Obscurantism

Obscurantism (pronounced uhb-skyoor-uh n-tiz-uhm or ob-skyoo-ran-tiz-uhm)

(1) A state of opposition to human progress or enlightenment.

(2) Deliberate obscurity or vagueness.

(3) Opposition to the increase and spread of knowledge.

(4) Deliberate obscurity or evasion of clarity.

1825-1835:  From the French obscurantisme in the sense of "opposition to enlightenment", from the German obscurantismus.  The source was the Latin obscűrans, present participle of obscűro (cover, darken, hide), derived from obscūrus (shadowy, obscure), thus the construct obscűrans + ism.  The English obscure was from the Middle English obscure, from the Old French obscur, from the Latin obscūrus (dark, dusky, indistinct), the construct being ob- (towards; against) +‎ scūrus (a form of scuru (dark), from the Proto-Italic skoiros, from the primitive Indo-European skeh.  The –ism suffix was from the Ancient Greek ισμός (ismós) & -isma noun suffixes, often directly, sometimes through the Latin –ismus & isma (from where English picked up ize) and sometimes through the French –isme or the German –ismus, all ultimately from the Ancient Greek (where it tended more specifically to express a finished act or thing done).  It appeared in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form abstract nouns of action, state, condition or doctrine from verbs and on this model, was used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence (criticism; barbarism; Darwinism; despotism; plagiarism; realism; witticism etc).   Obscurantism, obscuration & obscurantist are nouns and obscurantic is an adjective; the most common noun plural is obscurantists.

Protecting us from ourselves

Plato & Socrates at the academy, a mosaic from Pompeii.

Leo Strauss (1899–1973) was a German-American political philosopher and classicist.  Although the western tradition has produced not a few philosophers whose writings have been difficult and beyond immediate understanding, Strauss was rare in that he not only admitted being an obscurantist but wrote also of the history of the style and reasons for adapting it to his work.  In writings from antiquity, Strauss found hidden meanings, difficult, almost encoded knowledge which would be unnoticed by all but the most widely-read and highly educated few.  He pondered that while some philosophers might write esoterically to avert persecution by political or religious authorities, he was more taken with the idea the style is uniquely proper to philosophy, which can of course prove as dangerous for reader as writer.   What he argued was that what to most seemed obscurantism, was a means of enticing the select few capable of such things to abstract their thoughts from the text, thus to derive the meaning.  He noted too the importance of dangerous ideas being things the young might too quickly be able to grasp because they’d not pause to consider the implications, recalling the trial of Socrates, condemned to death for corrupting the mind of youth.  Beyond poisoning the minds of students, he warned there had been philosophers who had visited their dangerous ideas upon entire nations because their work was both accessible and seductive.  Strauss didn’t think Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) a Nazi but he understood how compelling his words had been for them.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

So there is obscurantism good and obscurantism bad.  As a caste, regardless of denomination, priests were long notorious for deliberately keeping information, knowledge, or understanding hidden or difficult to access, often insisting foundational documents of the faith must never be translated into the vernacular languages used by most people, it being better that they rely on the clergy for what was written as well as what was meant.  Even when translations became readily available and literacy levels improved, it was not uncommon for people to be told not to read the texts because they would become confused.  In the case of the Christian Bible, that's probably true for most folk although the priests had their own motivations which centred on the retention of power.

Sarah Palin.

In democratic politics, obscurantism has evolved to discourage questioning.  As late as the 1980s, it was to a degree still possible for authoritarian regimes to repress the flow of information from external sources but even in systems described as “hermetically sealed” (such as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea, the DPRK)) this has become difficult, especially when external forces are deliberately trying to subvert the government line.  The internet has made it impossible for Western governments wholly to suppress inconvenient truths so the process have been refined to what is essentially a process of (1) manufacturing fear and (2) instilling doubt.  That’s well understood and it’s done because it works, fear and doubt probably the most successful electoral strategy pursued in the modern era and one given renewed validation because on the rare occasions anyone offers hope and optimism (such as Barack Obama (b 1961; US president 2009-2017)), they have always disappointed.  Obscurantism should not be confused with incoherence or sheer insensibility.  The tortured and sometimes mangled syntax of figures such as Sarah Palin (b 1964; Republican vice presidential nominee 2008) and George W Bush (George XLIII, b 1946; US president 2001-2009) was a gift to humorists and meme-makers and the consensus among the political science community seemed to be that neither often attempted to be deceptive or misleading; it was simply that the longer they spoke the less what they were trying to say could be understood.