The Trust Paradox

Trust in all forms of government has greatly dropped in the US and nationally, but it might actually be a much-needed reflection of reality rather than a sad decline of the state of our civilization. Trust makes all actions of the one trusted possible with far less energy and resources. Garnering support becomes much easier when the state doesn’t face the scrutiny of a disgruntled public. In the example of a central bank, reducing inflation or unemployment becomes cheaper by hundreds of billions of dollars when the people believe the bank is credible over time. This is just one example of the many ways that costs increase for a government that has lost the trust of the people. Rather than justifying an increase of trust however, this phenomena means that it must be given out with great scrutiny when creating and maintaining governing bodies. Local governments founded on trust are able to thrive over time, yet the further the seat of power is from the people, the more important it is to temper that trust with healthy suspicion. Both in establishment and maintenance, a national government is aided when it is created in such a way that it can operate free from the dictates of trust. Trust has a tendency to generate poor outcomes in the federal government yet it allows more effective governance on a localized level.

The personal nature of real trust makes it far more difficult for a two-way path of trust to occur on a national level. Because it is impossible for citizens to have any idea of what is going on daily at the Federal level, they will have a distorted view of both agencies and their own representatives. Representatives are also unable to effectively assess the needs of their people and in particular, how to translate their localized preferences to decisions affecting the whole country. When the Federal government is given a higher level of trust, the incentives of government itself overpower the desire and ability to govern the people for either their own good or wants. Larger governmental bodies tend to increase in size and grow their dominion over the governed. Trust cannot be meaningfully given to structures so far away as to be unknowable. Neither can it be given to structures that have shown an almost physical tendency to step towards tyranny. However, in local government, the desire for growth and power are tempered with more directly felt consequences to their actions and a higher level of personal accountability to the people. Overreaches will still occur, but the proximity reduces the great need for scrutiny. The issues that must be addressed will present themselves more naturally rather than move in silence for decades hidden from public sight as they are at the Federal level. Trust of local government allows the community to work with officials with limited resources to great effect, yet trust in the Federal government will increase the usage of resources and size of the government itself without any associated accountability.…