Illegitimate government corrodes trust between ruler and ruled

Evidence

Within illegitimate governments, in Locke’s view, the psychological relation of trust between ruled and ruler was likely for the most part to be absent, though it was also apt to be affirmed by those in authority with particular unctuousness. The more complex and the more economically differentiated the society in question, the more likely it was to be absent (Locke 1967: II, chapter 5). — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 1174

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Hardin’s argument that trust requires observable constraints — here Locke predicts trust evaporates precisely where coercive power is unconstrained by consent. — connects to: Totalitarian rulers denigrate precisely what the ruled secretly long for. — Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, 159; Trust is the juridical presupposition under which mandate powers ruled — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 89; A ruler who acts by private will forfeits all right to obedience — John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, 188 (+1 more)
• QUESTION: Why does economic differentiation make trust absent more likely? Locke’s reasoning here is compressed and worth unpacking.