Secrecy, democracy, and lies

“All governments lie,” said I. F. Stone, who may have lied to the public, including his readers, more than a little, himself, about his own relationship with the KGB.

All the same, the matter is a conundrum, surely.

Any sensible person would agree that even democratic governments have to be able to protect secrets and this may well require telling lies.

And sometimes those lies will have to be told in public, to that government's own people as well as anyone else listening in.

Any US president who says to the American public “I will never lie to you” is a fool or a liar, and in the latter case thinks we are fools.

So much for Jimmy Carter, whom I loathed for that remark no less than for his abandonment of the Iranian hostages after an understaffed rescue effort that failed on that account, in contrast to Obama’s effort to kill Osama bin Laden.

But secrecy takes government action out of the scope of public oversight and in some cases also out of the scope of congressional oversight.

And then lying compounds the problem, since in such a case instead of having no idea what’s going on the public or the congress has a false idea what’s going on.

All the same, we understand the need.

So few of us really object to government efforts at secrecy, per se.

And most of us understand that lies are part of the package.

Just another small frustration to add to others that are so many and in some cases so much larger.

Update, 11172012, 0721 EST.

Anyway, there's something really disgusting about partisan propaganda outlets of any stripe getting all Quaker and virtuous, whining about government lying to the American people.