Only because, I'm betting, that you view street surveillance as something that binds others, but not yourself. I doubt you would make this argument for any other kind of surveillance.
If Microsoft were to record everything you did on your PC, would you consider Windows the "high trust" OS community vs Linux? Of if your employer began surveilling all your devices (including personal ones) to ensure you weren't stealing from the company, would you consider your company one of "high trust"?
I don't deny that surveillance can reduce crime, but the idea that surveillance undermines high trust societies is relatively straightforward
It is part of the problem, not part of a solution.
Some people will always be antisocial due to tendencies and possibly mental illness, but having a society that is so rich and yet has so many poor people as the USA will of course create criminals. No amount of cameras will solve that.
Low income correlates, but not cause/effect. Giving cash to poor people in high crime areas doesn't solve crime rates.
However, I have been in plenty of low income high trust areas. In some ways, those were even more high trust.
Economics play a role, but there is a moral and cultural fabric that gets built through repeated interactions overtime. Unfortunately, that fabric is very susceptible to damage.
Eg: there are plenty of towns where you wouldn’t have to lock your car or even your bike, but it only takes a couple thefts for the entire culture to change…