Brazilians are right to be less suspicious than Zimbabweans

With the exception of immediate family members, the only category most respondents say they trust a lot, Brazilians are wary of those they don’t know, they are wary of strangers, they are wary of those who think differently, and they are even wary of their neighbors. On a national average, on a scale of zero to ten, Brazilians’ trust in their peers is only 2.5 points. Regionally, confidence is somewhat higher in southern states, such as Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina, and somewhat less in central-western states, such as Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul. Lack of trust is a Brazilian mark – and a national shame.

• Supreme: The code of conduct designed by Fachin obtains the support of the president of the higher courts

Trust facilitates associations, and associations, as Tocqueville pointed out, generate strength and entrepreneurship, but also ideas, wealth and children. Distrust alienates people and encourages everything that is contrary to growth and prosperity, including bureaucracy, the legitimate child of suspicion. Those who are wary don’t take risks, and those who arouse suspicion don’t bite. This applies to individuals, businesses and countries. It is no coincidence that, in the World Values ​​​​Survey which crosses the interpersonal trust index with GDP per capita, the rich and stable Nordic countries – such as Norway and Denmark – appear at the top of the ranking. Brazil is among the ten worst placed, and the unfortunate Zimbabwe, once again, in last place.

• Editorial: The STF fails on transparency and accountability

For Felipe Nunes, the widespread distrust among Brazilians comes mainly from the fear generated by the threat of crime. “Fear makes them lose confidence,” he says. Recent reports have shown that the number of Brazilians who stop answering their cell phones is increasing for fear of being victims of fraud, a crime that has seen the greatest growth in recent times. Just as distrust does not exist without reason, trust also needs to be sustained. No one trusts blindly and freely, remembers Robert Putnam, an American sociologist who popularized the concept of “social capital” (a set of coexistence networks and norms of reciprocity that facilitate cooperation and make a society function better). According to Putnam, citizens trust others the more they believe they are capable of predicting the reactions they will have to a given action. The same principle applies to institutions. The more transparent and predictable they are, the more reliable they are – and the opposite is also true.

A code of conduct for Federal Court judges, such as that proposed by Minister Edson Fachin, could help raise subterranean levels of national trust. This is not a panacea for the many ills that afflict the judiciary, but it would at least make the behavior of Their Excellencies more predictable and verifiable. In a country of distrust, it’s not much, but it’s worth starting – Zimbabwe may not want to stay in the spotlight for long.