The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it.
It was J F Kennedy in 1961.
He also said:
It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.
He wasn't talking of neoliberalism, of course. But he might as well have been for this is the threat we face: the threat the 1% create through the use of tax havens, the media and the instruments of power to oppress.
And yes, we do need that change in outlook, very badly.
Hat tip: Larry Levin
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Richard,
Will when TR-UK be posting all of its financial information on-line? No need for “secrecy” is there?
Georges
It is all available on line – at Companies House
I voluntary put full information on record
Where do you draw the line between privacy and secrecy?
If in doubt – disclose
Mr Richard Murphy,
thanks
He wasn’t specifically talking about neo-liberalism as we understand it today, Richard, but even in the early 1960s many of the core features of unrestrained capitalism were visible. I’m not sure when in 1961 Kennedy made the speech you cite, but Eisenhower warned of the growing power and influence of the ‘military-industrial complex’ – which has now grown into the system of corporate power and control we have today – in a speech in early January 1961 (his farewell speech I believe).
By the way, Simon Jenkins has another good piece in The Guardian today attacking the double-standards of HMRC’s approach to collecting tax. I liked his line on secrecy: ‘ “commercial confidentiality”, otherwise known as incompetent secrecy.’, though personally I think that it’s deliberate connivance not incompetence that it’s often used to cover up.
April 1961 I gather
And of course he was talking of communism and yet the parallels are uncanny
Just covered Jenkins!
Ivan, It’s worth noting that EIsenhower had originally intended to cite the “military-industrial- CONGRGESSIONAL” complex, noting even then the destructive phenomena of the “revolving door” (cited by Richard on the Non-Exec Directors of HMRC), and the incestuous cosying up to Big Business of the Legislature and Executive arms of government (cited passim by Richard).
Alas, Eisenhower decided it was impolitic to use this phrase, (though he is to be commended for having been as outspoken as he was) and those two phenomena have expanded, unchecked. Take a look at this interesting site on the Venn Diagrams of power in the US – http://www.democraticunderground.com/100238687
Thanks for pointing out the Venn diagram, Andrew. Filed away for future use as it’s very good. I did do some work on this aspect of politics/policy making myself a few years back (‘Experts’ and e-government: power, influence and the capture of a policy domain in the UK, [2009]), specifically looking at the consultancy industry, and a little about the history of how the ‘revolving door’ first started in the UK (courtesy of the work of the Fulton Committee in the late 1960s). I guess a lot of us who read Richard’s blogs would be of the view that the whole cosy system stinks – which of course it does.
“Everybody knows that corruption thrives in secret places, and avoids public places, and we believe it a fair presumption that secrecy means impropriety.” – Woodrow Wilson (1913) The New Freedom: a Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People (New York: Doubleday).
Great quote
Will tweet it
Yes, excellent quote ivan the t. I don”t have time to check back now but I suspect these concerns stretch right back to the founding fathers, as they certainly featured in the writing of thinkers whose work influenced the formulation of the Bill of Rights and Constitution.
WE may disagree about corporation tax but not about this.
Digital networks allow us to be much more open. Contracts between corporations should be enforceable only to the extent that they are published and crawlable by the googlebot.
Richard, here is the link to JFK’s speech. He made other speeches on this theme and many assume that he was not referring to communism but to the activities of the international bankers. You may recall that he planned to introduce debt-free currency, bypassing the Federal Reserve. I guess that Ivan Horrocks has also drawn this conclusion in his comment above.
JFK and his family paid a heavy price for the route he took.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces