"I agree that there are things that should be kept secret"
About this Quote
A man who detonated the Pentagon Papers choosing the language of restraint is the point. Ellsberg’s “I agree” is a deliberate concession, a tactical lowering of the temperature in a debate that usually collapses into absolutism: either you worship secrecy or you torch the files. He’s telling you he’s not naive about statecraft; he’s indicting the state for abusing a tool that actually has legitimate uses.
The line is careful in a way that reveals its subtext. “Things” is non-specific, almost bland, a placeholder that invites a listener to supply the obvious: troop movements, intelligence sources, the identities of people who would be endangered. Ellsberg grants that ground because it strengthens his real argument: what governments most reliably hide isn’t operational necessity, it’s political embarrassment, illegal conduct, and avoidable death. Secrecy becomes less a shield than a solvent, dissolving accountability.
The context matters because Ellsberg wasn’t a doctrinaire anti-security provocateur; he was an insider who watched secrecy function as an engine of escalation and a sedative for the public. That biography gives the sentence its bite. Coming from him, “kept secret” doesn’t mean “kept safe.” It means “kept unexamined.”
So the intent is not to praise confidentiality but to reclaim moral high ground: yes, some secrets protect people. The ones he exposed protected narratives. The understatement is the weapon.
The line is careful in a way that reveals its subtext. “Things” is non-specific, almost bland, a placeholder that invites a listener to supply the obvious: troop movements, intelligence sources, the identities of people who would be endangered. Ellsberg grants that ground because it strengthens his real argument: what governments most reliably hide isn’t operational necessity, it’s political embarrassment, illegal conduct, and avoidable death. Secrecy becomes less a shield than a solvent, dissolving accountability.
The context matters because Ellsberg wasn’t a doctrinaire anti-security provocateur; he was an insider who watched secrecy function as an engine of escalation and a sedative for the public. That biography gives the sentence its bite. Coming from him, “kept secret” doesn’t mean “kept safe.” It means “kept unexamined.”
So the intent is not to praise confidentiality but to reclaim moral high ground: yes, some secrets protect people. The ones he exposed protected narratives. The understatement is the weapon.
Quote Details
| Topic | Privacy & Cybersecurity |
|---|
More Quotes by Daniel
Add to List













