Trust - best built on solid ground

TL;DR: J.D. Vance recently observed that many in the Democratic Party are attempting to manufacture trust from the top down, neglecting the fact that genuine trust is often born from grassroots connections. There’s indeed a stark contrast between trust that’s artificially constructed through manipulation and censorship, and trust that’s organically cultivated from the ground up.

Trump’s vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance appeared on podcast host Joe Rogan’s show earlier in November . According to Vance, large parts of the Democratic Party are trying to create higher trust from above, without understanding that the previously high trust once arose organically: “I think that a lot of them are trying to reimpose that social trust from the top.”

Most people understand the importance of high trust. Political scientist Robert D. Putnam, for example, has shown that large social capital, in the form of trust and networks, is a key factor for economic growth, cooperation, and problem-solving. See e.g. his book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2000).

The low trust today is widespread. Trust in the American federal government is at historically low levels . Trust in the media is at rock-bottom levels . Even trust in doctors and hospitals has plummeted : at the beginning of 2024, the proportion of people who reported “a great deal of trust” had dropped to 40%, from 72% in April 2020. This can be concerning, as individuals with low trust in doctors and hospitals will be less likely to follow their advice and recommendations. It’s therefore not surprising that many want to “rebuild trust” (this was the theme of the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting this year ).

How much trust is actually reasonable?

But how much trust is actually reasonable? To determine this, one can ask whether an institution has acted reliably in the past, whether it possesses the knowledge and ability required to deliver what is promised, and whether its interests are in line with our own.

The low trust figures among Americans are likely a reflection of the fact that many of them today question the extent to which the answers to these questions are actually affirmative. During the pandemic, medical experts in the UK incorrectly predicted that hundreds of thousands of people would die. In the US, the leading infectious disease expert misled the public about, among other things, face masks, the sitting president lied about both the effectiveness and safety of vaccines , a British health minister wanted to “scare the pants off people ,” and virus experts even conspired to mislead about the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus . All while social media companies, under pressure from governments, were forced to censor information that was actually correct .

Trust - built on sand or on solid ground?

It’s possible to continue on the current path and try to improve trust figures by limiting access to information. For instance, if the public doesn’t get access to negative information about authorities or experts, the measured trust can increase. But in that case, trust is merely built on sand, waiting to be undermined by the inexorable forces of truth.

But there’s another possibility. Building relationships that are genuine and honest, listening to each other without judgment, and communicating without misleading. Doing things that really matter, and doing them well, showing competence and reliability through actions. In this way, trust can grow naturally and organically. A trust built on solid ground, not on sand. A delicate task. But presidential election or not, isn’t it time for us to start building a future where this form of trust is the obvious foundation?

Cover image created with AI