political institutions increases, as we no longer perceive them to be functioning
well for us (Fitzgerald & Wolak, 2016, p.132).
In some cases, whilst distrust in this way can appear as if it applies to the whole
institution, it may only apply to particular elements in certain instances. When
looking at why citizens may distrust certain governments within institutions, it
stems from whether there is a “failure” by the government to follow through on
promises (Whiteley, 2016, p.237). Arguably in cases like this distrust in political
institutions is likely to increase. Additionally, as Fitzgerald and Wolak have
argued, when we find our political officials within our institutions to be corrupt,
we inevitably distrust them (2016, p.132). This is ultimately because we perceive
as having failed to fulfil their to honestly represent us free from corruption and
as such their actions have “undermined” the faith that citizens initially had in
them (Anderson & Tverdova, 2003, p.105). Distrust though this particularised
notion does not necessarily suggest a problem with the institution however, as
arguably for many citizens the institutions are more “abstract and distant” from
the individuals within them who have betrayed their trust (Anderson &
Tverdova, 2003, p.94).
4.2). How does trust in political institutions affect the nature of participation?
The discourse between scholars regarding this relationship of distrust in political
institutions is, as Holum notes, “complex” and “unresolved” (2022, p.1). One
main argument amongst political commentators is that when trust is low in a
particular government, conventional participation is likely to be higher. This
arguably stems from the incentive distrust in the government creates amongst
citizens to participate in order to “oust the incumbents” (Lee & Schachter, 2019,
p.405). Citizens in this situation raise their voices because of their
56
Made with FlippingBook HTML5