
Americans' Confidence in Institutions Stays Low - randomname2
http://www.gallup.com/poll/192581/americans-confidence-institutions-stays-low.aspx
======
hackuser
Speaking generally, people seem to have unrealistic expectations about human
institutions. Name a large one that isn't bureaucratic, that doesn't have
inefficiencies of large organizations, and where its priority isn't loyalty to
the institution itself (though Congress, consisting of elected people
nationwide, might be an exception to that).

Not all institutions are the same; some are better than others and we
shouldn't just accept problems and corruption. But why do people keep
believing big talkers who say they're going to magically eliminate all those
things and make it run like a hyper-efficient 5-person business?

IMHO, much of it is people looking to get elected by looking for problems and
things to complain about, rather than looking how to get things done.

Without time to examine it in detail (I've got to run), I'd hypothesize that
most of what's important in the world is accomplished and has been
accomplished by large institutions.

~~~
clumsysmurf
In "American Amnesia" (1) Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson argue that post
WWII, the mixed economy of private business / free markets doing what it does
best, in conjunction with the government investing in education, science,
technology, and infrastructure (which all benefit private sector), while
providing a safety net, resulted in prosperity.

The trend since Reagan / Thatcher years (neoliberalism) and anti-government
free market fundamentalism threatens this constructive partnership where
private sector and government were both rivals and partners.

On the one side you have "starving the beast" (think Grover Norquist, Tax
Pledge), defunding critical programs to the point of dysfunction. Does it
surprise anyone that the IRS is underfunded by Congress to pursue tax evaders,
as Congressman are lobbied to keep loopholes open?

Another calamity is NASA's Earth Sciences, the part that studies Earth itself
(climate change, etc).

On the other side of the isle, the dems have failed to make government
/efficient/ and a visible positive force in the daily lives of average people.

(1) [https://www.amazon.com/American-Amnesia-Government-
America-P...](https://www.amazon.com/American-Amnesia-Government-America-
Prosper-ebook/dp/B010MHAITI)

~~~
dv_dt
The Dems have failed because they've largely signed onto the 'neoliberalism'
philosophy too.

~~~
hackuser
Norquist and the current GOP aren't neo-liberal; they take it much further.

The Dems fail to provide an alternative narrative; they let the GOP frame
every issue and the debates are over before they begin.

------
vaadu
The problem is multilayered:

\- Corruption. money gets access

\- Elected government folks over promise and under deliver.

\- Elected government folks' priority is getting reelected.

\- Unelected government folks have far too much power

\- Lack of accountability for wrongdoing and incompetence

\- Waste of taxpayer money

\- Good people don't want to run for office because the scrutiny is too high

~~~
AnimalMuppet
In other words, Americans are correctly assessing their institutions, which is
why confidence in them is low...

~~~
theseatoms
Exactly. I don't see why this is a "problem."

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Well, it's not a problem that the American people are too cynical. But it _is_
a problem that our institutions are turning into trash.

~~~
krapp
It is a problem that the American people are too cynical. Cynicism is the
reason negative campaign ads are so effective - no one _trusts_ political ads
unless they're negative - and the more negative they are, the more people
believe them. Cynics don't bother actually studying the positions of a
candidate - because they know all candidates are corrupt anyway, and all
parties are the same - but of course they'll vote for anyone who's politically
incorrect and promises to "throw the bastards out," because the only
politician anyone trusts is a politician who pretends they're not running for
office. Cynicism has made the concept of being engaged with the political
process a joke to anyone who doesn't want to destroy that process.

I mean, the cynics are correct, but they're also more than a little
responsible for perpetuating that system by setting the bar so low.

~~~
MawNicker
I think a big part of the problem is that we have a concept of cynicism at
all. It's very similar to the conspiracy theorist label. There are known
conspiracies. Big ones. It's not that crazy to be a conspiracy theorist. It
_is_ crazy to think that we've been visited by aliens or that the elite are
reptiles. Thinking those things _does_ make a person a conspiracy theorist.
That _doesn 't_ mean that all conspiracy theories are crazy. In the same way,
not all cynicism is petulant and hopeless. But when a population is trained to
recognize and dismiss cynics that is frequently what they become.

~~~
krapp
>In the same way, not all cynicism is petulant and whiny.

That's true, but most of it is, and I don't think that's entirely accidental.
Many cynics are cynics because society expects them to be. People mistrust the
government before they really even understand what it is.

>It's just that when a population is trained to recognize and dismiss cynics
that is frequently what they become.

I would argue the population has been trained to be cynical in order to
disengage them from politics, lead them to expect nothing from the system, and
make them more easily manipulated. It does seem evident that there is a
feedback loop between the cynicism of voters and politics.

~~~
MawNicker
> I would argue the population has been trained to be cynical in order to
> disengage them from politics

I actually agree. However, I think the discussions we need to be having are
ultimately cynical. We need to be able to tolerate it. The opinion you've just
expressed is terribly cynical and that doesn't undermine it's legitimacy.

------
pasbesoin
You have to enable people to do the right thing. Sufficient stability and
resources, combined with active and effective accountability.

No project, much less institution, is "set and forget". Nor can any individual
continually nor consistently "do the right thing" in the face of ongoing
personal threat and insecurity.

Not every aspect of life benefits from loose, disposable relationships.

Professional, nor personal.

------
vermontdevil
Most Americans' common encounter with the "institutions" would be the
following:

DMV (motor vehicle bureau/department) Post Office Police/Courts Local schools
Social Security

Our government is not monolithic. It's vast (ranging from SS, military, FAA,
FDA, NASA, etc etc) and on the state level as well.

But seems many Americans' experience are mostly with these front line
departments and quite often it is not quite positive.

But many of us do not see beyond this and want to tear down everything
regardless of how essential many of these agencies/services are.

~~~
CaptSpify
You don't notice when things go well. If you have a good experience with the
Fire Department, you aren't going to say "wow, I wish we could take down that
institution". It just disappears from your mind.

I'm sure there's a term for this, but I don't know what it is.

------
virmundi
I wonder if the reason we distrust our institutions is because we almost
worship them. As I've watched the society become more atheistic, I've watched
it look more and more to the human institutions to replace what it lost. All
the grandeur and power we expected of a god is missing. Instead we see corrupt
humans just like us doing corrupt things. Every time something bad happens, we
scream for the government to do something. We don't hold the person
accountable; we hold the tool. When the government does something and it has
unintended consequences, we get mad that they didn't forsee it coming or we
get mad that they knew what would happen and just wanted steal even more
power. The same is true for financial institutions. We expect them to
magically make money and prosperity for our stocks. We give them grand titles
and powers. Then they fail. We gnash our teeth and curse these Titans of
industry.

~~~
jdavis703
This is one of the main points of "Sapiens." That Capitalism, Communism,
Nations-States, et al are manifestations of a new wave of religions that
followed the first wave (polytheism, tree worship, animism, etc), and the
second wave of monotheistic religions like Islam, Christianity etc.

------
pigpaws
confidence in congress only went down 10%? they must be polling the lobbyists
or something...

~~~
jostmey
It's sad because congress is where our individual vote carries the most
weight. It's a crucial institution for our country, without which we'd be
nothing more than an empire (in my opinion). Now more than ever it is
important to root out the cronyism, nepotism, and big-money that has corrupted
this important branch of our government.

~~~
zappo2938
Maybe people have higher confidence in their own Congresspersons. Perhaps,
they disagree strongly with their counterpart voting constituents on the
Coasts. If this is the case, democracy is working as expected.

~~~
eldavido
I also believe democracy is "working as expected".

It's hard to see locally, but we're a country that's deeply divided on some
core issues. Half the country wants gay marriage, the other half doesn't. A
single-payer-advocating socialist almost won the Democratic primary, where his
opponent is talking seriously about trying to "roll back" the ACA
("Obamacare"), this president's legacy domestic policy achievement.

I feel like half the country wants to become more like Europe -- more
socialist, higher minimum wage, high taxes, big social safety net, free
universities, lots of job protections (and the reluctance to hire that goes
with it), minimal/no religion, less marriage, whereas the other half wants to
step back about 50 years to picket fences, nuclear families, and a more
isolated national existence.

We aren't going to have another civil war but I wouldn't be surprised if,
looking back, we're more ideologically divided now than the country was, then.

~~~
throwanem
As many American soldiers died in the Civil War as in every other war we've
ever fought combined. If we were as divided now as we were then, I think it'd
be surprising as hell.

~~~
dragonwriter
The Civil War didn't occur just because of how deep the divisions were, but
because they were strongly correlated with geography and not strongly
correlated with class (particularly, that the divisions were quite present
_among_ the upper class with disproportionate influence on governments, and,
while not perfectly aligned with geography, strongly correlated with it
especially among the upper classes.)

The same degree of division with different geographic and class distribution
could very well not have similar results.

------
NTDF9
Life in America is simple, "To each his own". You are on your own if you fuck
up and no, you can't rely on institutions to save your ass. Institutions are
just looking for their own good.

~~~
yompers888
Your path leads to lots of problems. Humans are social; our entire
adaptability revolves around being able, in times of discomfort or disaster,
to use the tools others have spent their time and resources creating. Someone
thinking it's possible to make it on his/her own just shows that cooperation
is so ubiquitous that we don't even notice it.

The development patterns of the last 75 years, with their spreading out of
people, have caused huge problems here, causing people to be physically
distant from one another, eroding a very natural support network.

Additionally, we've lost powerful charitable forces over the recent decades:
religion and unpaid women. Wealthy wives, being expected to stay home with the
kids, were hugely important in social work. Now that church influence is in
decline and women are paid for their work, we have to pivot to other
institutions for support structures. In the US, we've not quite gotten that
next generation of support figured out.

