8 ms·

The Last Secrets of Skull and Bones (1977)

76 points by wglb 8y ago

samstave 8y ago
I find it interesting that people have been talking about secret societies and occult for many many decades, yet its still a taboo area for people to speak about in the main stream... I knew a guy who went to Yale and was tapped by the 322... But there is so much more to all of the secret societies, occult and other aspects of conspiracy which I find fascinating. This is a talk given in 1958 regarding the Illuminati: - Pawns in the Game - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1uem-RXmJU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1uem-RXmJU
- toofy 8y ago
  > ...yet it’s still a taboo area for people to speak about in the main stream... This would be a result of how many people immediately jump to absurd conclusions that something evil absolutely must somehow be at play. It’s bizarre how many otherwise rational and logical humans turn into full blown conspiracy theorists the moment they read “secret society” it’s like their own personal rationality offswitch. Until we can calm down the mass hysteria surrounding this topic, it will almost certainly remain taboo, and honestly, considering how weird the topics always turn, I’d rather it stay taboo than watch a panicky hysterical mass attack innocent people who just want a bit of privacy. History is full of paranoid mass hysteria instances where the masses go absolutely bonkers and innocent people suffer—for somewhat recent examples, look at the satanic panics or Wenatchee WA where, in their hysteria, they issued 29,726 charges of child abuse... yes, that number is correct, 29,726 charges. A number of people’s lives were ruined as they were publicly dragged through the ordeal, yet not a single charge stuck. Not one. Mass hysteria is a very real phenomena and these topics of secret societies and the occult are probably better left as taboo, just reference any forum about the subject to see clear examples as to how much of our population are incredibly ill-equipped to discuss them rationally.
  - ikeboy 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecutions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecut... says people were convicted, contrary to your claim
    - toofy 8y ago
      From your link: “Those who were convicted were freed by higher courts and had their convictions overturned or pleaded guilty on lesser charges. Five served their full sentences before their cases were overturned. Some lost parental rights. By 2000, the last person in custody, Michael Rose, was released, after a judge vacated his March 1995 convictions.”
      - ikeboy 8y ago
        And? That doesn't say all charges were overturned - it says some pled guilty
        toofy 8y ago
        Unfortunately the source link on that wiki is dead, but a different source: ”Many witnesses and defendants later said they were pressured into making false confessions and accusations by caseworkers from the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) and by Wenatchee Police Department Lieutenant Bob Perez. All who confessed later recanted. Some defendants said that when threatened with life imprisonment, they pled guilty to lesser charges. Some said they were told that if they confessed they wouldn't go to jail but would be treated in the community. Many were told they would never see their children again unless they signed a confession. Those questioned also said they were told that their children wouldn't be placed in foster care or put up for adoption if they signed confessions.” [0] Considering the entire contextual insanity of this case, the obvious and absolute hysteria which surrounded the entire case, the biased and careless ways the cases were handled, the decision making processes which happen when someone must choose between life in prison or lesser charges, the literal thousands of charges which were dropped/overturned, and perhaps most disturbing of all—the way that dissenters were suddenly brought up on charges, I have no problem sticking by my original statement: This was mass hysteria. [0] http://www.historylink.org/File/7065 http://www.historylink.org/File/7065
  - V-2 8y ago
    Generally speaking, if a society isn't "evil" - and the situation doesn't really fit into any of the 'whistleblower' or 'opposition against an oppressive regime' scenarios - then why does it have to operate in secret? It's typical of mafia-like, criminal organizations. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due
    - toofy 8y ago
      From my perspective, this sounds far too much like “Why do you need privacy or cryptography if you have nothing to hide?” Everyone here should be well aware by now that wanting privacy != nefarious behavior.
      - V-2 8y ago
        There's a difference between an individual and an organization that intends to have an impact on the society. The society can't, or shouldn't demand that I give up privacy of my inherently private matters. But it is very reasonable for the society to expect a basic degree of transparency from an NGO or a political party - insofar as the actions in question are meant to have public impact. It's a two-way street, to me. Note that I'm not even entering the subject of legal obligations here. Whether or how to enforce this approach is a separate discussion (quite a few democratic constitutions do forbid political organizations of clandestine structures and membership). I'm only referring to common sense, and what feels justified. Is it a private matter if someone held on trial is the judge's boss in a secret organization they both belong to?
        wl 8y ago
        These kinds of organizations generally don't exist to have a public impact. They exist to transform individuals. > Is it a private matter if someone held on trial is the judge's boss in a secret organization they both belong to? A judge has an obligation to recuse where there's a conflict of interest, regardless of the nature of that conflict. This is not a good argument against private societies, unless you want to start banning any situation that could at some point lead to a conflict of interest.
  - briantakita 8y ago
    re: the satanic panic, the tunnels (under the school) reported by the children were verified years later. At the time, the inability to find the tunnels was key in discrediting the childrens' testimony. re: Wenatchee WA. The justice system not providing enough proof for a guilty verdict does not mean the events did not happen. It only means there was not proof beyond a reasonable doubt according to the courts. However, it does seem like law enforcement did not act ethically & it's more likely they created false testimony from their witness badgering (of children) & dubious theories. In this case, members of law enforcement conspired to create a false case. Sometimes people act on incomplete information and are correct. When organizations act in secret, a rational person ought not to trust these organizations. In the realm of politics, where warfare is fought in many domains, it is beneficial to be critical of such organizations. Otherwise, instead of being a "conspiracy theorist", one becomes a "coincidence theorist", when creating models of how & why related events occur.
    - wl 8y ago
      > re: the satanic panic, the tunnels (under the school) reported by the children were verified years later. Some true believer found an anomaly with ground penetrating radar and called it a tunnel. It's more likely a buried garbage pile. https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/bsi/article/viewFile/77/96 https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/bsi/article/viewFile/...
      - briantakita 8y ago
        It's inconclusive at this point. If there were tunnels, they could have been filled in with "trash" by the time the ground penetrating radar reading was done. One possible avenue is to look up land permits & to create a case as to why the trash was filled in (if that's the case). However, this study is somebody's opinion of the readings, so it may not even be a trash pit. Further physical examination would probably be necessary to confirm one way or another, but at this point, it's a cold case. However, the childrens' testimonies of some sort of underground anomaly is a strange "coincidence". How would they know that there was something out of the ordinary underground, whether it's tunnels or buried trash? At this point, there are mysteries in this case & a number of possible truths. However, there are known cases of Satanism & ritual abuse. There's even more cases of testimony from different sources. I don't see this as a panic at all, but an acknowledgement of a possibility.
  - comicjk 8y ago
    You're wondering why groups with names like "Skull and Bones" have an occult reputation? They cultivate it deliberately because it's cool. Yes, the public takes this cosplay too seriously, but they don't deserve all the blame.
- ataturk 8y ago
  I would like to know more about the one at UNC in Chapel Hill. The castle is pretty freaky.
morpheuskafka 8y ago
Yale needs to take a clear stand against this "secret society" nonsense. It patently has no place at a global research university. To be sure, a significant amount of all the talk about it is likely grossly exaggerated and unfounded. But the core fact of a respected institute of education having any relationship with organizations rooted in sociopolitical elitism (with an attendant history of discrimination) that serve no benefit to the institution or the public remains. In practice, the system may or may not be harmless. But to keep it alive serves zero useful purposes and degrades the reputation of the institution.
- kornish 8y ago
  > that serve no benefit to the institution What makes you think such an affiliation serves no benefit to the institution? Exclusivity can be enticing unto itself. People want to have a shot of being elite.
  - alexnewman 8y ago
    The real question is what is Yale doing for the 322!
- netcan 8y ago
  I'm not trying to be dismissive and don't know much about these colleges but... Couldn't the description "organizations rooted in sociopolitical elitism (with an attendant history of discrimination)" be applied to elite universities or the "ivy league" generally? Exclusivity, a taste of the old upper class traditions, a bit of mystique..
- bredren 8y ago
  Aren’t they similar to dining clubs at Princeton?
- coldtea 8y ago
  >But the core fact of a respected institute of education having any relationship with organizations rooted in sociopolitical elitism (with an attendant history of discrimination) that serve no benefit to the institution or the public remains Isn't the very notion of an Ivy league university "rooted in sociopolitical elitism"? And doesn't it serve major "benefit to the institution"? That's its target group, and they want prospective students to know they can enter that elite themselves. And if there's a secret society you can aspire to get in of students and alumni promoting each other and handing out favors, even better. They should write it in their ads!
fipple 8y ago
An interesting factoid illustrating power begetting power is that in 2004, the two major candidates for US President were both members of Skull and Bones, which admits 15 college juniors per year.
- RickJWagner 8y ago
  I bet that made for some interesting discussions at S&B gatherings. Which to support?
  - Graham24 8y ago
    Yeah, it sure did. Whoops, sorry, forget I said that...
arminiusreturns 8y ago
Yet to speak of anything even remotely similar gets you labeled a crackpot conspiracy theorist, even on HN.
- toofy 8y ago
  > Yet to speak of anything even remotely similar gets you labeled a crackpot conspiracy theorist This is likely due to how it is being discussed. Too often, when secret societies are brought up, many people have convinced themselves that secrecy must mean something nefarious is at play, and many of these people are absolutely unwavering in this belief. Considering that the HN community is privacy centric and generally rejects the notion of “You don’t need privacy if you’ve got nothing to hide.” it doesn’t surprise me that many people discussing secret societies are downvoted because many of the people discussing this turn into blithering crackpots the minute secret is brought up. If a society wishes to have privacy, this privacy does not make it axiomatically evil. Some people, yes, even groups of good people, just like to be left alone.
  - V-2 8y ago
    > Too often, when secret societies are brought up, many people have convinced themselves that secrecy must mean something nefarious is at play "Must" is an exaggeration, but it is certainly a red flag. > Considering that the HN community is privacy centric and generally rejects the notion of “You don’t need privacy if you’ve got nothing to hide.” A society by definition isn't private in the sense used here. Noone complains about book clubs not listing all their members on the front door. A society, however, is an organization with the purpose of playing some role in the public life. You can't have it both ways.
    - toofy 8y ago
      I understand where you’re coming from, but I’m not sure I agree that we can’t have it both ways. A book club can play just as much of a role in public life as the next club. We absolutely should be able to have it both ways, to choose whether or not we wish to list our book club members on the front door. This should be our choice. Maybe one week we wish to list attendees and another week choose not to list, why can’t we have it both ways? Why is it some random stranger’s business who attends my gatherings or what happens at my gatherings? Whether it’s a book club or a group of classmates drinking in my living room, why would random people feel like they’re entitled to invade my private space and dictate what I can and cannot do? I understand the very real concerns with power concentrating in the hands of a few, but I’m not sure attacking our ability to have private gatherings is the appropriate way to address power concentration. This type of attack is also very concerning when we consider how much off-base speculation, wild paranoia and hysteria tends to come along once people start speculating what’s happening behind my book club’s closed doors.
motohagiography 8y ago
Panics about secret societies and fraternal organizations are a useful leading indicator of an authoritarian political tide. When you look at who worries about them, and governments that make pronouncements about them, looking back on who the good guys were, it usually wasn't the ones threatened by what happens when good men find a way to connect with one another.
blancheneige 8y ago
I think the HN crowd would be baffled by the shit we had to do for pledging. Not at S&B mind you, another ivy equivalent.
- ams6110 8y ago
  Well, do tell. And why do these society rituals seem so infused with homoeroticism and other sexual elements?
  - blancheneige 8y ago
    supposed to be a bonding experience where you get to show your true commitment. the whole paraphernalia is usually lost on everyone
- starbeast 8y ago
  I never underestimate humanity's ability to come up with shit that is as weird as it is ridiculous, especially when it comes to tribal initiations. We get bungee jumping from the tribal initiation of the Bunlap people of Vanatu, so unless your pledge involves something as dangerous as attaching a liana to your ankles and jumping off a tree with the intention being to actually hit the ground with your face, while naked except for a belt and a strategically placed leaf, then frankly you aren't even trying.
arxpoetica 8y ago
Fun fact: secret societies — and the resultant woes of society — is a central theme in the Book of Mormon. > ...And it came to pass that they formed a secret combination, even as they of old; which combination is most abominable and wicked above all, in the sight of God... > ...And it came to pass that there arose a rebellion among the people, because of that secret combination which was built up to get power and gain... > ...And the regulations of the government were destroyed, because of the secret combination of the friends and kindreds of those who murdered the prophets...
- drewmate 8y ago
  And in the ultimate ironic twist, years after the Book of Mormon was published, Mormons adopted a version of the very Masonic rituals likely referenced in their own book. [0] [0] http://packham.n4m.org/temples.htm#ENDOWMENT http://packham.n4m.org/temples.htm#ENDOWMENT
- dev_dull 8y ago
  Wasn’t it written in the 1800s? That seems like the heyday of secret societies in the USA.
  - JasonFruit 8y ago
    Opposition to secret societies was common in rural American religion at that time. It's survived among Primitive Baptists, some conservative Methodists, and others. There's a general feeling that Christian brotherhood is inhibited by that sort of secret-keeping.
starbeast 8y ago
>“Who was the fool, who the wise man, beggar or king? Whether poor or rich, all’s the same in death.” As much as being fans of the Illuminati (and who isn't?) they might also be fans of Diogenes of Sinope. >"I am searching for the bones of your father, but could not distinguish them from those of a slave." Diogenes of Sinope trolling Alexander the Great (again) ~300BC One thing about these secret societies is that they give the political hegemony some resistance to the Rasputin problem. People who are addicted to power have a peculiar weakness to woo merchants promising further power over supernatural realms, which if the power addict even slightly entertains as a possibility of existing, they will feel compelled to follow, even on the off chance of more power. If they already feel they have the inside track on the occult, they are far more likely to rely on the resident court woo merchants, rather than following the latest wild eyed cosmic debris that just wandered in. As an aside, a friend of mine has the theory that Trump is conclusive proof of the non-existence, or at least lack of real power, of the Illuminati or equivalent. On the basis that there is no sane over-arching conspiracy of total control where you would choose to end up with Donald Trump. He only makes sense from a world of many groups that have varying power and competency, where one of them is currently trying to fuck the other up.

76 points by wglb 8y ago

I find it interesting that people have been talking about secret societies and occult for many many decades, yet its still a taboo area for people to speak about in the main stream... I knew a guy who went to Yale and was tapped by the 322... But there is so much more to all of the secret societies, occult and other aspects of conspiracy which I find fascinating. This is a talk given in 1958 regarding the Illuminati: - Pawns in the Game - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1uem-RXmJU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1uem-RXmJU

toofy 8y ago
> ...yet it’s still a taboo area for people to speak about in the main stream... This would be a result of how many people immediately jump to absurd conclusions that something evil absolutely must somehow be at play. It’s bizarre how many otherwise rational and logical humans turn into full blown conspiracy theorists the moment they read “secret society” it’s like their own personal rationality offswitch. Until we can calm down the mass hysteria surrounding this topic, it will almost certainly remain taboo, and honestly, considering how weird the topics always turn, I’d rather it stay taboo than watch a panicky hysterical mass attack innocent people who just want a bit of privacy. History is full of paranoid mass hysteria instances where the masses go absolutely bonkers and innocent people suffer—for somewhat recent examples, look at the satanic panics or Wenatchee WA where, in their hysteria, they issued 29,726 charges of child abuse... yes, that number is correct, 29,726 charges. A number of people’s lives were ruined as they were publicly dragged through the ordeal, yet not a single charge stuck. Not one. Mass hysteria is a very real phenomena and these topics of secret societies and the occult are probably better left as taboo, just reference any forum about the subject to see clear examples as to how much of our population are incredibly ill-equipped to discuss them rationally.
- ikeboy 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecutions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecut... says people were convicted, contrary to your claim
  - toofy 8y ago
    From your link: “Those who were convicted were freed by higher courts and had their convictions overturned or pleaded guilty on lesser charges. Five served their full sentences before their cases were overturned. Some lost parental rights. By 2000, the last person in custody, Michael Rose, was released, after a judge vacated his March 1995 convictions.”
    - ikeboy 8y ago
      And? That doesn't say all charges were overturned - it says some pled guilty
      - toofy 8y ago
        Unfortunately the source link on that wiki is dead, but a different source: ”Many witnesses and defendants later said they were pressured into making false confessions and accusations by caseworkers from the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) and by Wenatchee Police Department Lieutenant Bob Perez. All who confessed later recanted. Some defendants said that when threatened with life imprisonment, they pled guilty to lesser charges. Some said they were told that if they confessed they wouldn't go to jail but would be treated in the community. Many were told they would never see their children again unless they signed a confession. Those questioned also said they were told that their children wouldn't be placed in foster care or put up for adoption if they signed confessions.” [0] Considering the entire contextual insanity of this case, the obvious and absolute hysteria which surrounded the entire case, the biased and careless ways the cases were handled, the decision making processes which happen when someone must choose between life in prison or lesser charges, the literal thousands of charges which were dropped/overturned, and perhaps most disturbing of all—the way that dissenters were suddenly brought up on charges, I have no problem sticking by my original statement: This was mass hysteria. [0] http://www.historylink.org/File/7065 http://www.historylink.org/File/7065
- V-2 8y ago
  Generally speaking, if a society isn't "evil" - and the situation doesn't really fit into any of the 'whistleblower' or 'opposition against an oppressive regime' scenarios - then why does it have to operate in secret? It's typical of mafia-like, criminal organizations. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due
  - toofy 8y ago
    From my perspective, this sounds far too much like “Why do you need privacy or cryptography if you have nothing to hide?” Everyone here should be well aware by now that wanting privacy != nefarious behavior.
    - V-2 8y ago
      There's a difference between an individual and an organization that intends to have an impact on the society. The society can't, or shouldn't demand that I give up privacy of my inherently private matters. But it is very reasonable for the society to expect a basic degree of transparency from an NGO or a political party - insofar as the actions in question are meant to have public impact. It's a two-way street, to me. Note that I'm not even entering the subject of legal obligations here. Whether or how to enforce this approach is a separate discussion (quite a few democratic constitutions do forbid political organizations of clandestine structures and membership). I'm only referring to common sense, and what feels justified. Is it a private matter if someone held on trial is the judge's boss in a secret organization they both belong to?
      - wl 8y ago
        These kinds of organizations generally don't exist to have a public impact. They exist to transform individuals. > Is it a private matter if someone held on trial is the judge's boss in a secret organization they both belong to? A judge has an obligation to recuse where there's a conflict of interest, regardless of the nature of that conflict. This is not a good argument against private societies, unless you want to start banning any situation that could at some point lead to a conflict of interest.
- briantakita 8y ago
  re: the satanic panic, the tunnels (under the school) reported by the children were verified years later. At the time, the inability to find the tunnels was key in discrediting the childrens' testimony. re: Wenatchee WA. The justice system not providing enough proof for a guilty verdict does not mean the events did not happen. It only means there was not proof beyond a reasonable doubt according to the courts. However, it does seem like law enforcement did not act ethically & it's more likely they created false testimony from their witness badgering (of children) & dubious theories. In this case, members of law enforcement conspired to create a false case. Sometimes people act on incomplete information and are correct. When organizations act in secret, a rational person ought not to trust these organizations. In the realm of politics, where warfare is fought in many domains, it is beneficial to be critical of such organizations. Otherwise, instead of being a "conspiracy theorist", one becomes a "coincidence theorist", when creating models of how & why related events occur.
  - wl 8y ago
    > re: the satanic panic, the tunnels (under the school) reported by the children were verified years later. Some true believer found an anomaly with ground penetrating radar and called it a tunnel. It's more likely a buried garbage pile. https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/bsi/article/viewFile/77/96 https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/bsi/article/viewFile/...
    - briantakita 8y ago
      It's inconclusive at this point. If there were tunnels, they could have been filled in with "trash" by the time the ground penetrating radar reading was done. One possible avenue is to look up land permits & to create a case as to why the trash was filled in (if that's the case). However, this study is somebody's opinion of the readings, so it may not even be a trash pit. Further physical examination would probably be necessary to confirm one way or another, but at this point, it's a cold case. However, the childrens' testimonies of some sort of underground anomaly is a strange "coincidence". How would they know that there was something out of the ordinary underground, whether it's tunnels or buried trash? At this point, there are mysteries in this case & a number of possible truths. However, there are known cases of Satanism & ritual abuse. There's even more cases of testimony from different sources. I don't see this as a panic at all, but an acknowledgement of a possibility.
- comicjk 8y ago
  You're wondering why groups with names like "Skull and Bones" have an occult reputation? They cultivate it deliberately because it's cool. Yes, the public takes this cosplay too seriously, but they don't deserve all the blame.
ataturk 8y ago
I would like to know more about the one at UNC in Chapel Hill. The castle is pretty freaky.

morpheuskafka 8y ago

Yale needs to take a clear stand against this "secret society" nonsense. It patently has no place at a global research university. To be sure, a significant amount of all the talk about it is likely grossly exaggerated and unfounded. But the core fact of a respected institute of education having any relationship with organizations rooted in sociopolitical elitism (with an attendant history of discrimination) that serve no benefit to the institution or the public remains. In practice, the system may or may not be harmless. But to keep it alive serves zero useful purposes and degrades the reputation of the institution.

kornish 8y ago
> that serve no benefit to the institution What makes you think such an affiliation serves no benefit to the institution? Exclusivity can be enticing unto itself. People want to have a shot of being elite.
- alexnewman 8y ago
  The real question is what is Yale doing for the 322!
netcan 8y ago
I'm not trying to be dismissive and don't know much about these colleges but... Couldn't the description "organizations rooted in sociopolitical elitism (with an attendant history of discrimination)" be applied to elite universities or the "ivy league" generally? Exclusivity, a taste of the old upper class traditions, a bit of mystique..
bredren 8y ago
Aren’t they similar to dining clubs at Princeton?
coldtea 8y ago
>But the core fact of a respected institute of education having any relationship with organizations rooted in sociopolitical elitism (with an attendant history of discrimination) that serve no benefit to the institution or the public remains Isn't the very notion of an Ivy league university "rooted in sociopolitical elitism"? And doesn't it serve major "benefit to the institution"? That's its target group, and they want prospective students to know they can enter that elite themselves. And if there's a secret society you can aspire to get in of students and alumni promoting each other and handing out favors, even better. They should write it in their ads!

fipple 8y ago

An interesting factoid illustrating power begetting power is that in 2004, the two major candidates for US President were both members of Skull and Bones, which admits 15 college juniors per year.

RickJWagner 8y ago
I bet that made for some interesting discussions at S&B gatherings. Which to support?
- Graham24 8y ago
  Yeah, it sure did. Whoops, sorry, forget I said that...

arminiusreturns 8y ago

Yet to speak of anything even remotely similar gets you labeled a crackpot conspiracy theorist, even on HN.

toofy 8y ago
> Yet to speak of anything even remotely similar gets you labeled a crackpot conspiracy theorist This is likely due to how it is being discussed. Too often, when secret societies are brought up, many people have convinced themselves that secrecy must mean something nefarious is at play, and many of these people are absolutely unwavering in this belief. Considering that the HN community is privacy centric and generally rejects the notion of “You don’t need privacy if you’ve got nothing to hide.” it doesn’t surprise me that many people discussing secret societies are downvoted because many of the people discussing this turn into blithering crackpots the minute secret is brought up. If a society wishes to have privacy, this privacy does not make it axiomatically evil. Some people, yes, even groups of good people, just like to be left alone.
- V-2 8y ago
  > Too often, when secret societies are brought up, many people have convinced themselves that secrecy must mean something nefarious is at play "Must" is an exaggeration, but it is certainly a red flag. > Considering that the HN community is privacy centric and generally rejects the notion of “You don’t need privacy if you’ve got nothing to hide.” A society by definition isn't private in the sense used here. Noone complains about book clubs not listing all their members on the front door. A society, however, is an organization with the purpose of playing some role in the public life. You can't have it both ways.
  - toofy 8y ago
    I understand where you’re coming from, but I’m not sure I agree that we can’t have it both ways. A book club can play just as much of a role in public life as the next club. We absolutely should be able to have it both ways, to choose whether or not we wish to list our book club members on the front door. This should be our choice. Maybe one week we wish to list attendees and another week choose not to list, why can’t we have it both ways? Why is it some random stranger’s business who attends my gatherings or what happens at my gatherings? Whether it’s a book club or a group of classmates drinking in my living room, why would random people feel like they’re entitled to invade my private space and dictate what I can and cannot do? I understand the very real concerns with power concentrating in the hands of a few, but I’m not sure attacking our ability to have private gatherings is the appropriate way to address power concentration. This type of attack is also very concerning when we consider how much off-base speculation, wild paranoia and hysteria tends to come along once people start speculating what’s happening behind my book club’s closed doors.

motohagiography 8y ago

Panics about secret societies and fraternal organizations are a useful leading indicator of an authoritarian political tide. When you look at who worries about them, and governments that make pronouncements about them, looking back on who the good guys were, it usually wasn't the ones threatened by what happens when good men find a way to connect with one another.

blancheneige 8y ago

I think the HN crowd would be baffled by the shit we had to do for pledging. Not at S&B mind you, another ivy equivalent.

ams6110 8y ago
Well, do tell. And why do these society rituals seem so infused with homoeroticism and other sexual elements?
- blancheneige 8y ago
  supposed to be a bonding experience where you get to show your true commitment. the whole paraphernalia is usually lost on everyone
starbeast 8y ago
I never underestimate humanity's ability to come up with shit that is as weird as it is ridiculous, especially when it comes to tribal initiations. We get bungee jumping from the tribal initiation of the Bunlap people of Vanatu, so unless your pledge involves something as dangerous as attaching a liana to your ankles and jumping off a tree with the intention being to actually hit the ground with your face, while naked except for a belt and a strategically placed leaf, then frankly you aren't even trying.

arxpoetica 8y ago

Fun fact: secret societies — and the resultant woes of society — is a central theme in the Book of Mormon. > ...And it came to pass that they formed a secret combination, even as they of old; which combination is most abominable and wicked above all, in the sight of God... > ...And it came to pass that there arose a rebellion among the people, because of that secret combination which was built up to get power and gain... > ...And the regulations of the government were destroyed, because of the secret combination of the friends and kindreds of those who murdered the prophets...

drewmate 8y ago
And in the ultimate ironic twist, years after the Book of Mormon was published, Mormons adopted a version of the very Masonic rituals likely referenced in their own book. [0] [0] http://packham.n4m.org/temples.htm#ENDOWMENT http://packham.n4m.org/temples.htm#ENDOWMENT
dev_dull 8y ago
Wasn’t it written in the 1800s? That seems like the heyday of secret societies in the USA.
- JasonFruit 8y ago
  Opposition to secret societies was common in rural American religion at that time. It's survived among Primitive Baptists, some conservative Methodists, and others. There's a general feeling that Christian brotherhood is inhibited by that sort of secret-keeping.

starbeast 8y ago

>“Who was the fool, who the wise man, beggar or king? Whether poor or rich, all’s the same in death.” As much as being fans of the Illuminati (and who isn't?) they might also be fans of Diogenes of Sinope. >"I am searching for the bones of your father, but could not distinguish them from those of a slave." Diogenes of Sinope trolling Alexander the Great (again) ~300BC One thing about these secret societies is that they give the political hegemony some resistance to the Rasputin problem. People who are addicted to power have a peculiar weakness to woo merchants promising further power over supernatural realms, which if the power addict even slightly entertains as a possibility of existing, they will feel compelled to follow, even on the off chance of more power. If they already feel they have the inside track on the occult, they are far more likely to rely on the resident court woo merchants, rather than following the latest wild eyed cosmic debris that just wandered in. As an aside, a friend of mine has the theory that Trump is conclusive proof of the non-existence, or at least lack of real power, of the Illuminati or equivalent. On the basis that there is no sane over-arching conspiracy of total control where you would choose to end up with Donald Trump. He only makes sense from a world of many groups that have varying power and competency, where one of them is currently trying to fuck the other up.