XML Template (2011) [8.11.2011–10:46am] [1–25] K:/TCS/TCS 423040.3d (TCS) [PREPRINTER stage] Transparency, Interrupted Secrets of the Left Clare Birchall Abstract Though far from new, the rhetoric of transparency is on the ascent in public and political life. It is cited as the answer to a vast array of social, political, financial and corporate problems. With the backing of a ‘movement’ , trans- parency has assumed the position of an unassailable ‘good’. This article asks whether the value ascribed to transparency limits political thinking, particu- larly for the radical and socialist Left. What forms of politics, ethics, of being- in-common, might it be possible to think if we pay attention to secrecy rather than transparency? Key words the commons j open government j poetry j psychoanalysis j secrecy j transparency j WikiLeaks T ODAY, WE are told that transparency can solve all our problems. It is invoked with a ‘soteriological optimism’ (Tsoukas, 1997: 840) and entrusted with the task of fostering accountability and strengthening participatory democracy. It is expected to weed out and prevent corruption or, to invoke the early 20th-century US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis’ famous phrase, disinfect public life (1913). More specifically, it has been called upon to: prevent the undue influence of lobbyists on US rep- resentatives (see OpenSecrets.org); thwart the abuse of UK MPs’ expenses (Brooke, 2010); foster economic growth (see European Commission, 2004); 1 pave the way for financial recovery (Roth, 2009); democratize aid (Barder, 2010); and even help tackle global warming. 2 There are plenty of existing studies which consider the effectiveness or otherwise of specific transparency policies in various contexts (e.g. Lathrop and Ruma, 2010; j Theory, Culture & Society 2011 (SAGE, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, and Singapore), Vol. 0(0): 1^25 DOI: 10.1177/0263276411423040