Anticorruption and Masonry. Brotherhoods, Deviance, and “Bad” Social Capital

distortions in the corresponding content and narratives, are one of the main constraints which prevent any future research on the relationship between masonry and (anti)corruption. Various actors may interact under the umbrella of masonic or para- masonic entities, committing to a variety of fruitful extra- legal transactions. From generic exchanges of favors to appointments and careers in the public sector, from votes (i.e., electoral corruption) to other forms of bribery— exchanges are the most varied. A masonic network overlapping with political- institutional roles can provide an adaptable and evolving social architecture of interactions: inclusion is selective, and uncertainty in the participation to informal or illegal deals is reduced. It is a social arena regulated by informal institutions, where shared values and norms of expanded reciprocity emerge and are socially enforced to sustain mutually beneficial interactions. Mutual recognition of actors’ involvement— also codified in the masonry rituals— guarantees the generation and reproduction of trustworthiness in deferred and indirect transactions. This social infrastructure is then capable to sustain circularity of the exchanges of resources and the reciprocation of obligations, allowing powerful white- collar actors to pursue their distinct, but often complementary, goals.