Power Accumulation: Secrecy, Opposition, and Cover Stories
by
Michael S. Rozeff
by Michael S. Rozeff
DIGG THIS
This article,
as in my earlier articles on power, refers to aggressive power;
epitomized by how states use power. It does not refer to power used
in defense of one’s life or justly acquired property.
As attested
to by a voluminous and growing literature, the state’s power is
evil. My goal remains to lay bare the general rules by which this
power works so that we might more easily avoid its temptations and
instead be drawn to the opposite path of diminishing the presence
of state power in our society.
An earlier
article of mine lists a dozen theorems about politics and state
power. This one adds several more.
Criminality
of political means
In any society,
we expect that some human beings will attempt to accumulate power.
In Oppenheimer’s terms (employed to good effect by Albert Jay Nock),
they will try to exploit the "political means" rather
than the "economic means." Political means focus on theft
of property, conquest, seizure, and coerced wealth redistribution.
These oppose the liberty to use one’s rightful property, peaceful
production, and exchange, which are economic means. The state embodies
political means; they are its essence. Carried down to the personal
level, the political means are seen to be the same as those of common
criminals: power is used in both cases to take.
We should be
mindful that the state, whether nascent or full-blown, is a dynamic,
not a static organization. The powers wielded by those who head
it wax and wane, the general thrust being augmentation and concentration
of those powers. The worst states combine power concentrated in
the hands of one or a very few men with widespread police and other
bureaucracies that monitor and control life throughout the population.
But in any state, the conformity between the state’s use of the
political means and the operations of criminals never fails to be
present.
Examples of
the criminal exercise of the political means are legion. Wiki matter-of-factly
tells us that the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), dating
from 1947, engages
"in covert operations at the direction of the President."
From its inception, the CIA has engaged in a range of secret activities
that included mind-control, front organizations, assassinations,
political overthrows, media control, cultural control, financing
of sympathetic organizations, kidnapings, torture, stabilization
and de-stabilization of foreign governments, support of death squads,
drug operations, anti-union activities, and lethal operations affecting
the politics of many foreign nations and the domestic U.S.
Attractions
of secrecy
I venture the
hypothesis that no empire of any magnitude can control large territories
and peoples without analogous secret police organizations that spy
and carry out similar control and violent activities. The Roman
Empire had the Frumentarii, Ottoman Sultans had the hafiye, the
U.S.S.R. had its Cheka, NKVD, and KGB (among others), and the Nazis
had their Gestapo. The U.S. has its CIA and FBI (among others) and
now the Department of Homeland Security (DHS.)
But many states
that are not empires have or have had such organizations to effect
their foreign and domestic activities of control. Ghana has its
Bureau of National Investigations (BNI), China its Guoanbu (Ministry
of State Security), Venezuela its DISIP and DIM, and Turkmenistan
its Ministry of State Security. The list of secret state police
organizations is far longer than these few examples. Their presence
is a powerful signal of the state’s equivalence to a large-scale
criminal gang. The Cosa Nostra had its secret assassination bureau
known as Murder, Incorporated, mimicked by the CIA’s nickname "The
Company."
Funding the
CIA with a secret budget, the Congress instituted a secret police
with the world as its beat. The CIA’s extended powers were a quantum
leap over the previous activities from which it sprang. Since its
beginning, its accumulated power, activities, and budget have grown
and grown. We can fully expect the U.S. state to continue to extend
the powers used by the CIA to domestic matters, and if not the CIA,
then other bureaucracies and secret police agencies such as the
FBI, the DHS, or newly-invented or transformed bureaus of control.
Former CIA
officer John Stockwell has written: "It is the function of
the CIA to keep the world unstable, and to propagandize and teach
the American people to hate and fear, so we will let the Establishment
spend any amount of money on arms," and "Enemies are necessary
for the wheels of the U.S. military machine to turn."
Two theorems
These observations
lead me to propose
Theorem 13:
Power-accumulators and power-users prefer secrecy.
In broader
economic terms, I restate Theorem 13 as follows:
Theorem 13
(alternate): The cost of accumulating and using power rises as transparency
of the political system increases. Conversely, the cost of accumulating
and using power falls as transparency of the political system decreases.
However, I
do not mean to state this theorem as merely a law derived from empirical
observation. I mean to prove that this theorem is always true. The
proof goes as follows. Any accumulation of power leads to a use
of power, or else it would not be accumulated. Any use of power
must harm some people, whom we can call the victims. They will object
and make known their grievances. They will point out the injustice
of the harm inflicted upon them. The actions of the wielders of
power may or may not find general support among the population they
rule; in other words there will be those who applaud the domination
of the victims and those who do not. There will usually be a significant
number of people with a sense of justice (a moral interest) who
will sympathize with the victims. In addition there will be those
who have economic, political, cultural, ethnic, religious, and other
interests in supporting the victims. For example, they may fear
becoming the next victims. Hence, any use of power whatever leads
to resistance to its use. This is so important that, in passing,
I state it as a separate theorem:
Theorem 14:
Power begets opposition to its use.
To complete
the proof of theorem 13, note that since power begets opposition
to its use, the wielders of power have an interest in minimizing
the opposition. Secrecy facilitates this process in many ways. Clearly,
if there is perfect secrecy, then no one knows who is using power
to inflict harm and the victimizers can get away with their crimes
without reproach. If there is imperfect secrecy, this is better
than none. Then there is confusion and uncertainty about who is
responsible for what. This makes it easier to shift the blame. Even
if people know, for example, that the CIA has done something, the
powers-that-be in various government branches can claim that they
were not directly responsible for its shadowy operations or can’t
control them. Secrecy encourages terror and fear among other potential
victims. Secrecy leads to less publicity, or distorted publicity,
and this helps defuse the resistance against its use.
In short, secrecy
makes it all the harder to pinpoint the perpetrators, shine a light
on their crimes, and bring them to justice. It raises the costs
of stopping the power-users. This is why those using power want
secrecy. They are criminals doing criminal acts, and criminals want
to act in the dark. They don’t want people to know what they are
doing. They don’t want to be caught.
Extensions,
exceptions, and illustrations
Since the accumulation
of power leads to its use, secrecy becomes important in this process
as well. The accumulation of power means that the state, in some
way or by some action, enhances its ability to impose harm; that
is, an act occurs that makes it easier for the state to impose power
in the future. The state’s costs of imposing power decline.
When a state
accumulates more power, it can use more aggressive force and get
away with it. The criminals grow stronger with impunity. For example,
Chavez (and the Venezuelan state) recently gained new dictatorial
powers. The U.S. presidency has been gaining power for decades.
The U.S. government gained power over the states when direct election
of Senators began, and it gained significant power when the Constitution
was amended to allow the income tax. A legislative law that muzzles
speech prior to elections gains power for incumbents and the state.
The U.S. Constitution (drafted in secrecy) strengthened the national
government.
These cases
go beyond extending a given power to new areas. They represent altogether
new powers. But the extensions of given powers to new areas also
accumulate power even as they implement the existing power. For
example, the state has a great deal of power over the education
of children; and this has already been made legal by various courts.
As time passes, this power is employed and extended to control education
in more and more detailed ways. The power already present is extended.
In both these
instances, gaining new powers and extending old ones, new harm is
being done. This, as I noted at the outset, is a given and a known
fact. It is recognizing this fact and accepting it as a given that
allows us to move on to analyze the crafty methods by which harm
can be imposed with a minimum of opposition aroused by those who
are harmed and those who raise alarms over the harm.
Secrecy is
one such method. Other things equal, the rulers generally favor
a lack of transparency within the political system. A law or an
executive act cannot help but become known at some point; that is
not the issue. The point is that if the public knew what was going
on in lurid detail beforehand, the resistance to the law would be
stoked. Hence, the preparation for the law, the logrolling, the
payoffs, the lobbying, the manipulations, the side deals, and the
machinations that go into the making of the law are kept behind
closed doors as much as possible. A last minute flurry of activity
sometimes results in obscure but important provisions or slight
but significant rewordings that even voting legislators know little
about and the general public knows nothing about. The kingpins or
lead legislators making a law benefit from holding their cards close
to the vest and not revealing what they are really after. They may
never reveal their purposes, and they have an incentive to stay
mum until it is too late for opposition to coalesce and speak out
against them. The power game is like playing two games of chess
at once: a shadow game on an open board, and a real game on a secret
board inside one’s head. Feints, sacrifices, and other maneuvers
on the shadow board are tools to win the real game.
There are apparent
exceptions to the use of secrecy. There are sometimes brutal and
naked exhibitions of open power, such as mass executions, that are
designed to instill terror and solidify power over an occupied population.
There is the guillotine in the French Revolution. There are the
policies of the Russian Communists to kill significant segments
of the population. There is the Final Solution of the Jewish Question
of the Nazis. These kinds of events usually occur during wars, conquests,
revolutions, or large internal transformations when the exercise
of power is already open. And even in some of these instances, the
criminals prefer secrecy and cover stories so as to gain compliance
and defuse resistance.
Like most properties
of human actions, secrecy can be used well or badly. I do not mean
to leave the impression that secrecy itself is bad. Jesus at times
kept his own counsels. He said to pray and fast in secret. "A
talebearer revealeth secrets; but he that is of a faithful spirit
concealeth the matter." (Proverbs 11:13) But "A wicked
man taketh a gift out of the bosom [a bribe] to pervert the ways
of judgment." (Proverbs 17:23)
My point is
that since the state’s power is evil and the state commits perpetual
crimes, its leaders have the strong incentive of every criminal
to conceal them. Therefore, secrecy and a lack of transparency are
hallmarks of the accumulation and use of power.
Cover stories
The lack of
transparency goes much further than the making of laws and use of
power. It also extends to the after-effects of the power. The power
invariably causes harm, and the powers-that-be benefit from controlling
and influencing the measurement or non-measurement of that harm.
Indeed, if they can claim or "show" that there is no harm
but a net benefit, their position is enhanced. They therefore attempt
to control governmental accounting and reporting so as to minimize
reported costs and maximize reported benefits.
In other words,
in the effort to accumulate and use power, there is an important
place for pseudo-transparency. The wielders of power understand
that their laws will become public and create resistance. They know
that opposition must be defused, and they know that secrecy and
obscurity have their limits. The next steps they take are to feign
openness and transparency and to use communications to obfuscate
the real purposes and effects of their acts of power. This suggests
another theorem:
Theorem 15:
Cover stories and false rationalizations facilitate the accumulation
and use of power.
While cover
stories and false rationalizations can be seen as a special case
of the drive for secrecy, they are important enough to warrant their
own theorem.
Since people
can foresee the effects of power, any attempt to gain or extend
power is aided by obfuscation. Propaganda and disinformation have
two faces. One face is clouding and confusing the issue as a form
of keeping its true ends secret. The CIA works through disinformation
campaigns and media control. One well-placed story or video can
sow a great deal of confusion and provide cover.
The other face
is spreading stories about the supposedly positive aspects of the
use of power. This method is exceedingly important. Hearings, if
they are held, are simply tools to develop and orchestrate sound
bites favorable to laws in the making. Tales of catastrophes, frauds,
illegalities, threats, and enemies of all sorts awaiting a remedy
by law play into the hands of law makers.
Dominant
ideology
No society
is uniform in the beliefs and values of its members, but there is
often a dominant ideology that is then reflected in the state that
the society creates and tolerates. If the state is powerful and
expansive, which necessarily means it is unjust, then its actions
are supported by the iniquitous values of those who dominate the
society and state.
We in our land
are confronted with these works of secrecy and falsehood. Many false
teachers find ready ears as they spread the message that the state’s
evil is good. Their works add to this world’s and our suffering.
They cast us downwards. "Woe unto them that call evil good,
and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter." (Isaiah 5:20)
We
are confronted in our land with those who love and support power,
knowing that it is evil. Jesus said "And this is the condemnation,
that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather
than light, because their deeds were evil." (John 3:19) To
paraphrase, all the deeds and works of this unjust state power are
evil; but many of us love this power. Even when the evil is made
known and no longer secret, many of us choose this evil and support
it with all our heart. The verdict for such a love is guilty, and
the sentence is heavy.
February
26, 2007
Michael
S. Rozeff [send him mail]
is a retired Professor of Finance living in East Amherst, New York.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
Michael
S. Rozeff Archives
|