Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Unverified Commit 85208da6 authored by rhatto's avatar rhatto
Browse files

Updates books/sociology/secrecy

parent 544f2b0a
No related branches found
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
books/sociology/secrecy.md
+ 278
− 3
View file @ 85208da6
[[!meta title="The Sociology of Secrecy"]]
[[!meta title="The Sociology of Secrecy and of Secret Societies"]]
By Georg Simmel.
## Excerpts
......@@ -32,7 +34,6 @@
knowledge developing with reference to the other party. The
investigation should finally proceed in the opposite direction;
[...]
given by the total relationship of the knower to the known.
......@@ -478,7 +479,6 @@
more decisive possibility of remaining secret.
While secrecy, therefore, is a sociological ordination which
[...]
As a general proposition, the secret society
......@@ -487,3 +487,278 @@
the violent pressure of central powers. This is true, not alone in
political relations, but in the same way within the church, the
school, and the family.
[...]
Thus the secret society
cotinterbalances the separatistic factor which is peculiar to, every
secret by the very fact that it is society.
[...]
lating will; for growth from within, constructive purposefulness.
This rationalistic factor in their upbuilding cannot express itself
more distinctly than in their carefully considered and clear-cut
architecture. I cite as example the structure of the Czechic secret
order, Omlaidina, which was organized on the model of a group
of the Carbonari, and became known in consequence of a judicial
process in I893. The leaders of the Omladina are divided into
"thumbs" and "fingers." In secret session a "thumb" is chosen
by the members. He selects four "fingers." The latter then
choose another " thumb," and this second " thumb " presents himn-
self to the first "thumb." The second "thumb" proceeds to
choose four more "fingers"; these, another "thumb;" and so
the articulation continues. The first " thumb " knows all the
other " thumbs," but the remaining " thumbs " do not know each
other. Of the "fingers" only those four know each other who
are subordinate to one and the same "thumb." All transactions
[...]
of the Omladina are conducted by the first "thumb," the " dicta-
tor." He informs the other "thumbs" of all proposed under-
takings. The "thumbs" then issue orders to their respective
subordinates, the "fingers." The latter in turn instruct the mem-
bers of the Omnladina assigned to each. The circumstance that
the secret society must be built up, from its base by calculation and
conscious volition evidently affords free play for the peculiar
passion which is the natural accompaniment of such arbitrary
processes of construction, such foreordaining programs. All
schematology - of science, of conduct, of society - contains a
reserved power of compulsion. It subjects a material which is
outside of thought to a form which thought has cast. If this is
true of all attempts to organize groups according to a priori prin-
ciples, it is true in the highest degree of the secret society, which
does not grow, which is built by design, which has to reckon with
a smaller quantum of ready-made building material than any
despotic or socialistic scheme. Joined to the interest in making
[...]
The secret society must seek to create among the cate-
gories peculiar to itself, a species of life-totality. Around the
nucleus of purposes which the society strongly emphasizes, it
therefore builds a structure of formulas, like a body around a
soul, and places both alike under the protection of secrecy, because
only so can a harmonious whole come into, being, in which one
part supports the other. That in this scheme secrecy of the
external is strongly accentuated, is necessary, because secrecy is
not so much a matter of course with reference to these super-
ficialities, and not so directly demanded as in the case of the real
interests of the society. This is not greatly different from the
situation in military organizations and religious communities.
The reason why, in both, schematism, the body of forms, the fixa-
tion of behavior, occupies so large space, is that, 'as a general pro-
position, both the military and the religious career demand the
wvhole man; that is, each of them projects the whole life upon a
special plane; each composes a variety of energies and interests,
from a particular point of view, into a correlated unity. The
secret society usually tries to do the same.
[...]
The secret society must seek to create among the cate-
gories peculiar to itself, a species of life-totality. Around the
nucleus of purposes which the society strongly emphasizes, it
therefore builds a structure of formulas, like a body around a
soul, and places both alike under the protection of secrecy, because
only so can a harmonious whole come into, being, in which one
part supports the other. That in this scheme secrecy of the
external is strongly accentuated, is necessary, because secrecy is
not so much a matter of course with reference to these super-
ficialities, and not so directly demanded as in the case of the real
interests of the society. This is not greatly different from the
situation in military organizations and religious communities.
The reason why, in both, schematism, the body of forms, the fixa-
tion of behavior, occupies so large space, is that, 'as a general pro-
position, both the military and the religious career demand the
wvhole man; that is, each of them projects the whole life upon a
special plane; each composes a variety of energies and interests,
from a particular point of view, into a correlated unity. The
secret society usually tries to do the same. One of its essential
characteristics is that, even when it takes hold of individuals only
[...]
Counterpart of the official world, detachment from larger structures in
which it's contained (the next level of recursion):
Moreover, through such formalism,
just as through the hierarchical structure above discussed, the
secret society constitutes itself a sort of counterpart of the official
world with which it places itself in antithesis. Here we have a
case of the universally emerging sociological norm; viz., struc-
tures, which place themselves in opposition to and detachment
from larger structures in which they are actually contained,
nevertheless repeat in themselves the forms of the greater struc-
tures. Only a structure that in some way can count as a whole
is in a situation to hold its elements firmly together. It borrows
the sort of organic completeness, by virtue of which its members
are actually the channels of a unifying life-stream, from that
greater whole to which its individual members were already
adapted, and to which it can most easily offer a parallel by means
of this very imitation.
-- 482
Freedom and law from the inside:
In exercise of this freedom a territory is occupied to which the norms of the
surrounding society do not apply. The nature of the secret
society as such is autonomy. It is, however, of a sort which
approaches anarchy. Withdrawal from the bonds of unity which
procure general coh,erence very easily has as consequences for the
secret society a condition of being without roots, an absence of
firm touch with life (Lebensgefiihl), and of restraining reserva-
tions. The fixedness and detail of the ritual serve in part to
counterbalance this deficit. Here also is manifest how much men
need a settled proportion between freedom and law; and, further-
more, in case the relative quantities of the two are not prescribed
for him from a single source, how he attempts to reinforce the
given quantum of the one by a quantum of the other derived from
any source whatsoever, until such settled proportion is reached.
-- 482
Existem a partir de sociedes públicas e de forma exclusiva::
The secret society, on the other hand, is a secondary structure;
i. e., it arises always only within an already complete society.
[...]
That they can build them selves up with such characteristics is possible, however, only
under the presupposition of an already existing society. The
secret society sets itself as a special society in antithesis with the
wider association included within the greater society. This anti-
thesis, whatever its purpose, is at all events intended in the spirit
of exclusion. Even the secret society which proposes only to
render the whole community a definite service in a completely
unselfish spirit, and to dissolve itself after performing the service,
obviously regards its temporary detachment from that totality as
the unavoidable technique for its purpose. Accordingly, none of
the narrower groups which are circumscribed by larger groiups
are compelled by their sociological constellation to insist so
strongly as the secret society upon their formal self-sufficiency.
Their secret encircles them like a boundary, beyond which there is
nothing but the materially, o,r at least formally, antithetic, which
therefore shuts up the society within itself as a complete unity.
In the groupings of every other sort, the content of the group-
Aristocracy:
This significance of secret associations, as intensification of
sociological exclusiveness in general, appears in a very striking
way in political aristocracies. Among the requisites of aristo-
cratic control secrecy has always had a place. It makes use of
the psychological fact that the unknown as such appears terrible,
powerful, and threatening. In the first place, it employs this fact
in seeking to conceal the numerical insignificance of the govern-
ing class. In Sparta the number of warriors was kept so, far as
[...]
On the other hand, the democratic principle is
bound up with the principle of publicity, and, to the same end, the
tendency toward general and fundamental laws. The latter relate
to an unlimited number of subjects, and are thus in their nature
public. Conversely, the employment of secrecy within the aristo-
cratic regime is only the extreme exaggeration of that social
exclusion and exemption for the sake of which aristocracies are
wont to oppose general, fundamentally sanctioned laws.
In case the notion of the aristocratic passes over from the
Freedom, obedience and centralization:
To this result not merely the correlation of demand
from freedom and for union contributes, as we have observed it
in case of the severity of the ritual, and in the present instance it
binds together the extremes of the two tendencies. The excess of
freedom, which such societies possessed with reference to all
otherwise valid norms, had to be offset, for the sake of the
equilibrium of interests, by a similar excess olf submissiveness
and resigning of the individual will. More essential, however.
was probably the necessity of centralization, which is the con-
dition of existence for the secret society, and especially when,
like the criminal band, it lives off the surrounding society,
when it mingles with this society in many radiations and
actions, and when it is seriously threatened with treachery
and diversion of interests the moment the most invariable
attachment to one center ceases to prevail. It is conseqeuntly
typical that the secret society is exposed to peculiar dangers,
especially when, for any reasons whatever, it does not develop
a powerfully unifying authority. The Waldenses were in
nature not a secret society. They became a secret society in
the thirteenth century only, in consequence of the external pres-
sure, which made it necessary to keep themselves from view. It
became impossible, for that reason, to hold regular assemblages,
and this in turn caused loss of unity in doctrine. There arose a
number of branches, with isolated life and development, fre-
quently in a hostile attitude toward each other. They went into
decline because they lacked the necessary and reinforcing attri-
bute of the secret society, viz., constantly efficient centralization.
Responsibility:
Nevertheless, responsibility
is quite as immediately joined with the ego - philosophically, too,
the whole responsibility problem is merely a detail of the problem
of the ego - in the fact that removing the marks of identity of
the person has, for the naive understanding in question, the effect
of abolishing responsibility. Political finesse makes no less use of
this correlation. In the American House of Representatives the
real conclusions are reached in the standing,committees, and they
are almost always ratified by the House. The transactions of
these committies, however, are secret, and the most important
portion of legislative activity is thus concealed from public view.
This being the case, the political responsibility of the repre-
sentatives seems to be largely wiped out, since no one can be
made responsible for proceedings that cannot be observed. Since
the shares of the individual persons in the transactions remain
hidden, the acts of committees and of the House seem to be those
of a super-individual authority. The irresponsibility is here also
the consequence or the symbol of the same intensified sociological
de-individualization which goes with the secrecy of group-action.
In all directorates, faculties, committees, boards of trustees, etc.,
whose transactions are secret, the same thing holds. The indi-
vidual disappears as a person in the anonymous member of the
ring, so to speak, and with him the responsibility, which has no
hold upon him. in his intangible special character.
Finally, this one-sided intensification of universal sociological
-- 496-497
[...]
Danger for the rest of society and the existing oficial and central power:
Wherever there is an attempt to realize
strong centralization, especially of a political type, special organi-
zations of the elements are abhorred, purely as such, entirely apart
from their content and purposes. As mere unities, so to speak,
they engage in competition with the central principle.
[...]
Accordingly, the secret society seems to be dangerous simply
because it is secret. Since it cannot be surely known that any
special organization whatever may not some day turn its legally
accumulated powers to some undesired end, and since on that
account there is suspicion in principle on the part of central
powers toward organizations of subjects, it follows that, in the
case of organizations which are secret in principle, the suspicion
that their secrecy conceals dangers is all the more natural.
[...]
Thus the secret society, purely on the ground of its secrecy, appears
dangerously related to conspiracy against existing powers.
[...]
The secret association is in such bad repute as enemy of central powers that,
conversely, every politically disapproved association must be
accused of such hostility!
-- 497-498
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment