Philosophy: Does trust prevail?

Just once, you are too casual to backup. Just once, even the tested trust fails. Just once, trust is traded for convenience. That once, you trusted too much. Minimize your losses (it is damage control time), save your bones, save your soul, and next time think before you trust.
My theory is that humans are inherently lazy. All the drinking, all the artificial highs, all the fervent shouting, mesmerize people into action; violent actions, fighting for a nation, fighting for cause. People die, ideologies fail, kings sell their empires, fighters sell their cause, and convenience prevails.
Practical people never trust completely. India is the land of opportunists, and opportunity prevails. Bombay is a city of dreams where money prevails. A moment of blind trust, and chicanery prevails.
Trust, valor, chivalry are un-cool ideas of a bygone era. In our generation, charity needs more publicity than a Hollywood movie, to prevail.

Philosophy: Trust

In the book Maximum City, Suketu Mehta is interviewing a don, and the don explains that it is all about trust. The don is there because he trusts his friend, who referred him here. It is generally said that the lives of the dons, the warriors, the explorers i.e. the "real" men, is based upon trust. Trust, is thus this larger than life idea, under the aegis of which one's life, one's girl, one's money is secure.

Trust I think is way too glorified. I believe trust is the essence, on which world works, the equilibrium on which the world is based. I trust my radials (tyres) when I drive my car at 80 MPh on the freeway. I trust the pressure cooker to not explode, when I cook. I trust the pilot, when in an airplane. Moment we loose trust, we are distracted. Loss of trust on one thing, has a ripple factor too. It leads to paranoia.

How do one decide if something/somebody is trustable? This one is hard for me to answer, as the parameters can vary from person to person, and situation to situation. However each parameter is intriguing, for each one can be cultivated, each one can be misused. How many times have we seen a hero create a setup, where he saves the heroin from fake goondas? Corporates talk of steady growth numbers to promote investor confidence. I suppose statistics is an established parameter. Thus, the smartest men can manipulate facts.

However not everything is trustable. When it really matters, we test trust. Not every trust is fulfilled, and thus we have backup. We are used to have backups in mind, in case the trust is ever broken. The unanswered question for me is if there is something called absolute trust?