I wonder if there is a relationship between the level of political participation of the citizenry of some country and the level of satisfaction in their government's efficiency. In the US there is little political participation. Most of us just vote for the candidate with the best commercials. That is why the candidate with the most money wins. On the flipside, we are all pretty satisfied that the government will take care of most of our problems.
The only people here who think the government is completely incompetent are people like academics, who are also very politically aware.
Israelis display a very high level of political involvement, but they also have one of the lowest levels of faith in government efficiency.
It seems like a simple enough thesis to assert that satisfied citizens, or citizens who think the government is working, have little reason to worry enough to participate. The same will hold for countries where there is no hope of doing anything.
So countries where the citizens think that they can initiate change, and feel like there is a need to initiate change, will be politically involved.
The frightening thing is the following: What if a country which is doing fine for a long time loses its ability and tradition of political activism. Then it suddenly becomes necessary to continue it. What happens? Can a citizenry recover that sort of thing?
There is an old worry among political theorists that we are becoming a nation of sheep. We follow the dictates of the political infrastructure, and it motivates us more than we motivate it. It is a worry of mine too. I do trust my government. It is doing pretty well. But I worry that few people have a say in foreign or domenstic policy. I feel like the citizens ought to.