“The System is Broken”: Americans No Longer Believe In Its Institutions
It’s not difficult to see that the foundation is crumbling…

It’s not difficult to see that the foundation is crumbling…

A new Gallup poll has found that already low “confidence” in our system of government, our economy, the media, banking, big business, religious institutions and watchdogs is further eroding.

“Americans’ confidence in most major U.S. institutions remains below the historical average for each one,” a Gallup spokesman said in a news release.

[…]

All in all, it’s a picture of a nation discouraged about its present and worried about its future, and highly doubtful that its institutions can pull America out of its trough.

There is plenty of good reason, with evidence uncovered daily, weekly and consistently throughout the years of the hypocrisy and failures of government, the failed promises of politicians, the lies and spin of the mainstream media and newspapers, the greed and exploitation of the financial sector and the “just us” mentality of above-the-law enforcers who are supposed to uphold justice.

Just check out how little faith remains in the structure of, well, just about any institution in America, by the numbers:

Only 8 percent have confidence in Congress, down by 16 points from a long-term average of 24 percent – the lowest of all institutions rated.

33 percent have confidence in the presidency, a drop from a historical average of 43 percent.

32 percent have confidence in the Supreme Court, down from 44.

28 percent have confidence in banks, down from 40 percent.

21 percent have confidence in big business, down from 24 percent.

24 percent have confidence in organized labor, down from 26.

24 percent have confidence in newspapers, down from 32 percent.

21 percent have confidence in television news, down from 30 percent.

52 percent of Americans […] are confident in the police [57 percent historically]

What else can be said, but that the system is broken?

Obviously it bears little resemblance to the one envisioned by the founding fathers and their emphasis on separation of powers and limited government.

None of the three branches of government are trusted by even close to a majority of the American populace… maybe that’s to be expected, with frequent media criticisms of political figures in a polarizing two party system.

But other pillars of society have lost their backing of the public, too – in astonishing numbers that show not only that the American dream is dead, but that private institutions are widely perceived as being just as corrupt as public ones (or worse).

To top it off – this perception is entirely deserved. The aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis consolidated the power and wealth of the big banks, and gave the Federal Reserve ultimate power over the economy, while average Americans suffered greatly.

Scandal after scandal revealed that corruption for what it is.

Media scandals – such as Brian Williams’ fabricated war zone stories and George Stephanopoulos’ attempt to conceal his conflicts of interest with the Clinton Foundation – have left a bad taste in the mouth of media consumers already facing fake news indigestion.

The factors are piling up beyond our capacity to excuse them away: fatigue from endless wars and threats of terrorism; cynically-false promises of hope and change; the repeated, brazen trampling of civil rights; a sharp decline of opportunity at the hands of economic recession; trade deals written in secret to enrich corporations; the rise of job-crushing technology and more have all sapped at the American spirit.

Whether most Americans follow these developments or not, they instinctually sense them. No one trustworthy is steering this ship – worse, no one may be at the wheel at all.

Who or what can turn things around?

That remains to be seen, but few will be willing to buy into the system if it remains on course.

The loss of confidence in the system ultimately relates to the loss of confidence in the freedom of the individual.

It is strong-willed and determined people who have always made this country, and any other, strong and vibrant.

The constant detriment of individual rights and the endless calls to transfer power to the collective – whether inside or outside of government – is the real source of the problem that this Gallup poll reflects.

Our best hope at a better world should start there. Is it still possible?

It's not broken.
It's flaws are showing.

People are acting like people.
Nothing new.


Nothing.
There is no turning around.
There is always just moving on.
It just depends on how slow you want to go.


Nope. It's not "still" possible because it never was possible.
At best you can have some peace for a bit.
But not for everybody, and not forever.
Finite world. Finite resources. Everybody competing and cooperating against each other for theirs, and security and control of it.

The USA has lots of paranoid people. So, what's new?

Don't confuse disgust with paranoia

Government sophisticated enough to govern a population of over 300,000,000 in a modern Western style society must be intrinsically imperfect.

Why?

Ideally suit one government to one specific static condition of the governed, and as that dynamic profile of the governed changes as it inevitably does, the formerly perfect government will no longer be.

It remains an uneasy truce in the U.S.

But it is a painfully sad irony to me that we have higher taxation, more severe more punitive self-government in the 3rd Millennium than we had under the 18th Century stewardship of King George III; who at the time was so non-responsive to the People's needs our forefathers waged a bloody Revolution to rid themselves of it.

There are many parallels to the fall of the Roman Empire.

Indeed so mw!

But to me, perhaps the most alarming is the U.S.' expanding imperialism.

How bad is it?

I gather there are 28 NATO member nations.
According to what I've read of it, not only does the U.S. spend more on military than any other NATO member nation.
What I've read indicates the U.S. spends more on military than all the other NATO member nations, combined!

If it is necessary for the U.S. to spend that much; then we are CLEARLY doing something wrong in our foreign policy, to collect so many dangerous enemies.

How many nuclear aircraft carriers does Denmark have?

I disagree with that I highlighted in bold and Denmark's government is a constitutional monarchy making your question 'irrelevant'...

In response to the OP...

A flawed government is not an irrelevant government...Government is not only relevant, it's necessary to the success of a nation,,,,any nation...Without it chaos would destroy cohesion and cohesion is the breath of strength and prosperity...The relevant message in our TIMELESS constitution is clear, the fate of a nation lies with its people, not its government...Stop whining, take care of YOUR stuff, pay attention and vote responsibly...Or move somewhere else...

i beg to differ, i'd say our government is pretty irrelevant, thats why only 30 % of the country votes. and also without government i dont see "chaos" destroying the country. most people are civilized and would be able to handle themselves perfectly fine without the retarted federal government. government is what is ruining this country...

Not sure where you got your 30% figure, just sure that, like the rest of your statement about voting, it is wrong...Also, when they get hungry enough, civilized people become uncivilized very fast...

Any entity that can collect trillions of dollars and disperse those funds to whomever they want will always be relevant. If you asked are they competent then that is a different story entirely.

If style of government were the issue I'd agree.
But virtually every federal government has a military.
I gather the Vatican is theologically pacifist; yet they have their Swiss Guard.

I thought Denmark was a NATO member, and therefore must have a military, as it's a membership requirement.

But it wouldn't matter. Pick any counter-example you prefer, with whatever style of government you wish.
The same exact rule applies.

Being armed to the teeth as we are indicates one of two things.
- Either we're paranoid, and it's not necessary. Or,
- We're making enemies most other nations don't have.

And btw, some might consider the U.K. a monarchy.
But it has a Prime Minister (I've been to his house) and a functioning parliament.
The House of Windsor is more or less a nostalgic legacy retained for tourism.

I thought the topic was about 'our' federal republic, not our military...Or the Prime Minister's house...

L2, the topic is:

mw then commented on the "Roman Empire".

That introduces the issue of military; a prominent feature of U.S. foreign policy.

The United States military is a U.S. federal government function.
Even the State militias that report to their State's governor, owe their allegiance to the president, our CIC.

If you have missed the significance of mw's point,
the Holy Roman Empire over-extended itself, and thereby extinguished itself.
You think that's not material to the U.S.?

We may already be over-extended.

- We are not the solar-system's policeman.

- And we ought not continue to play the role of the planet's vigilante'.

Is that relevant to:

Of course.
It's an on topic discussion about the relevance of government.

And if you know of a better comparison for U.S. military spending than other NATO member nations, please share.

I never miss Joe's point because his points always seem relevant to me... :-)

I don't know who "Joe" is.
Posters here self-identify by pseudonym.

But I consider mw's:

not merely relevant, but prescient.

We know it is a fatal path.
And yet it is the path we are on.

And the U.S. has over $18 $Trillion in debt to show for it.

I wonder if the Romans spent 66% of their budget on entitlement programs...

All KINDS of erroneous information and false reasoning in this thread.

Minor bits:

The Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire are entirely different things, and were only vaguely related.

The Roman Empire did NOT fall, because it overextended itself.

In fact, I have never EVER seen a valid comparison between any modern country in trouble, and the "fall of the Roman Empire," because it is an inherently false statement to say that the Roman Empire "fell." It's history and demise were VASTLY more complicated than any of the annoying pundits and pseudo intellectuals who try to use it's current day non-existence as a sort of bugaboo to frighten other ignorant people into supporting or opposing something which has NOTHING to do with the Romans at all.

As to the main thread launch rant, it's got no real "legs." That is, it's 90% rant, and only 10% or less, valid criticism.

The fact that lots of people are grumpy, and will answer CANNED POLL QUESTIONS in a given way, has zero to do with accurately measuring anything related to the OP's theme.

In particular, the OPs supposition that because many people don't TRUST many of our government leaders, has absolutely no logical connection whatsoever to the question of whether this or any government is "relevant."

I personally am fed up with people making the statement that "our xxxx is BROKEN!" as though this statement serves any purpose other than self-worship of the speaker.

That statement is an act of avoidance of responsibility on the part of anyone who makes it, as what they are invariably doing, is proclaiming that they have no intention of doing any of the work required of any grown up citizen, to actually address even their OWN concerns.

It's nothing but political fecal matter, masquerading as insight.

Good for you....