists call social capital. He plans his retirement by having a dozen kids. If this lifestyle is subsidized by infidel social services, so much the better. And when social services collapse, those of his kids who aren’t in prison or in ISIS will be there to look after him in his golden years.

    As retirement plans go, it’s older and better than the European model.

    Europe is drinking rat poison to cure a cold. Instead of changing its values, it’s trying to maintain them by killing itself. The Mohammed retirement plan won’t save European Socialism. It will bury it.”

    Full: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260511/death-europe-daniel-greenfield

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 10:59 pm #

      I repeat my request for sources that aren’t far right propaganda and hate rags. I.E don’t buy into the delusional Eurabia fantasy, don’t want to execute muslims en mass etc etc.

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:03 pm #

        Keep repeating your Denialist wish fulfillment issues all you like. Just don’t expect to be treated seriously as a result.

      • Master Yoda January 9, 2016 at 4:21 am #

        Man I love Chris’ books but I stand strongly with you in argument against his political views

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:09 pm #

      it’s not, it is a serious request, you want to actually debate link an unbiased source, I will attempt to do the same for counter arguments.

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:23 pm #

        A request that is essentially like asking someone to prove to a blind man that he sky is blue is not a serious request.

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:10 pm #

      any source that compares the refugee crises to the goddam holocaust is biased. Seriously, people fleeing wars we started is the same as the deliberate murder of around 11 million people?

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:26 pm #

        So you are a holocaust denier too? Not surprising.

        Just HOW MUCH do you hate Jews, Rob? Do tell us!

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:25 pm #

      how is ‘do not link a source that slanders refugees, buys into the eurabia bs myth that has been proven false and compares immigration to the Holocaust’ blind?

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:32 pm #

        1) Like a lot of things you don’t know, Slander is what is falsely said not written. That is libel.
        2) They didn’t libel anyone. For that they have to state absolute falsehoods. They did not.
        3) The Eurabian Union thing isn’t a BS myth. Just ask the poor German gals who got raped in Cologne about it.

        By 2050, there will be a majority of non-German muslims in Germany…enough to take over the government at all levels and change the bundesland and federal constitutions. This is a democraphic FACT. The Germans are not producing enough babies and the Muslims are.

        Stop your trolling. That is what you are only doing now. It’s quite obvious.

      • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:38 pm #

        Source for the population growth you claim, source that every one born to muslim parents stays muslim, source, source source!

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:40 pm #

        Google it yourself. I’m not falling for your trolling tactic of wasting my time doing it for you.

        “Prove to me the sky is blue! Prove to me the sky is blue! Never mind that I don’t know what ‘blue’ is or even what ‘color’ is” — blind man messing with everyone else’s head

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:28 pm #

      I am not a holocaust denier, I know it happened, it was murder on an unprecedented scale, which is why comparing the refugee crisis to it is so insane

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:29 pm #

      millions of Jews, homosexuals, Jehovah witnesses, communists, social democrats, gypsies and the disabled where slaughtered, and somehow that compares to people fleeing war to survive?

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:33 pm #

        Nope, it doesn’t compare. Because that is a comparison you just made up, not one they made.

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:35 pm #

      to quote the source you linked ‘they’re more like a final solution.’ So yes, the comparison has been made.

      • Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:38 pm #

        Which is an appropriate quote. It means they will do to European culture what was done to the jews in the Holocaust: wipe them out of Europe as completely as possible.

        Which is true.

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:53 pm #

      here a neutral and impartial source for you http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/

  10. Dennis the Menace January 8, 2016 at 11:41 pm #

    Chris —

    This Rob Godfrey guy is obviously a troll. There is enough on this thread to prove that w/o a doubt. Will you ban him?

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:42 pm #

      wait I am a troll for asking for sources?!

      • Dennis the Menace January 9, 2016 at 12:27 am #

        For erroneous sources just to get people to waste time on something you won’t claim to accept anyway, yes.

        Classic sign of Internet Trollism.

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:43 pm #

      I am not falling for your big lie propaganda tactic, the standard of the authoritarians through out history, you are making extreme and extraordinary claims: Source them

    • Rob Godfrey January 8, 2016 at 11:47 pm #

      on your claims about population growth and retention in the faith (which you need for this to work) I did google it, pew finds it to be untrue, and they are the closest to neutral that I know of.

      • Dennis the Menace January 9, 2016 at 12:26 am #

        Neutrality does not determine truth. What is true does.

    • Rob Godfrey January 9, 2016 at 12:27 am #

      you need evidence to determine truth, not opinion. So provide evidence to support your claims, not opinion pieces.

      • Dennis the Menace January 11, 2016 at 7:24 pm #

        Having to provide evidence to a blind man that the sky is colored blue is just submitting to Trollish tyranny.

    • Rob Godfrey January 9, 2016 at 12:31 am #

      hang on, you make the claim, based on an article by a ‘think tank’ on at least the far right with no supporting evidence or citations, and when confronted start claiming that the one who challenged you is a troll? What, exactly, is the article we are having this debate under about again? Claiming something is true doesn’t make it so, evidence makes something true or false, I would no more believe the communist party GB than I believe the article you quoted, both would be hyperbole, neither would provide evidence.

  11. PhilippeO January 9, 2016 at 4:18 am #

    agree with this.

    and thats why i supported the Left. People want to be treated fairly, and Trust have to be earned. You can only give Trust, if you perceive that government/business/etc treat you the same way they treat other citizens. ‘equality before the law’ is important concept in modern democracy, and without it Trust could not be generated.

    I see the Right as helped enforcing tribalism, culture they support is once ‘national culture’, but in current condition its cater only to member of specific tribe. tribalism by its very nature reduce ‘national Trust’.

    PC for all its drawback helped maintain ‘mainstream culture’. a show that appeal only to men but not women, white but not black is automatically ‘tribal’ and reduce influence of ‘mainstream culture’ to maintain Trust.

    the Left economic policy also generated Trust. allowing the Rich to maintain their own wealth generate distinct culture from the poor and reduce Trust. while fairer wealth distribution reduce difference between rich-poor and thus generate more Trust. people would be more trusting of the system if they see that they personally benefit from it.

    one left policy that i disagree is maintaining ‘minority culture’ and allowing multiculturalism to develop. It has proven failure in Europe, Assimilation/Melting Pot policy should be encouraged. and assimilation/Melting pot means new culture must be born from it, the Right insistence on retaining original culture is detrimental.

    ideally, i supported three more policy to encourage ‘national culture’ and helped develop ‘national Trust.
    – government full support for ‘mainstream culture’ dominance in entertainment/communication. (both FOX news and spanish language TV is detrimental to national culture. ideally all news/entertainment/mass communication must cater to all citizens, whether they male/female white/black metropolitan/rural. PC must be enforced more vigorously. )
    – government enforcement of consanguinity law. (allowing immigrant/religious minority/the rich/profession to create endogamous minority culture is detrimental. enforcement of consanguinity would reduce ability to such group to sustain themselves. i think consanguinity law is primary cause why Industrial Revolution happen in Europe not in China/India/Mesopotamia )
    – more affirmative action / prevention of legacy admission. (Ivy leagues sent their children to same alumny, police children join police force, son of university professor also become professor, military brat joining military when adult, all this is disastrous to ‘national culture’. it cause circling the wagon effect when one of bad apple is prosecuted and allow esprit de corps to become ideology that see ‘outsider’ as inferior. )

    In America i think three generation without massive wars (since Korea), allow police, the rich, politician to marry each other, have their children join profession, thus creating atmosphere of distrust because ordinary people correctly see them as care more about their own caste/subculture rather than about other Americans.

    • Mace Windu January 9, 2016 at 4:25 am #

      Thank you for bringing logic and fact to this orgy of blind claims and unfounded racism.

  12. Obi Wan Kenobi January 9, 2016 at 4:32 am #

    The Hillary thing was a mountain made out of a molehill by the republican party in an effort to slur her reputation. The fact that she had an email was stupid… Probably bad judgment, but certainly not criminal. I believe that the police force is distrusted because of a few trigger happy officers. The right to have firearms is not a god given right and certainly not a right garunteed in the constitution.

    The way you have written this piece implys that the republican candidates are gilded in gold, the truth however is that their interests rest with the few very rich at the top. They use lies and racism to spurn hatred and fear… Playing right into the hands of the terrorists they hate so much

    • Dennis the Menace January 19, 2016 at 7:16 pm #

      “The Hillary thing was a mountain made out of a molehill by the republican party in an effort to slur her reputation.”

      At latest count, 1,300 classified emails were stored on her server. On its face, retaining classified materials in such vulnerable settings is a criminal violation. Senior intelligence officials have been charged for less – far less.

      AND one reveals the secretary of state telling a senior department official, Jake Sullivan, to strip all the security markings off one document and send it to her on an insecure connection. That proves purposeful intent on her part to DISTRIBUTE classified material via unsecure means.

      ANOTHER one between her and her crony, Sidney Blumenthal OUTS the identity of a CIA intelligence agent. Isn’t that what Libby Scooter got busted for doing with Valerie Plame? And didn’t you Dems demand and got his hide for it?

      AND now the FBI has been finding emails that prove for a fact that the allegations that she basically took bribes for donations to the Clinton Foundation are indeed true.

      But hey, that’s just the Republicans ‘making a mountain out of a molehill’, right? They infiltrated the FBI…some 150 agents working on this so far…and PLANTED all that, right? Oh, and I just *love* you how — like the Clintons themselves — somehow believe that the law that got Scooter Libby into trouble and General Patreaus magically doesn’t apply to them.

      Oh, and last: The Constitution DOES guaranteed the right to have firearms. It plainly says so in the the text and the Supreme Court has backed it up plainly and consistently, especially in the last decade.

      District of Columbia v. Heller “It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

      ET AL. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

      These and cases like these are laying down the case law framework that will soon strike down laws against Open Carry, too. One can not claim that they don’t violate a person’s right to bear arms when they clearly do.

      Try learning about reality instead of getting your civics lessons and current events news out of a Cracker Jack Box. You’ll look less foolish when you post stuff like you just did.

      • robert godfrey May 8, 2016 at 5:04 pm #

        So when do you start work at the death camp? I mean you are a conservative, of the Trump school, so you want to murder everyone who dissents. Like his call for the carpet bombing of the middle east, calling for tens of millions of murders and met with ecstatic applause

      • shrekgrinch May 8, 2016 at 11:05 pm #

        Who said I support Trump? Only that little voice in your mind along with all the other crap you dreamed up.

        Chris, can we ban this Troll?

  13. Anarchymedes January 9, 2016 at 10:00 am #

    This society won’t collapse into anarchy: it will either become a dictatorship or oligarchy itself (if Trump and Co win), or be conquered by Putin and Co (if they lose). I’d say it’s all deeper than merely trust: it’s the lack of faith. And I don’t mean the religious faith: to be honest, I myself can’t take any religion seriously and at the face value. I mean the faith in those ideals that are supposed to be the inspiration behind our society, the truth of our laws, the motivation for our soldiers, and so on. Please, please convince me that it’s anyhting other than money and status – or ‘success’ as the pop-psychology mumbo-jumbo refers to it. And this, unfortunately, is the advantage of both the totalitarian regimes and the theocracies: whatever else may be said of them, they do give every one of their members a sense of purpose higher than merely survival and procreation (or catching up with Johnses). ‘He who has a Why? in life can tolerate almost any How?’ Friedrich Nietzsche once said.

  14. Djheger January 10, 2016 at 8:53 am #

    Even the reader comments prove you right.

  15. scottrmeyer January 13, 2016 at 9:07 am #

    Some countries with public health care are instituting a new policy where your healthcare is not covered if you are not vaccinated.

    This seems like a great compromise to me. If for some reason you don’t want a vaccination then you can choose not to get it and also chose the consequences that follow.
    This brings me to my main problem with current politics. People are both unwilling to compromise, and unwilling to accept the real world. For example, in america there are two stances on gun law, right wing want none and left wing want all. Anyone who does any research can come to the conclusion that complete gun control is better, also a little bit of research will show you that spotty gun control is worse than none. Lets be real, until you can pass more complete gun control laws, don’t pass any. I can want gun control and look at the political situation in my state and vote against it.

    • scottrmeyer January 13, 2016 at 9:14 am #

      (side note, gun control was just the first example I came up with. I always vote for it and the laws are great in my state (comparatively))

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: