People's Forum: Does supervision mean distrust?

In the face of "beating" or admonishing conversation, some cadres have resistance in their hearts and think that this is a distrust of themselves. Under this psychological effect, many supervisors "can't save face" and just go through a procedure, so they look "rigid" but actually very weak. Is regulation just distrust? Or is there no need for supervision because of trust? Obviously not. Sociologists say that trust is to simplify the cooperative relationship between people. In fact, without basic trust, society will struggle. With a high degree of trust, we can save social costs and improve social efficiency. Moreover, supervision needs to pay social costs. For example, enterprises can save more time and energy without routine testing by quality supervision departments. But a high degree of trust does not mean that regulatory costs can be cut. Once the supervision is relaxed, no matter how high the original trust is, there will eventually be problems, or even big problems. "Trust means responsibility", many people say so. "Social trust makes you more responsible", an entrepreneur described his entrepreneurial experience like this. But after all, this is only an internal self-discipline that only works for a few people. For most people, once the external "heteronomy" of supervision is lost, the trust of others will not be transformed into their own responsibility, but it is more likely to become the "capital" of arbitrary overdraft. At present, the social "trust crisis" in some fields is fundamentally the result of arbitrary overdraft rather than responsible transformation of this trust. Trusting the other party does not necessarily mean that the other party will take responsibility, but it may become the beginning of the other party's irresponsibility and abuse of trust. People don't trust some experts to speak, precisely because he abuses public trust and is irresponsible to his profession; I don't trust the quality of some enterprises and brands because it overdraws the trust of consumers and is irresponsible for people's health; The distrust of officials in some incidents is mostly because they ignore the trust of the people and are irresponsible for their own lives. In this sense, if you want to gain the trust of others, you must start from your own responsibility. To solve the social "trust crisis", we should start with strengthening the sense of responsibility. To reduce the occurrence of production safety accidents and food safety incidents, it is necessary to strengthen supervision responsibility. An old editor who has worked for many years once gave up checking sentences because he trusted an old author. Later, he found that there was a lot of plagiarism in the article. Therefore, he made it a rule that no matter who he was, he should have an inspection. With this "institutional" barrier, many problems and mistakes have really been prevented. Many facts in life show that many contradictions and problems can be abandoned because of trust. On the other hand, the occurrence of liability accidents and safety accidents, although unexpected, must be reasonable. Trust without supervision is credulity, and trust is not an excuse to give up supervision. Supervision is not a deliberate "finding fault", but an institutional concern and a guarantee to improve the quality of trust. In this sense, carrying out educational practice activities is a kind of supervision under the premise of trust and a deep love for party member cadres. Correctly understand this supervision, correctly face the opinions and suggestions of the masses, and thoroughly solve the problems, our team will be more pure and reliable.