1. Introduction
In a democratic and republican society, every form of power should manifest itself transparently and responsibly, subject to the scrutiny of civil conscience and the principle of participation. Yet, there are dynamics that escape this framework. Occult power, woven from silent allegiances and invisible oaths, operates at the margins of institutional visibility, while profoundly influencing political, economic, and cultural life.
     It thus becomes essential to attempt an analysis to understand the mechanisms governing belonging to initiatory structures such as Freemasonry—particularly in its more opaque and influential forms—and to reflect on the psychological, civil, and ethical repercussions such affiliation may entail, striving to carry out an honest and respectful examination of the boundary between adherence and conditioning, between fraternity and domination.
     Unless proven otherwise, the Freemason must be regarded as a respectable individual. Often, they are a well-prepared, cultured citizen, motivated by ideals. Precisely for this reason, it is important to acknowledge that, at times, it is the very mechanism of belonging—with its unwritten rules, its promises, and its silences—that may determine behaviours which overstep objectivity and freedom of thought. Our aim is therefore to analyse and understand: to attempt, with respect and clarity, to evaluate what happens when belonging begins to replace conscience, and when secrecy becomes a tool of separation rather than of protection.
     Underlying all this remains the republican value of inner freedom: that which allows the individual to question, to think independently, to be part of a community without thereby renouncing their moral autonomy. What is examined here arises from a civic need: to contribute to greater awareness of the invisible mechanisms of power and to restore freedom of thought to its rightful place at the centre of democratic conscience.



2. The Conditioning of Belonging
Masonic initiation, as with many ritual structures, presents itself as a path of growth, a journey of individual improvement. It is undeniable that many who enter Freemasonry do so with noble aspirations: knowledge, ethics, spirituality. However, what often escapes the consciousness of the initiate is the gradual displacement of their moral autonomy toward the codes and expectations of the organization.
     The initiatory system operates through a subtle mechanism: the sense of belonging increases with each degree, and so does the pressure—implicit or explicit—to conform to certain behaviors. Inner freedom, instead of being strengthened, is gradually subordinated to loyalty to the group, to the bond of fraternity, to the obligatory discretion. The adept, acting with conviction and sincerity, may fail to realize that their thinking is slowly being reshaped.
     The real danger lies not in external obligation but in internal habituation: one does not obey by coercion, but by conviction—a conviction constructed over time through mechanisms of recognition, privilege, selection, and silence. And as the perception of benefits—material, relational, symbolic—increases, the critical capacity to question the nature and goals of the system diminishes.
     It is in this dynamic that true domination takes root: a power not imposed by force, but internalized with gratitude. A power that does not need to threaten because it has already achieved obedience through suggestion and identification. In good faith, the adept becomes a defender of an order they do not fully understand—and may never understand—because the architecture of the hierarchy is designed precisely to limit access to the whole truth.
     From this perspective, Masonic dominion—far from being an external repressive force—presents itself as an inner discipline, a control exercised through loyalty, gratitude, and promise. But any form of loyalty that does not admit criticism, any gratitude that does not tolerate doubt, is a path that can lead away from freedom.
     It is on this terrain that we must reflect: not to deny the personal value of those who adhere, but to recognize the logical and psychological trap of a belonging that can turn into invisible domination.

3. Secrecy as an Instrument of Internal Control
One of the most characteristic and least discussed aspects of the Masonic system is secrecy. It is justified as necessary to protect confidentiality, as a means of ensuring freedom of expression within the group, and of safeguarding the security of its members. However, a closer look at the hierarchical structure of the lodges reveals a more unsettling truth: secrecy is not directed solely outward, but perhaps even more toward the inside.
     Those outside the Masonic structure, by definition, have no access to its innermost dynamics. But neither do most of those within truly know its deeper purposes. The system is constructed in such a way that only the highest levels have access to certain information, and even to them, the full picture is rarely revealed. The fragmentation of knowledge within the hierarchy creates a paradoxical condition: one belongs to a system one knows only in part.
     The ritual silence and compartmentalization of information produce a specific effect: the average member, while feeling part of a great initiatory edifice, remains without the tools to grasp its actual aims. And this is not due to distraction or negligence, but by design. The central authority retains the overall vision, while the brethren are provided a partial, often idealized narrative that strengthens emotional attachment but limits critical understanding.
     Internal secrecy thus becomes a far more refined tool of domination than any external imposition. The brother not only does not know, but is convinced that it is better not to know. Indeed, he is often led to believe that doubt, curiosity, inquiry are acts of disloyalty to the brotherhood. In this way, secrecy builds a psychological barrier separating the individual from their critical conscience.
     Here, inner freedom is sacrificed on the altar of apparent coherence. The adept convinces himself that knowing less ensures purity, that obedience is a virtue, that blind trust is a sign of spiritual maturity. But all this, if left unexamined, can become a sophisticated form of alienation.
     Recognizing the function of secrecy as a tool of internal control does not mean accusing every initiate of conscious complicity. On the contrary: it means offering each person the opportunity to reconsider their position critically, and to choose whether they wish to be part of an order that guards mystery—or to return fully to their own freedom of thought.



4. The Apex as Unknown Center: P1 as a Symbol, the P2 in operational function
Every hierarchical structure naturally tends to concentrate power at the top. But in Freemasonry, this dynamic assumes a deeper and more opaque connotation, because what lies at the summit is not merely a higher level of competence or experience, but a center that eludes visibility and, precisely through its invisibility, exercises the highest degree of control. This summit, often unknown even to the members of the lodges themselves, represents the beating heart of Masonic dominion.
     Many Freemasons walk their initiatory path with sincerity and commitment, convinced they are contributing to a collective undertaking founded on values such as justice, knowledge, and brotherhood. Precisely for this reason, they rarely realize that the system to which they belong might be part of a larger construction, whose actual governance is never questioned, let alone revealed. Here lies the paradox: the Freemason, though animated by noble ideals, becomes the instrument of a design they do not know—and which may even contradict those very ideals.
     In recent Italian history, the Propaganda 1 (P1) lodge has represented the emblem of this pyramidal and occult structure, and the P2 its operational offshoot. Formally unrecognized, they operated outside the official rules, but maintained a very powerful influence on decisive areas of institutional and social life. The existence of P1, with its transversal network of power, shows that alongside visible Freemasonry there can exist — and perhaps always exists — an invisible Freemasonry, which uses regular lodges as an operational base and human reservoir.
      What makes this summit’s dominion so effective is neither force nor direct command, but rather the capacity to steer the thoughts and choices of initiates through symbols, silences, and signals. There is no need to issue orders when obedience itself has been made desirable. There is no need to reveal a goal when everyone is already moving in the desired direction. The summit, precisely because it remains unseen, becomes irrefutable.
     As the adept ascends through the degrees, they may feel increasingly closer to truth. But what often happens is that they merely approach concentric circles of partial narratives, each reinforcing the illusion of knowledge while distancing them from the core. The system P1-P2, in this sense, symbolizes not only a deviant organization, but the very mechanism by which the summit of Masonic power constitutes itself as an “absent presence”—a faceless command.
     One must then ask a simple yet radical question: whom does the system serve? Does it truly serve the elevation of mankind, as it claims? Or rather, does it serve the preservation of a hidden dominion that uses the idea of elevation as its instrument? Those inside the structure have the right—and perhaps the duty—to ask themselves. Because only those who dare question the top of the pyramid may one day reclaim their inner autonomy.

5. Initiation as a Permanent Bond
The initiatory moment is often perceived as a rite of passage, a symbolic rebirth marking entry into a new spiritual and social dimension. But behind the appearance of elevation lies another aspect: the establishment of a permanent bond, a tie that survives time, events, and even the individual’s own will. Initiation, in its ritual form, imprints a deep mark on the consciousness of the adept—and that mark does not easily fade.
     What distinguishes mere membership from an initiation is its symbolic and psychological depth. One does not join Freemasonry simply by signing up: one is transformed through a codified ceremonial designed to disorient, impress, and stir emotion. The initiate is introduced into a parallel universe where symbols, words, and gestures act as tools of suggestion. And precisely because it is an inner transformation, it tends to create a form of loyalty that transcends logic and reason.
     This bond does not end with the time of active participation: it continues even after formal disengagement from the institution. The initiate, even if no longer attending the lodge, still carries within themselves the imprint of belonging. This imprint may act unconsciously, influencing decisions, loyalties, fears, and reactions. The bond is not only with the organization, but with the identity that the organization helped to shape.
     Those who have undergone a profound initiation know the weight of the oath, the burden of the promise, the difficulty of detachment. The act of leaving Freemasonry—when it happens—is never merely an administrative decision, but an inner event, often dramatic. And this reveals how the initiatory system not only organizes behavior, but shapes the very perception of the self.
     In this context, to speak of freedom becomes complex. For freedom is not merely the absence of external coercion, but the ability to emancipate oneself from internal conditioning. The initiatory bond, with its symbolic depth, may continue to operate as a silent inner presence, capable of guiding and even limiting the one who believes themselves free.
     To recognize the power of this bond is not to deny its symbolic value. On the contrary: it is to take responsibility for asking what that bond is producing in one's life. Only then can a true path of liberation begin—not from Freemasonry itself, but from all that prevents the conscience from remaining sovereign.

6. A Proposal from the Outside
It is clear that, from the outside, it is not possible to formulate a precise model of reform or internal control for the Masonic system, precisely due to its closed structure and the diversity of its manifestations. However, a proposal of principle may still be advanced: to invite Freemasonry itself—in its most conscious and responsible expressions—to question whether it might introduce internal mechanisms for verification, transparency, and above all, the safeguarding of the inner freedom of its members.
     This is not about imposing external models, but rather about encouraging internal reflection—capable of recognizing the risks of auto-suggestion and of unconscious obedience. The goal is not to weaken the structure, but to make it more humane, more open to doubt, and to critical maturity.
     Spaces capable of preventing abuses and restoring to Masonic membership its most authentic value: the free and conscious choice of an individual in full possession of their own conscience.

di Giovanni Corrao - 10/05/2025