What of the protection of minorities? What you have there is the tyranny of the majority, the dictatorship of the proletariat, or rampant populism. — unenlightened

Yeah that's a bit of a problem, the 51% oppress the other 49, and take measures to ensure that they never surpass the threshold of 50%. It could become slavery.

Back to trust as it pertains to the American government...

There is a commonly held belief that the United States government consists of elected officials that make certain promises that they never intend to keep; that it consists of people who say whatever it takes to get elected. These statements are all true on their face, for the government does indeed include precisely such people. However, this vein of thought requires a bit of refinement and/or nuance. It is far too short-sighted as it is. With just a small amount of additional rhetoric, this line of thought could be used to convince one to generally believe that there are no honest politicians in American government. In fact, there are many Americans who would readily agree with such a statement, although that is not true. Nevertheless, the majority of Americans believe otherwise, and they also believe that there is not anything that can be done about it; that that's just the way it is and it is not going to change anytime in the foreseeable future.

Dishonesty has become accepted as a normal thing. It's easy to do when the overwhelming majority has a general distrust in elected officials that often manifests into repeating statements like "They all...(pick your reason for distrust)". The examples of this are far too many to hold any well grounded doubt about it. That is the way it is.



So, here's the problem...

There is an irrevocable and indubitable need for Americans to be able trust elected officials to act only as a means for somehow, and in some way increasing the overall well-being of American lives and/or livelihoods. That is the only criterion needing to be satisfied by a representative republic with strong democratic traditions such as the United States of America purports itself to be. This is the primary responsibility of American government and elected officials. That ought be the highest priority and/or guiding principle influencing the everyday thought, belief, and actions of any and all elected American officials.



What's in the best interest of the overwhelming majority of all Americans ought be the framework in which all governmental actions are considered in terms of. It's not. The results speak for themselves. The overwhelming majority of Americans are not recipients of the effects/affects of government policy which has improved their quality of life... their overall well-being. That's just not the case. It ought be, and would if everyone in the American government followed the aforementioned principles/priorities.

In order for elected officials to successfully do their job, in order for them to actually take action which results in increasing the quality of life for of all it's citizens each and every time it acts, it must act each and every time with exactly these things in mind. When this is done, there are other considerations that arise. Particularly, how to go about actually doing what's in the best interest of the overwhelming majority of Americans, and/or how to best judge when there are conflicting opinions on the matter at hand(whatever it may be).

So, there will be disputes. What grounds each side? What are those suggestions for action based upon? Clearly, the official believes certain actions ought be taken. What are the expectations of the actions? Do they expect that it will benefit the overwhelming majority? Will the results provide a better quality of American life to the overwhelming majority of Americans? These reasons are often sold to the American public as a means for preparation and/or 'manufacturing' consent.

Far too often, the legislation/policies resulted in exactly the opposite. This repetitive failure has resulted in permanent demonstrable financial harm to a very large swathe of the American population. This grounds many people's general distrust in government. The failure to ever correct the direct harm further bolsters it.

In order to increase the quality of life, in order to increase the overall wellbeing of Americans, one must act in ways that do so. When there is a conflict of interest between the many and few, it is always best to err on the side of many, aside from racism, sexism, and what have you(when the majority are sexist, racist, etc). When there is a conflict of interest between the least privileged and the most privileged, any government purporting to be "of the people, for the people, and by the people"(a representative form of government) ought always err on the side of least. This has quite simply not taken place nearly as often as it ought. Distrust ensues.

So...

...when and if enough people hold firmly to the belief that all politicians are untrustworthy, there can be and will be no further discrimination between those who are trustworthy and those who are not. The process is itself muddled with distraction and irrelevance and thus gets neglected. Dishonesty becomes the expectation.

We are there.

Thats a really attractive slogan. What of the protection of minorities? What you have there is the tyranny of the majority, the dictatorship of the proletariat, or rampant populism. — unenlightened

Oppression of minorities and spreading racism, sexism, and xenophobia are not in the best interest of the overwhelming majority.

What we have currently is a horribly financially corrupt majority of elected officials.