Every serious problem in history is due to the acceptance of conscious, intentional deception. Every serious social problem is due to lionization of evil.
Caesar was evil. He was a populare, this is not rocket science. Charlemagne was evil. His name, Charles, comes from churl. Literally the great churl. So, populare; not a coincidence. Christianity is evil. It's a cult for narcissists. "The high shall be brought low, the low raised up." Judaism seems to be straight demon-worship; Jehova is a plague djinni. The examples are endless.
The term "high trust society" means trusting untrustworthy people. It's not a good thing. It's the sine qua non of immoral behaviour: short term benefit, long term costs. Who is untrustworthy? Unvetted strangers. Strangers are the textbook case study on not being trustworthy.
If there is anything good in the aura of this term, it's nearly the exact opposite: high-enforcement society. Caino hypocriens is evil as shit at 95% rates. They will betray you the instant they think they can get away with it. How do you get a high "trust" society? Make them think they can't get away with it. If you want it to last, to be long term instead of short term, it has to be because it's too difficult to get away with.
Hunting Satanists is not only allowed, but sometimes mandatory. I do it for food. I find gnawing on their faces delicious. Do roast them thoroughly. As expected raw Satanism is toxic, unlike raw beef. Well-done only. If you're not hungry, go ahead and do it for sport. There is nothing you can do to a Satanist that's wrong, except being nice to them. Hunting Satanists just for practice killing people, like you're in a videogame? Great, awesome. Thumbs up. Want to hunt a Satanist just to see him die? Be my guest. Hankering for a pile of skulls? I love a good skull pile. It's impossible to be too extreme when rendering cruelty unto Satan. Only stop if you start feeling bad about yourself; pity is a sin.
Hunting Satanists is your duty and your privilege. Poor Gnon is always overworked. Give him a break and do his job for him.
The Dao is both infinitely loving and infinitely wrathful. Anyone favouring one or the other isn't representing the Dao. Which is hardly a bad thing: the Dao loves variety and particularism. And hates it too, of course. Anyone claiming to be only loving is 100% a devil. The proper response is found in the paragraph above. (Or claiming to be only wrathful, but you knew that already.)
More precisely the Dao transcends silly mortal concepts like "love" and "wrath," it's more like both at the same time, and even more like neither. Isn't actually infinite, because infinity is nonexistence. To us poor limited beings, this particular part of its transcendent nature looks sometimes like endless love, and sometimes like endless wrath.
I do have a bad habit of implying things rather than just saying them. "I'm going to make it seem like it was their own idea!" Yeah, no I'm not. I'm just going to make it easier to misunderstand. It's not a sly hint, it's just gross.
P.S. I have some disagreements with Hermes Trismegistus on a very similar score.