Democracy in darkness: Notre Dame historian explores the role of secrecy in representative government
Most people would accept without scrutiny that secrecy poses a threat to modern democracies. In fact, the masthead of the Washington Post declares that “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”
However, for Katlyn Marie Carter, an assistant professor of history at the University of Notre Dame, that sentiment “obscures the odd truth that American democracy was in fact born in darkness.” Members of the Constitutional Convention, for example, not only met behind closed doors, but nailed windows shut and posted guards to protect against potential eavesdroppers.
There are lessons to be learned from democracy’s shadowy origins about both the dangers and potential utility of secrecy in a representative government, Carter said.
In new research, Carter explores how debates over secrecy and transparency in politics during the Age of Revolutions in the 18th century shaped modern democracy — and how they can shed new light on current examples of political misconduct from the mishandling of classified documents to the sending of emails over private servers.
“Often when we’re talking about what should be secret or transparent in government, the issue gets pulled out of historical context,” she said. “So, it’s important to remember that these debates aren’t entirely new. New technologies may change the scope and implications of them but, fundamentally, these are debates that have been going on since our government was established.”
Carter’s book, “Democracy in Darkness: Secrecy and Transparency in the Age of Revolutions” (Yale University Press, 2023), traces the trajectories of the American and French Revolutions as they embraced and eschewed secrecy to varying degrees and examines how representative democracy was shaped in the process.
“This moment in the late 18th century is really the origin of modern representative democracy,” she said. “Before this, representative government and democracy were seen as very different — even incompatible — things. So, part of the story I tell is how those two concepts came together to the point that today, we don’t even question that representative government is the main form of democracy in the modern world.”
Ironically, Carter wrote in the book, commitments to transparency in the governments born of revolution in America and France often resulted in losses of public trust and instability.
“When elected officials in the early United States and revolutionary France made claims to speak for the people, the use of secrecy actually strengthened those claims by deferring popular disagreements to after the promulgation of constitutions and the passage of laws rather than during the deliberative process,” she wrote.
The very meaning of democracy was changed in the process, she stated.
“By the end of the Age of Revolutions democracy meant something new: it was widely understood as a means by which the people ruled themselves through elected representatives, rather than a government necessarily characterized by the degree of popular participation in it.”
Carter also said that exploring the ways in which the French and U.S. governments grappled with issues of secrecy allows for a more nuanced comparison of the two revolutions.
“In the U.S., through the early leadership of George Washington, secrecy is used to create a particular style of representative politics that is a little more insulated,” she said. “And over time, things gradually open up more as we move toward the 19th century. In France, the trajectory is really the opposite. From the beginning, they’re very open and dedicated to the idea of publicity and transparency, not just rhetorically, but practically. They work on their constitution with open doors and big audiences. And it’s only gradually that they start to reintroduce more secrecy into their legislative processes.
“But in both cases, it’s a very central concept to how these governments are formed in ways that haven’t really been recognized.”
Moving into the late 20th and 21st centuries, Carter sees a marked popular disavowal of secrecy in government that, she argues, may overlook some of its potential benefits.
“I started this project from the vantage point that secrecy has often been used to shield elected officials from public opinion and pressure — and that that’s a bad thing,” she said. “And I ended it thinking, well, sometimes that is a bad thing. But at other times, it can have some utility when the better decision is not always the most popular one or the one being suggested by the loudest voices. So, it can serve a function, when used carefully.
“When we go back and investigate how democracy came to be, we see that it contains these kinds of contradictions and unresolved questions. But part of the challenge of keeping democracy going and keeping it vital is trying to confront those internal tensions and explore them in new ways.”
Latest Faculty & Staff
- In memoriam: Charles Kulpa, professor emeritus of biological sciencesCharles “Chuck” Frank Kulpa, professor emeritus in the Department of Biological Sciences, died April 30 in South Bend. He was 80. Kulpa was a respected scholar and professor of environmental and applied microbiology for 40 years.
- Disadvantaged entrepreneurs often fear success, but new research can helpWhen low-income entrepreneurs start their own businesses, they frequently fear failure — a well-documented phenomenon. But over time, they may also fear success, given the costs and unknowns it can bring, and this barrier to growth is under-studied and underappreciated. A new study from a Keough School of Global Affairs expert breaks new ground by explaining this fear and offers five recommendations to help entrepreneurs overcome it and move out of poverty.
- Mary Gallagher appointed dean of the University of Notre Dame’s Keough School of Global AffairsMary Gallagher, the Amy and Alan Lowenstein Chair in Democracy, Democratization and Human Rights and director of the International Institute at the University of Michigan, has been appointed the Marilyn Keough Dean of the Keough School of Global Affairs by University President Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C. Gallagher, who will also hold a tenured faculty position in the Keough School, begins her five-year term as dean on July 1.
- Opioid epidemic reaches beyond health impacts to influence politicsVicky Barone, assistant professor of economics at Notre Dame, researched the origins and development of the opioid epidemic and found that the unregulated marketing of potent painkillers led to increased access to prescription opioids and subsequent overdose mortalities. Tracing the long-term consequences of opioid overdose deaths on the political landscape in America, she found an increased support for conservative beliefs and Republican candidates.
- Doug Thompson appointed inaugural executive director of diversity and engagementDoug Thompson, current vice president for equity and inclusion at Gustavus Adolphus College, has been appointed as the inaugural executive director of diversity and engagement in the University of Notre Dame’s Division of Student Affairs, effective July 1.
- There’s no ‘one size fits all’ when it comes to addressing men’s health issues globallyAt a time when health resources are at a premium and need to be wisely allocated, health professionals must find points within men’s lives when it makes the most sense to intervene and advocate for preventive care for promoting better health outcomes. Life transitions such as marriage and fatherhood are often pivotal and crucial intervention points. But just like every man is different, health concerns across global communities differ as well. Research from the University of Notre Dame finds that not all life transitions produce the same health results, and not all men’s global health policies should look the same from one country to another.