Nation of Secrets: The Threat to Democracy and the American Way of Life

Secrecy is obviously on the increase in America. Ted Gup certainly tackles the hoarding of state secrets and the difficulties faced by citizens who try to pry information out of the government. But what really makes this book unique is that Gup extends his analysis to a larger culture of secrecy in America, in which the withholding of information has extended to all areas of our political economy, with flimsy justifications from gatekeepers and little resistance from the majority of citizens. Gup does tend to fall into political sermonizing at times, with a shortage of explanation for his larger rhetorical theme of the damage that secrecy does to democracy; while he can also be faulted for mangling the distinction between disclosure and privacy or personal security. Another gap in the analysis is the effect of excessive litigation, as the threat of lawsuits surely chills the willingness of many parties to disclose information. But overall, Gup offers devastating evidence that excessive secrecy is doing real damage to the American ideals of public participation and self-governance. Gup shows that such tendencies have become a dangerous habit throughout America. In separate chapters and case studies, Gup sheds light on the growing secrecy in not just Federal governmental matters and national security, but also in the press, the university system, the courts, and the corporate world. In particular, universities shield information about crime on campus, the legal system is awash in closed-door settlements, and corporate lawyers are increasingly harsh on courageous whistle-blowers. In all cases, information that could benefit larger groups of stakeholders, or society at large, is kept secret for the benefit of the disputing parties or just for the authorities. And Gup shows plenty of evidence that privacy and security, which are usually the justifications for the withholding of information, are being used increasingly as false excuses to hide official embarrassment or to avoid justice for aggrieved parties. All along, this "culture" of secrecy is spreading into all areas of American officialdom, with little resistance from the public at large and increasing hardship for citizens who desire access to important information. While this book's politics are a bit uneven, as a larger expose on secrecy as a cultural and societal affliction, Gup's analysis is fully enlightening and more than a little disturbing for the thinking American. [~doomsdayer520~]

Great information by a professional researcher with factual data on how the government has evolved the classifying of information which should be available to the people into a huge secret system. The Bush administration, according to the author, has taken the secrecy issue to a level never before experienced in our society. This is an interesting but maddening read!

As one of those who testified to the Moynihan Commission on Secrecy, and to earlier Presidential Commissions of excessive government classification, I consider this book to be a treasure. The reviewer that defends government secrecy to protect "sources and methods" knows nothing of them. I was a spy, I helped steal codebooks and program imagery satellites, and I stood up the Marine Corps Intelligence Command. The author has rendered the Republic an extraordinary service, and from somewhere in heaven Daniel Patrick Moynihan is smiling upon this superb public service. The author opens the book with an extraordinary snapshot of a single day, Thursday, February 2, 2006, and a stunning array of secret sessions and practices spanning the entire Nation and all of its domains (academic, business, government, law enforcement, religious). This is a book of case studies, and a book with a constant theme that we must all note: secrecy breeds contempt and distrust, and secrecy blocks the collective intelligence of the people from playing a role in self-governance. The author excels at discussion not just excessive national security secrecy, but how secrecy is now pervasive, from agricultural contamination and recalls being concealed from the public, to energy policy (Dick Cheney is the first in history to destroy all records of all his guests). The author reminds us that Thomas Jefferson stated that "Information is the currency of democracy," and in all that he writes, he shows how secrecy is pathologically altering the relationship between the government and the governed, as well as between all forms of organization and their clients, members, or adherents. From the security clearance backlog to CIA abuses against its own employees to enlisted men being forbidden to discuss severe deficiencies in their body armor to the concealment of government negligence resulting in wrongful death to the concealment of corporate product deficiencies that kill to the silencing of valid *internal* critics of policies of torture and rendition to the obsessive *reclassification* of information long declassified, the author has written the definitive treatise on how the US Government and all elements of the US (academia, commerce) etc. have forsaken the principles and values of our Founding Fathers. The author states that secrecy produces errors in judgment and frees government from the fear of being contradicted by the facts. I admire this book, and this author, very much. This is a book that every citizen voter and citizen consumer should read. We must eradicate 90% of the secrecy in America, and we must redirect 75% of both the military and the intelligence budgets toward waging peace and open source intelligence, including free online and on demand education in 183 languages. I can best support this author and this book by offering several quotes that he missed and that completely support his presentation: Amilcar Cabral, African freedom fighter (1924-197

The fact that I'm reviewing Ted Gup's book about secrecy is somewhat unusual for me. You see, I don't normally take the time to read one that at varying times make me want to fling it against the wall with a curse about how wrong the author is on a particular point. But the reason why I am reading Gup's book is because along with the things that I feel are dead wrong, he makes a lot of valid points about what I would call "pernicious" or "unwarranted" secrecy, such as: when in cases of injuries resulting from product defects the two parties involved reach a secret settlement (it would seem to me that sometimes, there would be a compelling public interest in knowing what was wrong with a particular product or service) to cover criminal or unethical behavior or something that is embarrassing (like a university not reporting sexual assaults on campus) in response to extreme definitions of privacy rights (such as a University forcing a student who was raped by another student to sign a nondisclosure agreement before they will tell her what disciplinary measures were taken against her attacker) But I feel that Gup's writing also shows an almost fanatical opposition to all kinds of secrecy. I don't think that he seems to realize that to varying degrees, secrecy is an essential part of living in the world. If you don't believe me, ask yourself these questions. Would you welcome living in a house that was made of glass where anyone could look inside and see what you and your family were doing there? Would you be happy about your medical records, job evaluations, and financial data being available to anyone with a computer and an Internet connection? No, of course not. Gup probably calls all of this "privacy" as opposed to "secrecy" but "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck." Where I REALLY part ways with Mr. Gup is secrecy in relation to national security. I will concede that Gup is exactly right when he laments that people in government too often tag documents as being "secret" when they could be unclassified. But Gup completely misses the boat about secrecy that is imposed to protect "sources and methods." Simply put, there are a lot of ways that intelligence is obtained that if they become public knowledge, they are not going to around any longer. I'm going to quote here from an essay by a former senior member of the Intelligence Community about press leaks (in article that you can find on the Internet): "While leaks of classified information are often intended to influence or inform US audiences, foreign intelligence services and terrorists are close and voracious readers of the US press. They are keenly alert to revelations of US classified information. For example, a former Russian military intelligence (GRU) officer wrote: 'I was amazed--and Moscow was very appreciative--at how many times I found very sensitive information in American newspapers. In my view, Americans tend to care more about scooping