What Does it Mean to Live in a High-Trust Society?

I rode my bike to school at Colorado State University every day for four years. I locked it using a steel cable lock and never once had an issue. After moving to Washington D.C., I rode that same bike to Wheaton Metro Station and locked it using the same steel cable lock. It was cut and my bike was stolen on my very first day at work.

There is much discussion today on what constitutes a high-trust society. Rather than reinvent the wheel, I will quote at length Francis Fukuyama, famous for his work in liberal democracy and state building. He states in his 1996 book The Crisis of Trust:

Low trust societies are typically familistic or kinship based. There are strong kinship bonds but low levels of trust and interaction between people who are not related to each other. There may be difficulty in forming or maintaining voluntary non-kinship based groups or organisations. There may be a prevalent attitude[s] that individuals who are operating outside of a familistic or kinship based relationship can not or will not think or act for themselves; nor that they can be trusted to act spontaneously or out of their own volition on behalf of others. Compliance with rules is enforced; performance is monitored and controlled; and systems of reward and sanction are put in place. People may be categorised as 'controllers' (supervisor / managers) or 'the controlled' (the workforce). There will be use of legal and contractual regulation to enforce agreements and ensure delivery. Similarly, there will be use of formalised, centralised, hierarchical and bureaucratic structures to accomplish tasks and enforce compliance with established rules and performance standards.

Hierarchies are needed because it is perceived that people within the society can not be relied on to conform to the prevailing ethical codes by which the society operates and is held together. [emphasis added]

High trust societies, in contrast, are characterised by a high degree of generalised social trust. There will be a propensity for spontaneous / voluntary sociability amongst individuals not related by family or kinship. High trust societies are described as communities with shared ethical values and value sets. Such societies do not require extensive contractual, legal, or hierarchical regulation of their relations and social architecture because a prior moral consensus gives members of the group a basis for mutual trust. Members of the community will identify their own well-being with that of their group or community, or put the group's interests ahead of their own in the relative scale of priorities. The need for the supervision and control of the low trust society is replaced by mutual identification and cohesion, commitment, empowerment, and participation.

Fukuyama’s observations are not only profound, but strikingly relevant today. As the West continues to add immigration from non-western nations, previously-unthinkable abuses of this trust begin to manifest. In December of 2025, over 80 people were arrested in a complex fraud scheme involving thousands of Somalian immigrants. These Somalians, playing upon the generosity and goodwill of Americans, erected fake charities in which they claimed to be feeding children, providing housing stabilization services, providing autism therapy, and more. None of these services existed. Instead, over $1 billion of taxpayer money was pocketed. Perhaps the most egregious part of this story is that Minnesota state officials were made aware of the fraud as early as 2019, but were blackmailed into covering up the story through threats of lawsuits due to racial discrimination. Not only did these non-citizens take advantage of American generosity, they also took advantage of people’s goodwill in not wanting to appear racist. These Somalians, who do not share the Western concept of shame, had no moral qualms about taking advantage of our generosity. Shame is an interesting cultural quality as we shall soon see. In Western and East Asian societies, being a net ‘taker’ instead of a net ‘provider’ is one of the most shameful things an individual can do, and many will avoid it all costs. It is this very ideal which allows programs like Medicaid, Medicare, Paycheck Protection Programs, and more to work. If this ideal were not held by almost everyone in the society, the system would collapse as there wouldn’t be enough providers for all the takers.

Unfortunately, government fraud schemes are becoming more and more common. According to the Small Business Administration, over $64 billion was stolen from American taxpayers through fraudulent Paycheck Protection Program loans during the Covid-19 pandemic. Shockingly, this number pales in comparison to the suspected $400 billion stolen in unemployment fraud during Covid. These programs exist because the federal government, and Americans as a whole, believe it is incumbent upon elected officials to serve their constituency; in other words, those in positions of power are meant to serve the general population. Servant leadership is a hallmark of high-trust societies and is not the global or historical norm. It is also a direct result of a culture that places high importance on community and helping those less fortunate than themselves. Therefore, the U.S. populace has collectively agreed to have our paychecks garnished in significant amounts every month to fund programs that take care of the sick, elderly, unemployed, impoverished, and more. The implicit expectation, however, is that these funds are going to what they are intended to go towards and are not being misused, stolen, or abused. The presence of people who have no shame in abusing these programs immediately renders them obsolete. According to the Tax Policy Center, federal relief programs during Covid totaled over $5 trillion dollars. Much of this spending was fraud.

Many Americans reading this article may feel that servant leadership and domestic aid programs are the global norm, but this is a mistake created by a lack of worldly experience or historical knowledge. In fact, not only do many societies not have these beliefs present in their culture, they also show no signs of pursuing or adopting these beliefs. Many, in fact, once had these beliefs and have intentionally rid themselves of them.

In India and the surrounding regions, there exists a concept known as ‘izzat.’ Izzat is difficult to translate in English, but the closest we can come is ‘honor at all costs.’ It is an extreme version of social, sexual, and intercommunal status that requires one to maintain as much honor as they can at the expense of others. Izzat is inherently a zero-sum game; one person wins and the other loses. Say two people get into an argument over something petty. Instead of arguing, each participant will need to escalate the situation, which can turn deadly as izzat prevents someone from standing down or appearing submissive. This would incur shame. Of course, izzat isn’t just a personal metric, but one shared by a family, clan, or caste. In hyper-stratified caste societies like India, incurring shame not only shames the individual, but also the family and the caste, and must be avoided at all costs. Even admitting fault or taking responsibility for something very obviously one’s own fault is not allowed. Because this is a zero-sum game, even people doing their jobs are affected by izzat. Take, for example, a plumber. The very act of a plumber showing up to someone’s house to do a job is seen as subservient and shameful, not because of the job itself but because one is required to work at another’s behest, so the plumber will only do the work if he’s given a bribe. Often, the plumber will harm the clients house on the way out so as not to appear subservient or submissive to the client. This ideology extends to police as well. Taking one family’s side in a dispute can mark that officer (and his family) for retribution by the other family, so often the police do not get involved in petty issues, unless it is to receive bribes.

Izzat is also the reason so many Indian, Pakistani, and Middle Eastern cultures hire others of their same nationality and caste. Again, because this is a zero-sum game where ‘their’ people win and ‘your’ people lose, hiring as many of your own people as you can accrues massive amounts of izzat. As long as you provide for yourself and you tribe, you are seen as ‘winning.’ Naturally, this is why India leads the world in scamming. Many people think poverty causes scamming, but this is not true. Nations like Laos, Cambodia, and Cote D’Ivoire all share similar GDP per capita as India, yet no one is receiving scam calls from these countries. In India, scamming someone is seen as clever because rules are simply obstacles and the only morality needed is ‘winning.’ By tricking someone with your cleverness, you have accrued izzat for your people, and the expense incurred by others is irrelevant.

A man named Tyler Oliveira travelled to India to film their famous poop-throwing festival. Upon finding out that this film would bring shame on India, Oliveira began receiving thousands of death threats. These were an attempt to save their izzat, or honor, upon finding out that they were the laughing stock of the world. Being shamed in this way is what leads to horrific acts of brutality, especially with regard to sex. Attempting to attract a sexual partner comes with the risk of them saying no. If they do, you lose izzat, and the only way to get it back is to prove your superiority over that person. This often leads to horrific rapes and murders and is why India has such a staggeringly high rape percentage. If you are reading this and wondering why I, as an American, am qualified to talk about such things, please know that I’m not. Instead, you can trust Jayant Bhandari, an Indian author, philosopher, and investor. His explanation of Indian society is a must-watch for anyone believing that Western and Eastern cultures are even remotely similar. Bhandari claims that this culture permeates government. Instead of servant leadership, government officials believe they are served by the people and have no inclination that they are supposed to provide for their communities.

Many may think that much of this is a result of the British empires exploitation of India. In fact, it is the opposite; the British tried to stop these behaviors. In Neil Ferguson’s book Empire, he shares an anecdote by British officers in India of the native population practicing what is known as sati. This practice is when a wife, upon her husband’s death, is forced to throw herself onto her husband’s funeral pyre and die along with him. This was apparently an honorable way to follow your husband into the afterlife. The practice was heavily rooted in izzat and was just one of numerous practices that destroyed any attempt at building a prosperous society. The British found this repugnant and banned it.

For those who don’t think this evaluation is true, I encourage you to test your own beliefs. Littering is perhaps one the simplest ways to tell if someone lives in a high-trust society. Clean cities are maintained by people who have respect for their neighbors and where they live. Go to Google maps and enter street view anywhere in India and see how long it takes you to find a street view photo that doesn’t have trash strewn about.

I am using India as an extreme example, but low-trust societies are in fact quite common. On November 26, 2025, an Afghan national shot two national guard soldiers in Washington D.C. What shocked most people is that this man was actually a former interpreter for the Army in Afghanistan and was, supposedly, aligned with American values. He was granted asylum here after the Biden Administration’s disastrous withdrawal. How could someone who received so much from America turn around and stab America in the back? The reality, however, has shattered assumptions about these people. A viral X thread posted after the attack asked GWOT veterans to share stories of their experience with Afghan allies. The replies are shocking. Instead of being culturally aligned allies in a fight against terror and corruption, it appears that many Afghan allies were simply using the U.S. military as a way to safely rape children, accrue money, and enact revenge and retaliation on rival clans (izzat). Many Afghan interpreters were double-crossing American soldiers by relaying positions and travel routes to the Taliban. In many cases, Afghan allies would outright shoot and kill American soldiers while on patrol. This is called ‘green on blue’ violence and was so widespread that the military had to institute ‘guardian angel’ protocols to watch over their supposed allies. Other stories include women being beheaded for being raped (izzat), men raping donkeys, children digging through trash because their parents had too many kids and kicked the older (6 years old) ones out, and more. One user named Sam said this:

“It is impossible for people to even conceive that this culture is the way it is until they experience it. It’s surreal. There are no words to adequately describe that place. People still think I’m embellishing when I try to explain it.”

Fukuyama’s definition of a high-trust society is far, far away from what you have read here. In fact, it is likely far away from the experience of most people on earth. Rwanda is not a high-trust society, a conclusion evident during the Rwandan massacre. Nor are countries like Sudan and Nigeria, who are today experiencing mass genocide at the hands of their neighbors and compatriots. South Africa it also not a high trust society. Perhaps more than any other nation, South Africa’s decline proves that culture matters more than anything. South Africa hosted the world cup in 2010 and was well on the way to being the most prosperous nation on the continent; a nation that rivaled Europe in prosperity and global influence. That has all come crashing down. Decades of corruption, bribery, and a general lack of any sense of responsibility has demolished the once-proud nation. Of special note is the national energy company in the region, Eskom. Eskom used to keep the nation powered 24/7 at affordable rates for its populace. After returning to African hands, Eskom’s utility infrastructure began to degrade because nobody acknowledged it was their responsibility to maintain it. Instead, Eskom officials engaged in rampant bribery, embezzlement, nepotistic and illegal hiring practices, outright theft, and finally left Eskom to crumble. In 2020, Dutch financier Andre de Ruyter was asked to come in and right the ship. Not only was he unable to break through the corruption, but South African government officials even tried to assassinate him (izzat). The shame of having a European run the national energy company was more degrading than watching the company fail and plunging millions of their own citizens into darkness. Today, South Africa has considerable daily blackouts that have wrecked the local economy and thrust the nation into chaos.

It is foolish to think that these cultures will adopt high-trust values if they live in a high-trust society, and that is exactly what happened when the U.S. imported thousands of Somalians and expected them not to take advantage of generous programs. That is what happened when Americans though Afghans genuinely wanted a nation that resembled ours. That is what happened when the British thought they could leave South Africa in South African hands.

Historian Tom Holland, author of numerous books on history and religion, has said:

“People in the West, even those who may imagine that they have emancipated themselves from Christian belief, in fact, are shot through with Christian assumptions about almost everything. . . All of us in the West are a goldfish, and the water that we swim in is Christianity, by which I don’t necessarily mean the confessional form of the faith, but, rather, considered as an entire civilisation.”

What Holland has realized is profound. Combined with Fukuyama’s interpretations of high and low-trust societies, we see a pattern form. The West is a society in which we can trust our neighbors, in which we know that someone’s morality and empathy can be relied upon, even if we don’t know that person. We can trust our neighbors to be kind, to be clean and, most importantly, to be safe. We trust that, for the most part, our leaders lead with the intent to serve, and that people are interested in being honest with their emotions and beliefs. We also trust that others will follow the law and hold it in high regard, and that it can be dispensed evenly and without favoritism or prejudice. We believe in communal spaces, that they don’t belong to just one person, and they should be treated with respect – that is why we don’t tolerate playing music out loud in public and why we have clean parks, from the neighborhood level to the national level. We believe in meritocracy, not in clan or caste, and are very generous in our giving. All of these beliefs are rooted in Christianity and have become western values through it. They are also the foundation for all of our advancements.

Without these ideals, we would not have a functioning economy, businesses, intellectual property, education, or legal codes. These institutions rely on high levels of trust and shared values to function correctly. Without them, cooperation is replaced by infighting as we have seen in the previous examples, and infighting leads to destruction.

We must remember that these beliefs, and our experiences, are very fragile and rely strongly upon every person playing by the same rules. To play by the same rules, all players must share the same beliefs and want the same outcome. If they don’t, and choose to take advantage of the system, the system will collapse. There is a reason the West functions the way it does and other nations do not.