Attachment Theory and Society: How Our Governments Shape Collective Psychological Security

We often think of attachment theory as something that applies only to children and their caregivers. Developed by John Bowlby and expanded by Mary Ainsworth, attachment theory explains how early relationships shape our ability to connect, trust, and regulate emotions. But what if this same framework could be used to understand societies, governments, and even global governance?

Just as individuals develop attachment styles based on early interactions, societies condition their citizens through cultural narratives, political structures, and systemic interactions. The way we relate to power, institutions, and each other is deeply influenced by the security—or insecurity—of the world around us.

The Four Attachment Styles in Societies

1. Secure Societies: Stability and Trust Lead to Flourishing

• In a securely attached society, people trust their institutions. The government provides safety, fairness, and support, fostering psychological security in its citizens.

• A strong social safety net, transparent governance, and economic stability create a sense of belonging, allowing people to take risks, innovate, and collaborate.

• Example: Scandinavian countries are often cited for their high social trust, low corruption, and policies that reinforce a sense of collective well-being. Citizens are more likely to feel secure, both economically and socially, leading to high levels of happiness and productivity.

2. Anxious (Preoccupied) Societies: Hyper-Vigilance and Institutional Inconsistency

• In societies where institutions are inconsistent—sometimes protective, sometimes punitive—citizens develop anxious attachment to the government.

• People feel uncertain about their future, leading to hyper-vigilance, political polarization, and populism as individuals look for a strong figure to “save” them.

• Example: In countries with extreme political swings or economic instability, people become deeply engaged but also deeply fearful of betrayal. This often results in populist movements, distrust of elites, and social unrest.

3. Avoidant (Dismissive) Societies: Radical Individualism and Distrust

• Societies that promote radical self-sufficiency, minimize communal responsibility, and prioritize personal wealth over collective well-being create avoidant attachment in their citizens.

• In these societies, people distrust authority, avoid dependence, and often feel isolated in their struggles.

• Example: Hyper-capitalist societies with weak social safety nets often breed resentment toward government. People see institutions as inefficient or oppressive and turn to private solutions instead—whether in healthcare, education, or security.

4. Disorganized Societies: Fear, Chaos, and Power Struggles

• When a government oscillates between care and abuse, it creates disorganized attachment in its people.

• Citizens both fear and depend on the system, leading to distrust, conspiracy thinking, and cycles of revolution and repression.

• Example: Post-colonial states, authoritarian regimes, or deeply corrupt governments often create this kind of attachment, where people long for stability but distrust those in power.

What This Means for Our Future

As we stand on the precipice of an AI-driven, post-scarcity future, we must ask ourselves: what kind of attachment model do we want for humanity?

• AI & Technology: The way humans interact with artificial intelligence could also be understood through attachment theory. Will we form a secure attachment, trusting AI as a benevolent partner? Or will we develop anxious or avoidant attachment, fearing AI as an oppressive force?

• Global Governance: If societies could be designed to foster secure attachment through just policies and social structures, humanity could move toward a more cooperative and thriving civilization.

• Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs): Emerging models like DAOs could create new governance structures that reinforce secure attachment—where power is distributed, transparent, and participatory rather than centralized and authoritarian.

Conclusion: Building a Securely Attached World

The way societies govern is not just about policies and laws; it is about psychology, relationships, and trust. By applying attachment theory at a societal level, we can better diagnose why some nations thrive while others are trapped in cycles of fear and dysfunction.

The future of humanity depends on creating governance systems that foster secure attachment—where people feel safe, empowered, and connected. If we fail to do so, we will continue to live in a world driven by fear, isolation, and instability.

We have the intelligence, technology, and creativity to reimagine our future. The question is: will we design a world that fosters trust, cooperation, and human flourishing—or one that deepens division, fear, and control?

The choice is ours.