[PEN-L:4069] Re: secret societies and the origins of capitalist sociability

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> Tom Kruse <tkruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 03/02/99 09:05PM >>>
P.S. Yoshie notes:

Charles Brown wrote:
>>But if we know all about them, how are they secret ?

>It's called an open secret. If nobody knew about them, there would be no
>point in joining them.

Taussig did a great piece on the role of open secrets in society -- that
is, the effects of all acting as if we don't know something we do, knowing
that others know and know we know.  Like congressmen fucking around, say.
I'll try to find the citation.
________

Chas:
 I guess the Presidential bubble has been burst on that acting like we don't know when we do. That is the rightwing's problem with the Clinton-Lewinsky affair now its just open, not an open secret. The bourgeoisie have always been dependent upon secrecy , PRIVACY. The revelation of secrets threatens "privacy" and thus private property. I realize that's structuralism.

Then there's Oliver North's "plausible deniability".

Tom, is that Taussig , Mick ? I just realized it probably is as you are in Bolivia - _The Devil and Commodity Fetishism_

Your whole feedback on the secret societies and the rise and of the bourgeoisie was edifying, esp. the reference of book by Jacobs.


Charles Brown





Tom Kruse
Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia
Tel/Fax: (591-4) 248242, 500849
Email: tkruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx