Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”
by zunguzungu
“To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us, and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not. Firstly we must understand what aspect of government or neocorporatist behavior we wish to change or remove. Secondly we must develop a way of thinking about this behavior that is strong enough carry us through the mire of politically distorted language, and into a position of clarity. Finally must use these insights to inspire within us and others a course of ennobling, and effective action.”
Julian Assange, “State and Terrorist Conspiracies”
The piece of writing (via) which that quote introduces is intellectually substantial, but not all that difficult to read, so you might as well take a look at it yourself. Most of the news media seems to be losing their minds over Wikileaks without actually reading these essays, even though he describes the function and aims of an organization like Wikileaks in pretty straightforward terms. But, to summarize, he begins by describing a state like the US as essentially an authoritarian conspiracy, and then reasons that the practical strategy for combating that conspiracy is to degrade its ability to conspire, to hinder its ability to “think” as a conspiratorial mind. The metaphor of a computing network is mostly implicit, but utterly crucial: he seeks to oppose the power of the state by treating it like a computer and tossing sand in its diodes.
He begins by positing that conspiracy and authoritarianism go hand in hand, arguing that since authoritarianism produces resistance to itself — to the extent that its authoritarianism becomes generally known — it can only continue to exist and function by preventing its intentions (the authorship of its authority?) from being generally known. It inevitably becomes, he argues, a conspiracy:
Authoritarian regimes give rise to forces which oppose them by pushing against the individual and collective will to freedom, truth and self realization. Plans which assist authoritarian rule, once discovered, induce resistance. Hence these plans are concealed by successful authoritarian powers. This is enough to define their behavior as conspiratorial.
The problem this creates for the government conspiracy then becomes the organizational problem it must solve: if the conspiracy must operate in secrecy, how is it to communicate, plan, make decisions, discipline itself, and transform itself to meet new challenges? The answer is: by controlling information flows. After all, if the organization has goals that can be articulated, articulating them openly exposes them to resistance. But at the same time, failing to articulate those goals to itself deprives the organization of its ability to process and advance them. Somewhere in the middle, for the authoritarian conspiracy, is the right balance of authority and conspiracy.
His model for imagining the conspiracy, then, is not at all the cliché that people mean when they sneer at someone for being a “conspiracy theorist.” After all, most the “conspiracies” we’re familiar with are pure fantasies, and because the “Elders of Zion” or James Bond’s SPECTRE have never existed, their nonexistence becomes a cudgel for beating on people that would ever use the term or the concept. For Assange, by contrast, a conspiracy is something fairly banal, simply any network of associates who act in concert by hiding their concerted association from outsiders, an authority that proceeds by preventing its activities from being visible enough to provoke counter-reaction. It might be something as dramatic as a loose coalition of conspirators working to start a war with Iraq/n, or it might simply be the banal, everyday deceptions and conspiracies of normal diplomatic procedure.
He illustrates this theoretical model by the analogy of a board with nails hammered into it and then tied together with twine:
First take some nails (“conspirators”) and hammer them into a board at random. Then take twine (“communication”) and loop it from nail to nail without breaking. Call the twine connecting two nails a link. Unbroken twine means it is possible to travel from any nail to any other nail via twine and intermediary nails…Information flows from conspirator to conspirator. Not every conspirator trusts or knows every other conspirator even though all are connected. Some are on the fringe of the conspiracy, others are central and communicate with many conspirators and others still may know only two conspirators but be a bridge between important sections or groupings of the conspiracy…
Conspirators are often discerning, for some trust and depend each other, while others say little. Important information flows frequently through some links, trivial information through others. So we expand our simple connected graph model to include not only links, but their “importance.”
Return to our board-and-nails analogy. Imagine a thick heavy cord between some nails and fine light thread between others. Call the importance, thickness or heaviness of a link its weight. Between conspirators that never communicate the weight is zero. The “importance” of communication passing through a link is difficult to evaluate apriori, since its true value depends on the outcome of the conspiracy. We simply say that the “importance” of communication contributes to the weight of a link in the most obvious way; the weight of a link is proportional to the amount of important communication flowing across it. Questions about conspiracies in general won’t require us to know the weight of any link, since that changes from conspiracy to conspiracy.
Such a network will not be organized by a flow chart, nor would it ever produce a single coherent map of itself (without thereby hastening its own collapse). It is probably fairly acephalous, as a matter of course: if it had a single head (or a singular organizing mind which could survey and map the entirety), then every conspirator would be one step from the boss and a short two steps away from every other member of the conspiracy. A certain amount of centralization is necessary, in other words (otherwise there is no conspiracy), but too much centralization makes the system vulnerable.
To use The Wire as a ready-to-hand example, imagine if Avon Barksdale was communicating directly with Bodie. All you would ever have to do is turn one person — any person — and you would be one step away from the boss, whose direct connection to everyone else in the conspiracy would allow you to sweep them all up at once. Obviously, no effective conspiracy would ever function this way. Remember Stringer Bell’s “is you taking notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy?” To function effectively, the primary authority has to be disassociated from all other members of the conspiracy, layers of mediation which have to be as opaque as possible to everyone concerned (which a paper trail unhelpfully clarifies). But while the complexity of these linkages shield the directing authority from exposure, they also limit Avon Barksdale’s ability to control what’s going on around him. Businesses run on their paperwork! And the more walls you build around him, the less he might be able to trust his lieutenants, and the less they’ll require (or tolerate) him.
This, Assange reasons, is a way to turn a feature into a bug. And his underlying insight is simple and, I think, compelling: while an organization structured by direct and open lines of communication will be much more vulnerable to outside penetration, the more opaque it becomes to itself (as a defense against the outside gaze), the less able it will be to “think” as a system, to communicate with itself. The more conspiratorial it becomes, in a certain sense, the less effective it will be as a conspiracy. The more closed the network is to outside intrusion, the less able it is to engage with that which is outside itself (true hacker theorizing).
His thinking is not quite as abstract as all that, of course; as he quite explicitly notes, he is also understanding the functioning of the US state by analogy with successful terrorist organizations. If you’ve seen The Battle of Algiers, for example, think of how the French counter-terrorist people work to produce an organizational flow chart of the Algerian resistance movement: since they had overwhelming military superiority, their inability to crush the FLN resided in their inability to find it, an inability which the FLN strategically works to impede by decentralizing itself. Cutting off one leg of the octopus, the FLN realized, wouldn’t degrade the system as a whole if the legs all operated independently. The links between the units were the vulnerable spots for the system as a whole, so those were most closely and carefully guarded and most hotly pursued by the French. And while the French won the battle of Algiers, they lost the war, because they adopted the tactics Assange briefly mentions only to put aside:
How can we reduce the ability of a conspiracy to act?…We can split the conspiracy, reduce or eliminating important communication between a few high weight links or many low weight links. Traditional attacks on conspiratorial power groupings, such as assassination, have cut high weight links by killing, kidnapping, blackmailing or otherwise marginalizing or isolating some of the conspirators they were connected to.
This is the US’s counterterrorism strategy — find the men in charge and get ’em — but it’s not what Assange wants to do: such a program would isolate a specific version of the conspiracy and attempt to destroy the form of it that already exists, which he argues will have two important limitations. For one thing, by the time such a conspiracy has a form which can be targeted, its ability to function will be quite advanced. As he notes:
“A man in chains knows he should have acted sooner for his ability to influence the actions of the state is near its end. To deal with powerful conspiratorial actions we must think ahead and attack the process that leads to them since the actions themselves can not be dealt with.”
By the time a cancer has metastasized, in other words, antioxidents are no longer effective, and even violent chemotherapy is difficult. It’s better, then, to think about how conspiracies come into existence so as to prevent them from forming in the first place (whereas if you isolate the carcinogen early enough, you don’t need to remove the tumor after the fact). Instead, he wants to address the aggregative process itself, by impeding the principle of its reproduction: rather than trying to expose and cut particular links between particular conspirators (which does little to prevent new links from forming and may not disturb the actual functioning of the system as a whole), he wants to attack the “total conspiratorial power” of the entire system by figuring out how to reduce its total ability to share and exchange information among itself, in effect, to slow down its processing power. As he puts it:
Conspiracies are cognitive devices. They are able to outthink the same group of individuals acting alone Conspiracies take information about the world in which they operate (the conspiratorial environment), pass through the conspirators and then act on the result. We can see conspiracies as a type of device that has inputs (information about the environment), a computational network (the conspirators and their links to each other) and outputs (actions intending to change or maintain the environment).
Because he thinks of the conspiracy as a computational network, he notes in an aside that one way to weaken its cognitive ability would be to degrade the quality of its information:
Since a conspiracy is a type of cognitive device that acts on information acquired from its environment, distorting or restricting these inputs means acts based on them are likely to be misplaced. Programmers call this effect garbage in, garbage out. Usually the effect runs the other way; it is conspiracy that is the agent of deception and information restriction. In the US, the programmer’s aphorism is sometimes called “the Fox News effect”.
I’m not sure this is what he means, but it’s worth reflecting that the conspiracy’s ability to deceive others through propaganda can also be the conspiracy’s tendency to deceive itself by its own propaganda. So many people genuinely drink the Kool-Aid, after all. Would our super-spies in Afghanistan ever have been so taken in by the imposter Taliban guy if they didn’t, basically, believe their own line of propaganda, if they didn’t convince themselves — even provisionally — that we actually are winning the war against Talibothra? The same is true of WMD; while no one in possession of the facts could rationally conclude that Saddam Hussein then (or Iran now) are actually, positively in pursuit of WMD’s, this doesn’t mean that the people talking about ticking time bombs don’t actually believe that they are. It just means they are operating with bad information about the environment. Sometimes this works in their favor, but sometimes it does not: if Obama thinks Afghanistan is winnable, it may sink his presidency, for example, while the belief of his advisors that the economy would recover if the government rescued only the banks almost certainly lost the midterm elections for the Democrats (and was the death-knell for so many of the Blue Dogs who were driving that particular policy choice). Whether this actually hurts the conspiracy is unclear; those Blue Dogs might have lost their seats, but most of them will retire from public service to cushy jobs supported by the sectors they supported while they were in public service. And lots of successful politicians do nothing but fail.
This is however, not where Assange’s reasoning leads him. He decides, instead, that the most effective way to attack this kind of organization would be to make “leaks” a fundamental part of the conspiracy’s information environment. Which is why the point is not that particular leaks are specifically effective. Wikileaks does not leak something like the “Collateral Murder” video as a way of putting an end to that particular military tactic; that would be to target a specific leg of the hydra even as it grows two more. Instead, the idea is that increasing the porousness of the conspiracy’s information system will impede its functioning, that the conspiracy will turn against itself in self-defense, clamping down on its own information flows in ways that will then impede its own cognitive function. You destroy the conspiracy, in other words, by making it so paranoid of itself that it can no longer conspire:
The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie. This must result in minimization of efficient internal communications mechanisms (an increase in cognitive “secrecy tax”) and consequent system-wide cognitive decline resulting in decreased ability to hold onto power as the environment demands adaption. Hence in a world where leaking is easy, secretive or unjust systems are nonlinearly hit relative to open, just systems. Since unjust systems, by their nature induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance.
The leak, in other words, is only the catalyst for the desired counter-overreaction; Wikileaks wants to provoke the conspiracy into turning off its own brain in response to the threat. As it tries to plug its own holes and find the leakers, he reasons, its component elements will de-synchronize from and turn against each other, de-link from the central processing network, and come undone. Even if all the elements of the conspiracy still exist, in this sense, depriving themselves of a vigorous flow of information to connect them all together as a conspiracy prevents them from acting as a conspiracy. As he puts it:
If total conspiratorial power is zero, then clearly there is no information flow between the conspirators and hence no conspiracy. A substantial increase or decrease in total conspiratorial power almost always means what we expect it to mean; an increase or decrease in the ability of the conspiracy to think, act and adapt…An authoritarian conspiracy that cannot think is powerless to preserve itself against the opponents it induces.
In this sense, most of the media commentary on the latest round of leaks has totally missed the point. After all, why are diplomatic cables being leaked? These leaks are not specifically about the war(s) at all, and most seem to simply be a broad swath of the everyday normal secrets that a security state keeps from all but its most trusted hundreds of thousands of people who have the right clearance. Which is the point: Assange is completely right that our government has conspiratorial functions. What else would you call the fact that a small percentage of our governing class governs and acts in our name according to information which is freely shared amongst them but which cannot be shared amongst their constituency? And we all probably knew that this was more or less the case; anyone who was surprised that our embassies are doing dirty, secretive, and disingenuous political work as a matter of course is naïve. But Assange is not trying to produce a journalistic scandal which will then provoke red-faced government reforms or something, precisely because no one is all that scandalized by such things any more. Instead, he is trying to strangle the links that make the conspiracy possible, to expose the necessary porousness of the American state’s conspiratorial network in hopes that the security state will then try to shrink its computational network in response, thereby making itself dumber and slower and smaller.
Early responses seem to indicate that Wikileaks is well on its way to accomplishing some of its goals. As Simon Jenkins put it (in a great piece in its own right) “The leaks have blown a hole in the framework by which states guard their secrets.” And if the diplomats quoted by Le Monde are right that, “we will never again be able to practice diplomacy like before,” this is exactly what Wikileaks was trying to do. It’s sort of pathetic hearing diplomats and government shills lament that the normal work of “diplomacy” will now be impossible, like complaining that that the guy boxing you out is making it hard to get rebounds. Poor dears. If Assange is right to point out that his organization has accomplished more state scrutiny than the entire rest of the journalistic apparatus combined, he’s right but he’s also deflecting the issue: if Wikileaks does some of the things that journalists do, it also does some very different things. Assange, as his introductory remarks indicate quite clearly, is in the business of “radically shift[ing] regime behavior.”
If Wikileaks is a different kind of organization than anything we’ve ever seen before, it’s interesting to see him put himself in line with more conventional progressivism. Assange isn’t off base, after all, when he quotes Theodore Roosevelt’s words from his 1912 Progressive party presidential platform as the epigraph to the first essay; Roosevelt realized a hundred years ago that “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people,” and it was true, then too, that “To destroy this invisible government, to befoul this unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of statesmanship.” Assange is trying to shit all over this unholy alliance in ways that the later and more radical Roosevelt would likely have commended.
It’s worth closing, then, by recalling that Roosevelt also coined the term “muckraker,” and that he did so as a term of disparagement. Quoting from Pilgrim’s Progress, he cited the example of the “Muck-Raker” who could only look down, whose perspective was so totally limited to the “muck” that it was his job to rake, he had lost all ability to see anything higher. Roosevelt, as always, is worth quoting:
In Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress you may recall the description of the Man with the Muck-rake, the man who could look no way but downward, with the muckrake in his hand; who was offered a celestial crown for his muck-rake, but who would neither look up nor regard the crown he was offered, but continued to rake to himself the filth of the floor…the Man with the Muck-rake is set forth as the example of him whose vision is fixed on carnal instead of on spiritual things. Yet he also typifies the man who in this life consistently refuses to see aught that is lofty, and fixes his eyes with solemn intentness only on that which is vile and debasing. Now, it is very necessary that we should not flinch from seeing what is s vile and debasing. There is filth on the floor, and it must be scraped up with the muck-rake; and there are times and places where this service is the most needed of all the services that can be performed. But the man who never does anything else, who never thinks or speaks or writes save of his feats with the muck-rake, speedily becomes, not a help to society, not an incitement to good, but one of the most potent forces for evil. There are, in the body politic, economic, and social, many and grave evils, and there is urgent necessity for the sternest war upon them. There should be relentless exposure of and attack upon every evil man, whether politician or business man, every evil practice, whether in politics, in business, or in social life. I hail as a benefactor every writer or speaker, every man who, on the platform, or in book, magazine, or newspaper, with merciless severity makes such attack, provided always that he in his turn remembers that the attack is of use only if it is absolutely truthful…
Roosevelt was many things when he uttered those words, but he was not wrong. There is a certain vicious amorality about the Mark Zuckerberg-ian philosophy that all transparency is always and everywhere a good thing, particularly when it’s uttered by the guy who’s busily monetizing your radical transparency. And the way most journalists “expose” secrets as a professional practice — to the extent that they do — is just as narrowly selfish: because they publicize privacy only when there is profit to be made in doing so, they keep their eyes on the valuable muck they are raking, and learn to pledge their future professional existence on a continuing and steady flow of it. In muck they trust.
According to his essay, Julian Assange is trying to do something else. Because we all basically know that the US state — like all states — is basically doing a lot of basically shady things basically all the time, simply revealing the specific ways they are doing these shady things will not be, in and of itself, a necessarily good thing. In some cases, it may be a bad thing, and in many cases, the provisional good it may do will be limited in scope. The question for an ethical human being — and Assange always emphasizes his ethics — has to be the question of what exposing secrets will actually accomplish, what good it will do, what better state of affairs it will bring about. And whether you buy his argument or not, Assange has a clearly articulated vision for how Wikileaks’ activities will “carry us through the mire of politically distorted language, and into a position of clarity,” a strategy for how exposing secrets will ultimately impede the production of future secrets. The point of Wikileaks — as Assange argues — is simply to make Wikileaks unnecessary.
[…] Great post from zunguzungu on Julian Assange’s actual goals for Wikileaks, which lie less in exposing already-known misdeeds than in impeding the ability of conspiratorial state and military actors to communicate reliably amongst themselves: …while an organization structured by direct and open lines of communication will be much more vulnerable to outside penetration, the more opaque it becomes to itself (as a defense against the outside gaze), the less able it will be to “think” as a system, to communicate with itself. The more conspiratorial it becomes, in a certain sense, the less effective it will be as a conspiracy. The more closed the network is to outside intrusion, the less able it is to engage with that which is outside itself (true hacker theorizing).[…] […]
Mas que haker un filósofo y teórico de la económia politica y del terrorismo de estado que con las filtraciones recientes se demuestra que en el mundo entero falta razonamiento para poder ver realmente que esto es una batalla de pensamientos y razonamientos en la que Julián Assange demuestra no solamente la valentia y la tecnologia que utiliza sino el pensamiento y conocimiento para poder crear nuevas teoria antiterroristas de estado.
google translate:
Haker more than a philosopher and theorist of political economy and state terrorism with the recent leak shows that in the world lack reasoning to really see that this is a battle of thoughts and reasoning in which Julian Assange shows no only the courage and the technology it uses but the thought and knowledge to create new theory of state terrorism.
While I find Mr. Assange’s philosophy intriguing, I’m not sure it holds when applied internationally. For example, I do not think that Mr. Assange would have been able to hack through computer networks in China or in Russia. In addition, it would seem that both countries have been able to be quite effective in keeping their links weighted while still maintaining an iron curtain (not long ago, quite literally) around their conspiracies. Hacking US data networks seems a singlular focus, and while I, for one, welcome the spotlight on our own “conspiracy,” I am not at all sure it will have the outcome Mr. Assange anticipates. I hope it does, It’s an interesting experiment at any rate, but I sense the possibility of unintended consequences.
I don’t think you grasp the main reason why the USA figures so prominently, or rather you might be disappointed: Wikileaks doesn’t hack itself, it merely provides a platform for leakers to leak info. Since there are more willing and/or able to leak within the US government, it naturally has a sort of precedence.
Russian and Chinese leaks are harder to come by, but I am sure that Wikileaks would be happy to post them as well. They have stated as much in the past.
Wikileaks does not hack any networks of any kind. Individuals in corporation and government leak documents to Wikileaks, which in turn makes them public.
I think this is an important point that maybe should somehow be more audible in wikileaks. This was a subject that isn’t often raised, as each country is busy talking about THEIR important people and what was exposed. In France, the question was raised in some media debates, that why should it be only the USA that is questioned when in fact these mails expose hundred times worse practises in other countries ? Personally from the little I’ve read in a couple of days, the notes are informative of what is going on with a few jibes which is normal. The ‘stan’ ex soviet countries, the middle east etc are the ones who must be trembling.
This article is spot on though and someone tonight on our (french) talk shows said it was like the invention of the printing press, it’s the fact that IT is being invented by our youth and the elderly will have to get used to it. This also means that (to my mind) that the youth like Manning have the power but not the knowledge or the experience. This will have to be worked out. He acted out of his gut feelings, and for that he shouldn’t be sentenced to such a ridiculous (52 yr ?)sentence.
For me, what i find interesting is that precisely, this will or might change the paradigme of world relations, which is what wikileaks wants is it not ? It must cause debate and questioning rather than strident calls for ‘assassination’, etc, or even too much blind ‘love’ for wikileaks.
Hacking US data networks seems a singlular focus, and while I, for one, welcome the spotlight on our own “conspiracy,” I am not at all sure it will have the outcome Mr. Assange anticipates.
It’s funny how many people are badly informed about WikiLeaks. The clue is in the title, it’s not that hard.
To put it simply: If people regard him as a hacker instead of someone operating in the realm of journalism and publishing, he will not enjoy the freedoms and legal protection those professions enjoy. So saying Assange and Wikileaks are hacking networks instead of [i]being leaked material by persons within those networks[/i] is tantamount to depriving him the same protection journalists have.
important is from where the leaks come and if they’re authentic or fabricated (who can tell?) – more important, in fact, than JA’s philosophy – of course, because, as many suggest, Wikileaks is very likely being used, in the instance of the US-cable-traffic dump, to advance a specific agenda: attack the ‘real’ enemies, Iran and Pakistan
Jeanne Miner said: “In addition, it would seem that both countries have been able to be quite effective in keeping their links weighted while still maintaining an iron curtain (not long ago, quite literally) around their conspiracies.”
Literal iron curtain?
Wha?
I was discussing the same issue in other sites, if the only country hardly targeted is US, wikileaks will serve more the anti-us sentiment than the real purpose of knowing what the hell is happening in this world!
While many of the leaked documents are sourced from the US a click on the ‘About’ tab on any of WikiLeaks sites will show that leaked documents are by no means exclusively US based.
The singular focus on the US is not in my mind a particular vendetta against the US state or people on the part of wikiLeaks or Mr Assange. If however we were to revisit the nails-in-the-board analogy used in the above essay, you would be hard pressed to deny that the US has many strings connecting it to the whole world. Nearly every country in the world has a diplomatic interest and dialogue with the US, more so than the UK or Germany for example. That is not to say that other countries are diplomatically unimportant; only that if one wished to diminish the global desire to propagate secrets, the US would be a great place to start.
In essence, by releasing items of negligible importance like the diplomatic cables wikileaks is weakening the “strong front” of a state, catching them with their trousers down in front of an international audience. This makes nearly every country less willing to share information; as a UK resident I can hardly believe if this happened here that the US would care too much. “it cant happen to us” would be the response i imagine.
Catch the US with their trousers down though, and you get everybody worried.
Interpol just issued a global warrant for his arrest for rape.
USA just issued a warrant for espionage because of his statement on TV “my papers will bring down entities like the US Government”.
He is a retard if he thought he wouldnt end up in a hole somewhere in Greenland.
~M
Great post!
Just informing you that the Interpol request is asking for his assistance as a witness in a 4 month old case, that curiously resurfaced two days after cablegate was published. There is no arrest warrant.
Can we all, please, agree to cease the use of the suffix -gate to other, unrelated words?
JUDGMENT DAY
May 21, 2011
http://www.familyradio.com
Julian is a controversial person. But I disagree if the US government wants him to be jailed. They should reflect that their system is not secure.
They certainly *can* reflect on their security, but what they *should* be doing is not engaging in the first place in hypocritical activities based on “it’s ok as long as no one knows”-type justifications.
Online shopping Online Shopping Store to buy Daily essential and Digital electronic products Hydroponics (Deep water culture, Ebb and Flow, Drip system, Aeroponics, Mini system, Grow trays, Propagation & Cloning, Indoor grow Tents), Grow lights(Grow light kits, HPS lights, Metal halide grow lights, Fluorescent lamps, LED grow lights, Grow light, reflectors, HID grow lights, Grow light movers, Quality light meters, Lighting accessories ), Controllers (Lighting and power controllers, Temperature and humidity controllers, Operate fans, Multi-Function controllers, CO2 controllers and monitors, CO2 generators), Plan Care(Plant nutrients, Plant supplements, Grow media, Grow pots, buckets, and bags, pests, Leaf Trimmers), Water and Vent(Air filters and odor control, Water purifiers, Ventilation & fan, Air pumps, Water pumps and irrigation, Heat Exchangers, Dehumidifiers and Air Conditioners, Water Chillers, Test meters and PH control). Free Shipping & Pay Cash on Delivery.
Website: http://www.hydroponicsxl.com/
C all us: 888-551-2685
Thanks for this close reading. I haven’t had the chance to read Assange and that NYer profile left a bad taste in my mouth (towards the author). Incidentally, I read this today: http://tarnac9.wordpress.com/texts/the-coming-insurrection/ which is also getting a fair bit of press in Germany.
About that, it’s kind of bullshit:
http://www.zcommunications.org/the-coming-insurrection-or-the-arrival-of-suicidal-nonsense-by-chris-spannos
Old news and mostly tedious drivel, like a dreary thesis. Wikileaks is alive and kicking because it is not a manifesto, it is an organic entity, with real blood, with real knives, for real cries. (Thanks to Okkervil River- For Real for that last little bit, I couldn’t help it, it just seemed to fit).
Thanks for this elucidation. Assange is a fascinating character and this writing is pretty brilliant.
This was a great post. Assange has been one of the most interesting characters to come out of the Digital Age whose purpose doesn’t seem to be fueled by making money, but truthfully making a change in how we interact outside of the Internet.
Great write up!
[…] encourage my readers to peruse zunguzungu’s essay on the man’s philosophy. See if Assange’s vision doesn’t sound strikingly close […]
[…] Wikileaks. Zunguzungu’s excellent article; also an interesting analysis of Assange’s claim that wikileaks will redefine world […]
[…] Interesting essay with bonus Pilgrim’s Progress analysis by Teddy Roosevelt at the end. […]
You think Assange could have pulled off his grand scheme without endangering the lives of U.S troops across the world?
He is not endangering anyone, you’re still drinking the koolaid. This man has a vision and I share it.
The system we have is not working and it must be dismantled.
“The system we have is not working and it must be dismantled.”
Says who? And to what extent is it not working and to what extent should it be dismantled? And who the F is Assange to make these decisions and act upon them? With who’s authority? This is elitism at its absolute worse and most damaging.
Comments such as yours are utterly childish and naive. If Jake is drinking his Kool-Aid, you’re drowning in yours. Where is the justice in Assange, you, or anyone else deciding unilaterally that you know best and then to violate national security laws with complete disregard to the rights of sovereign nations? Our government still functions with the consent of the governed, and we are our own sovereign nation. Despite what his own inflated ego leads him to believe, Assange does not have the wisdom or authority to do what he did.
Off with his head.
Assange is a revolutionist, and when one of these comes around I guess it means time for revolution and therefore he acts upon what he believes in, and by the way, that is terribly hippocritical to say “Where is the justice in Assange, you, or anyone else deciding unilaterally that they know best” and then back up the government, whom may I add act as if they know best
The system works, and it will continue to work, that is the reason why MOST countries hates US. The United States of America is the most influential, powerful, and important country in the World, and you still think the system does not work?, Who the hell do you think you are?, You’re clearly retarded…
” The United States of America is the most influential, powerful, and important country in the World”
Eh, man, that would be China, actually. But you only got one notion (or nation) wrong 😉
America works for now, but the truth is that it will take hard work in the next two or three decades to stay on top. This round of civics have a ton of work to do, thanks to decades of ideology over factual policy.
@ProudAmerican
The system doesn’t work because there is still staggering and worldwide poverty, starvation, death and sufferring that could easily be prevented if it weren’t for the horrible way countries like the United States act in the world.
“Off with his head” sound pretty absolutist to me when not plain dictatorship. If that is the posture of the “conspiracist” I say “down with the conspiracy”. What about the US gov violating the sovereignty of other nations, from what I read so far in Wikileaks, there is clear evidence of conspiracy against democratically elected governments. This is done by undermining the judicial system and executive powers of our allies. So if you process Assange for violating US rules we should prosecute US diplomats for violating foreign rules.
its just a game.,..what Assange is really trying, or at least he is hoping, is to get a reaction or respond that will clearlly show the real range of power of the USA and its Alies.,,.,.
real system is the money market that its reached its limits,.,.,.that what the USA is always been chasing.,.,the real “fuel” for USA and UK money market,.,.
there is no power shift at stake here nor it will be in the near future.,.China has not enough value, real value, to take over the importance in the world.
@danny
“Our government still functions with the consent of the governed”
consent based on what? because of people like Assange the true face of the govt is being exposed to the public. Democracy is not just about people going to voting booth…it’s a consensus by the *informed* public.
Every govt should be exposed in this manner.
The American system works, it just does not work for American people. America works for non-allied, supra-national business cartels. America works for money, banks, the stock market, the very wealthy, foreign militaries, the UN, the Saudis, Nato, Israel, the federal reserve, the IMF, but it does not work for its own citizens. We are frittering away our status as a world power by sending drones to shoot flees. We are wasting our dwindling resources on war, police power and prison building, while our highways crumble, and our schools are overcrowded and failing. If our children are too numb and over-fed that they fail to recognize that the cornerstone of freedom is an intelligent population, then we have failed them and are going to get what we deserve> bad food, shitty housing, high taxes, corrupt governance, and dwindling elder care. As we age, muling and whining about not having access to doctors and medicine, we should remember that we are the ones who got in bed with the banks and corporations, pretending that they were good solid investments. Those fat bankers and businessmen we put our sacred trust in have bailed and do not regret dumping the American working class on the shit heap of economic disaster. Those who still believe in the benevolence of free market capitalism are mist-guided sycophants gazing starry-eyed, with hands out-reached, praying to the stone cold Generic Corporate logos, “Help us Big Brother.”
The only way we have any hope is if we can evolve. Assange grew a spine. Wikileaks evolved out of our lies and self-deception. We cannot control truth nor do we need to. Corporations are given license to do business such that they may serve the needs of ‘WE’ the people of America. Not those people in some other nation. The wars are not possible without the Halliburtons, but Halliburton is no longer an American company. Most of what we are using to keep an American soldier in a war-zone is not made in America.
As a people we seem to be clueless. Who can we possibly trust, not banks, stock markets, not big-business, not government at any level, not democracy, not free-markets? It is no wonder we are listing in foreign oceans and about to get really hungry at home.
Thank you Danny! While Assange’s philosophy has merit in theory, I agree that no individual, or group of them, has the right to unilaterally decide they know best what is working & not working & how to intervene!
The government acts as if they know best, Livid, because we, as a civilized society, give them permission to do so when we elect people we trust to know better than we how to handle things we cannot (and should not) do for ourselves. (Too many cooks in the kitchen… )
We ARE governed by our collective consent and no one has the right to essentially take my consent from me, in this particular instance, regarding foreign relations.
In Assange’s defense, if I understand correctly, he is really just the Napster of secrets, merely making the means possible for gutless egomaniacs to leak information because they can do so anonymously, taking no responsibility for their actions or their impact.
If transparency is the theory, who the leakers are should also be transparent. Otherwise it’s the same “system” Assange is revolting against!
Please show exactly where Assange’s actions have endangered troops. Actual irrefutable data and not the typical fear mongering the governments use to try and discredit.
I would not want to see the actions by Assange endanger our troops, but there has been nothing that has happened to them that can be shown to be a direct consequence of the leaks.
ProudAmerican:
Yeah right it works!
Is that why china is passing USA in growth?
Is that why the unemployment in USA is on the rise?
Is that why your banks is going bankrupt?
Is that why 40% of all house loans in USA is due by 3 month (rotten loans/subprime).
Is that why most of the other nations in europe has free healtcare?
ProudAmerican said
November 30, 2010 at 12:53 pm
The system works, and it will continue to work, that is the reason why MOST countries hates US.
Yep, hatred of the system is a measure of success!! Nic one idiot. If it works evryone respects the system, not hates the country who think they run it. OUtside the US, you are not nearly as strong as you think.
@Spencer
“The system doesn’t work because there is still staggering and worldwide poverty, starvation, death and sufferring that could easily be prevented if it weren’t for the horrible way countries like the United States act in the world.”
The US is one of only hundreds of countries in the world. are you advocating a NWO under the US banner so that these problems can be eased? The impoverished in the US are not the same impoverished of other countries (lazy bastards are lazy). The starved are not the same starved. US welfare programs vs. starvation in African nations comes to mind. Any suffering in the US is not the same suffering of other so-called less developed countries.
“The system we have is not working and it must be dismantled.”
I agree. How many wars has the US started that it can’t win. Remember that fighting wars that it couldn’t win at the extremity of the empire is what destroyed the Roman Empire.
And no matter how many times the exposed governments insist on repeating the “people will be endangered” lie, they have yet to come up with a single shred of evidence that this is actually the case. With the last leak, where they said the exact same thing, in the end they were forced to admit that not a single person had been harmed or even affected.
Form the reason comment feed, worth repeating, minor edits by me:
“The difference is that the actions of Assange pose an existential threat to the power establishment, whereas those of OBL have only really threatened the populace…. When OBL kills, it is OBL who does it. When Wikileaks is accused of the same (as it will be), you will always find that it is a nation state who is not only making the accusation, but who is also holding a smoking gun.”
Jake, you might like to head to WLCentral.org and look under Topics – Frequent Falshoods.
Correct me if I’m wrong but soldiers endanger their own lives by signing up to the military in the first place. Training to be a killer and then whining about how leaked diplomatic cables are putting your life in danger is ridiculous.
Preach on!
“When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign-that all of the dunces are in confederacy against him” -Jonathan Swift
Spot on Alan, Spot on.
Thanks for pointing this out. Anybody dumb or indoctrinated enough to sign up for soldering gets what they deserve. Why do people worship solders? They are murderous thugs teamed up to destroy, kill and polute. America does not need any solders overseas. America needs to pull back to its own borders. Average people around the world don’t need or want your police state.
Yeah, I only hear politicians whining. Soldiers are generally more realistic about their position.
There are many reasons why people are motivated to serve their country including a sense of duty, patriotism, excitement/adventure and many other reasons I’m sure. Soldiers are basically ordinary people with family and friends and they likely underestimate their chance of being killed in active duty. I’m sure many find combat morally challenging despite their training. I feel for them.
The last I heard, governments endangered the lives of troops by starting wars and sending them off to die. Maybe Bush and Cheney should be classified as terrorists because of the American troops they sent to die.
It’s odd that people who dismiss innocent lives lost in wars fought by “good intentioned” states as “unfortunate but unavoidable collateral damage,” have so much less tolerance for the “collateral damage” that results from exposing the cockroaches in the National Security State to the “sovereign” people they allegedly represent.
So instead of going after Al-Qaeda we should have gone on with our lives and pretended 9/11 didn’t happen? Let them keep coming after us with no response? Some people are committed to preventing the deaths of American innocents, as well as innocents abroad. As humans, we all make mistakes, but at least some people are trying and not sitting on back on their judgmental heels yammering their self-righteous babble.
As for “exposing the cockroaches,” the public has no more right to know the personal exchanges between our diplomats than they have the right to know what you and your associates say to and about each other.
Thanks, zunguzungu, for a most educational post. All the best.
@Piper Bayard: So instead of going after Al-Qaeda we should have gone on with our lives and pretended 9/11 didn’t happen?
You should have put some thought into you actions, as the results show. Al-Qaeda is still about, a vast number more Muslims hate America than before it went about its idiotic crusade, Afghanistan is a mess with the locals (Taliban and others) quite happy to for the U.S. to waste its blood, treasure and prestige while they wait it out, etc, etc, etc.
Some people are committed to preventing the deaths of American innocents, as well as innocents abroad.
So the neocons say, as for the “innocents abroad” their value is subject to American interests.
As for “exposing the cockroaches,” the public has no more right to know the personal exchanges between our diplomats than they have the right to know what you and your associates say to and about each other.
In a liberal democracy they do, if you don’t like if f*ck off to North Korea.
@Piper, who said, “As for “exposing the cockroaches,” the public has no more right to know the personal exchanges between our diplomats than they have the right to know what you and your associates say to and about each other.”
That would be incorrect, because it doesn’t take into account “public” and “private”. As a private individual, I have a right to privacy. It’s in the description. My information and communication are restricted to myself and those I communicate with, so those would be the only ones who have a right to know.
As private individuals, we get together and agree to form a democracy. That means that all of us, in theory, have equal say, and we should all have the information to assist in running things. So we make it *public*. This is what Wikileaks is attempting to *restore* to us.
If we’re in a dictatorship – “I get a say in running the government, and you don’t” – then your comparison is much more apt.
Blaming Wikileaks for endangering US Troops is like blaming the witness testifying to seeing a dogfight for endangering the dogs.
brilliant.
Actually, it’s more like blaming the FBI for killing witnesses when all they did was give their witness protection program roster to the mob.
Incidentally, situations like this do crop up once in a while in American law – homeowners getting sued by robbers who trip over roller skates left on the stairs and such…
@Amenian, who said, “Actually, it’s more like blaming the FBI for killing witnesses when all they did was give their witness protection program roster to the mob.”
And to follow your rather tortured analogy further, who would be considered “the mob” in this case? Oh, that’s right: *us*.
I keep finding that the stridency that people have against Wikileaks is directly proportional to their disdain for actual democracy.
I haven’t seen any evidence that U.S. troops were put in danger. It’s not like the Iraqis didn’t already know that we were happily targeting civilians before the leak; they lived it daily.
As a supporter of small government, it’s clear that we have to start with an OPEN government. There is no excuse for the state to keep secrets. And if something must be kept a secret, it’s almost certain that the state shouldn’t be doing it.
Like, oh, up to the minute troop maneuvers? Should the names of those helping US forces be publized? Should human rights activists reporting from their home country not have anonymity, if needed? Should the exact blueprints, specifications, and means of production of nuclear weapons be generally available? On a smaller level, should witness to crime not be allowed to report anonymously?
Government, like any collection of people, has any number of things that should be kept secret. The problem is when they are secretive about things that have no need to be.
to really?: Do you actually believe that ignorance is bliss? Saying the government has a number of things that should be kept secret from the people it’s governing is saying that you don’t believe in democracy.
In the strictest most basic definition democracy is: “government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.”
If you believe things should be kept secret from the people then you believe that they shouldn’t have anything to do with the decision making or the actions their country takes, in which case most action taken is with the money of the people.
By exposing what is happening is not putting lives at risk abroad, those lives are already at risk because they are in a state of war, and what we all know is that the government has put those lives at risk not to ultimately better the society over there, but to selfishly gain from it. It’s a thinly veiled cause and Wikileaks just pulled the veil. Because after all ignorance is not bliss, and if there is possibly a nuclear bomb headed this way due to the actions of our government I would rather know about it than not, or be able to put a foot forward than sitting and waiting for it to fall.
Group hug, everyone!
you spoke my feeling. I could not feel but appreciation for all contributors here. bless u all
Loving your enemy is one the silliest things I’ve ever heard. This type of thinking allows our enemies to kill us off and get away with it. The authoritarians have no mercy at all. They are dangerous and quite willing to shoot you down, then have a laugh. Every day, progressives are assassinated and imprisoned by the right-wing fanatics. I say we take down the bankers, landlords, and ceos. And their running dogs, the religious right rednecks.
hahahaa@ rokko I hear you! but at the end of the day we are human, we have the ability to be authoritarian and submissive.. and I agree with you its no fair or just or makes sense that we are submissive to coercive authority, one that can only survive at our expense… but.. theres a time and place for everything.. and today.. seeing the spirit of real human engagement on this forum.. just made me feel human again..
just expressing a feeling.. u see after the war.. comes the building..
I’d love to be part of the hug but reading down this list of comments leaves my conscience in tatters. As a young, able-bodied American with a brain, I feel like a citizen of Germany during the ’30s who is unable to find the underground resistance. If I’m alive when this is all over will I be able to live with the actions I took and did not take? Over 1,000,000 Iraqi innocents have died since the invasion…
Perhaps if his approach does work it wouldn’t be necessary to risk so many American lives abroad, both military and civilian. I think it’s important to remember that we’re all on the same team — we just have much different approaches to problem solving and even different opinions on what the problems are that need solving. But most everyone is in agreement that there are real problems demanding resolution.
The Buffalo Blog Frog says “If more of the same isn’t working, try something new.” WikiLeaks fights against those that would tenaciously cling to the old ineffective strategies by exposing their means and motives. Julian Assange eloquently explains how the free flow of uncensored information can work to dismantle the network of the de facto conspiracy.
American may have a lot of problems, but she’s still the ‘best show in town.’ That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t ever strive to do better, and that doesn’t mean that we aren’t rapidly deteriorating. Let’s get her fixed (i.e., back on course) before we’ve reached the point of no return. After ‘winning’ the Cold War, it would be a shame to see her implode from the pressures from within.
(Actually, that last metaphor is particularly insightful inasmuch as it’s more the lack of substance [inactivity of others] that may ultimately lead to her downfall.)
Best show in town??? No way. This is an example of American exceptionalism. We’re better! We’re the best! It’s indoctrination showing its wantonly ignorant head.
Americans love to stick their heads in the sand and yell loudly about how they are the best despite hard evidence that it is not so. I wish it were so, but that does not make it true.
Wake up. Start reading the alternative views and you’ll quickly learn that the US is a failed democracy turned kleptocracy.
The only possible fix is to Revolt and throw the thieves and murderers out. They will fight tooth and nail to continue their conniving ways. We will have to THROW them out. They won’t leave easily or gracefully.
There is no evidence that any of the leaks have caused ANY deaths of the U$A military. Due to this illegal war, the U$A Govt is directly causing deaths of any U$A military as well as the murder of Iraq and Afghanistan civilians
Which part of free market capitalism and democracy includes a neo fascist elite controlling massive extorted tax revenues, not to mention floating multi trillion dollar debts into the bond markets…. mainly so they can award Govt. contracts to private special interest corporations…. please tell me dummy democractic believers… did you vote that your country should float trillions of dollars of bonds in debt and effectively bankrupt itself ?
just as we’ve never really had a proper communist state, because they always collapsed into dictatorships, we’ve never really had a proper capitalist state, because Govt. always grows big and fat and starts distorting the real free market.
in the real free market there is no use for a $50 Billion aircraft carrier, or a $250M fighterjet, its useless, yet the Govt. is able to purloin those by coercing its population into paying for them on the basis of one fear or another. That’s no more freemarket captialism than Stalin’s USSR was communism.
But the truth is that before big Govt. took over, we have had pretty decent free market systems, and they have certainly built a lot more than any other system, because market reward people who do industrious, creative and useful things… the only time they don’t work is when Govt. combined with special interest stop allowing a level playing field.
@Liam
A vote for Obama WAS a vote for Keynesian economics…. so yes, the people voted to increase spending.
Online shopping Online Shopping Store to buy Daily essential and Digital electronic products Hydroponics (Deep water culture, Ebb and Flow, Drip system, Aeroponics, Mini system, Grow trays, Propagation & Cloning, Indoor grow Tents), Grow lights(Grow light kits, HPS lights, Metal halide grow lights, Fluorescent lamps, LED grow lights, Grow light, reflectors, HID grow lights, Grow light movers, Quality light meters, Lighting accessories ), Controllers (Lighting and power controllers, Temperature and humidity controllers, Operate fans, Multi-Function controllers, CO2 controllers and monitors, CO2 generators), Plan Care(Plant nutrients, Plant supplements, Grow media, Grow pots, buckets, and bags, pests, Leaf Trimmers), Water and Vent(Air filters and odor control, Water purifiers, Ventilation & fan, Air pumps, Water pumps and irrigation, Heat Exchangers, Dehumidifiers and Air Conditioners, Water Chillers, Test meters and PH control). Free Shipping & Pay Cash on Delivery.
Website: http://www.hydroponicsxl.com/
Call us: +1 888-551-2685
[…] that the extent to which the data is used is irrelevant to the motivations of Assange and Co. They believe that the ”US is essentially an authoritarian conspiracy and … that the practical […]
Assange seems to say that governments with secure, internal communications tend to lead to authoritarian conspiracies.
and curiously he dismisses those who challenge the 911 Myth
I’m sympathetic to the overarching goals, but I think Assange is paradoxical helping more authoritarian regimes. It’s telling that his most important leaks are coming from a country that has a Freedom of Information Act.
How many leaks has he published from Saudi Arabia? To say nothing of Myanmar and North Korea.
Those are the places where more information could help people in their everyday lives. In the US it mainly has entertainment value on Fox News. Is anyone really shocked that some diplomats don’t like Berlusconi?
Your answer from Assange:
“People say, why don’t you release more leaks from the Taliban. So I say hey, help us, tell more Taliban dissidents about us.”
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/2/
As if he can just produce leaks from any authoritarian regime of his choosing. Think for a second about how this process actually works. Or better yet, read Assange’s interviews (Forbes, TED, Colbert) where he explains very clearly what is required to produce meaningful leaks.
I think that is the MAIN problem with Wikileaks… choosing what he wants to leak. That’s not transparent!
How can he aim for transparency when he himself isn’t? That does not makes him any different from the government and it’s dirty works.
is he actually choosing which ‘leaks’ to post and not to post? the impression is that all ‘leaks’ get posted – if so, the system is wide open as a conduit for disinformation psyops
That is the problem though, the governments with the worst transgressions are far less likely to have breeches because they are feared. This will leave the democratic countries at the mercy of the REAL authoritarian ones.
Assange’s goal is to sabotage diplomacy to further his anarchist, hacker idealogy. (He was an established hacker long before he created wikileaks.) His actions are deliberate and are intended to shut down to inter-agency cooperation, which he subtly terms “conspiracies.”
Ironically, after Wikileaks released a quarter of a million US diplomatic cables, he had the audacity to call for Hillary to step down because she may have violated UN diplomats immunity. Why would someone who believes that information should be free for all take such a stand?
“Secret diplomacy” is a misnomer. It is a delicate process which calls for our diplomats to be courteous to their designated country’s leaders yet give their honest opinions back. Does anyone here really expect a diplomat to give reliable information if he or she has reason to believe that what they write will be available for all everyone, particularly who they deal with personally, to see?
Now a cover up like what was happening in Yemen would be one thing to expose, but American media has already been covering that topic a while before that cable leak came out! If you didn’t know of US activity before this leak, then you haven’t been paying attention!
Derek, stay tuned. You will not be saying that in a few months, and it never was true. They have leaked from almost every country in the world, and had a great political impact several times (Iceland and Kenya for two examples, google). The major difference is the reaction, nothing has really matched the hysteria of the US government and media. They used to have an indexed list of leaks by country, I can’t find it now, but it was very extensive, internationally and cross sector.
Hey there GeorgieBC. (@marketmentat here!)
The WL mirror site (http://mirror.wikileaks.info/) front page has a pretty comprehensive list of all the leaks. (Incluing Kaupthing – arguably the thing that caused the first real re-appraisal of all the bullshite emanating from Iceland before IceSave went under).
It’s no longer on the main WL site. The country index is not on the mirror site, either… needs to be ported across I reckon; there has been a slight lack of housekeeping in recent months 😉
Cheerio
GT
Thanks, MM, that index really belongs in a debunking post. Will grab if I see it again, and the list when the mirror comes up again.
There’s also a list under “Journalism record” on their “about” page.
http://wikileaks.org/about.html
Derek, I hate what America has become generally, but I really believe… that despite all the shit the original American values keep being being smothered in by your successive governments… and despite the mass dumbification and dehumanization consistently perpetuated on the american people… if any decomcratic country has a people who could collectively re-awaken, organise and reform their system, and resuscitate the values of their republic, despite all that, it is THE American people. your not better than any other, just more privileged and cursed at the same time.
That is why you have a Freedom of Information Act. Assange is only reminding you of it.
@Jake – If it’s so easy to find leaks and put them on the web, you can be sure it’s just as easy for enemies to find leaks and put them on the web.
The public not knowing that there are leaks does not make the military safe from leaks!
Likewise, hacking a security system has the benefit of improving said system.
“…you can be sure it’s just as easy for enemies to find leaks and put them on the web.”
Wouldn’t an “enemy” be more likely to keep the information as a “secret” within its own “conspiratorial network”? Isn’t it the very act of releasing/freeing the “secret” information rather than using it as “chip” that puts Wikileaks on the side of “freedom”?
disinfo psyops
2 things to never forget:
1. “Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the state.” – James Jesus Angelton – Director of CIA Counter Intelligence (1954-74)
2. “The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.” – William Colby – Director of the CIA (1973-76)
This is a substantial piece but does anyone actually believe that Wikileaks/leaking will actually change “regime” behavior? Leaking is already part of the tactical repertoire of espionage/counter-espionage — witness the Valerie Plame kerfuffle. I appreciate Assange’s efforts, but I find his reasoning hopelessly naive. Here as elsewhere, transparency is a red herring.
Espionage/counter-espionage in today’s world is limited to leaking between authoritarians who already communicate. The only place that leaking to / spying from is unacceptable is the masses being controlled. They are supposed to be placated with “leaks” that expose reality stars having plastic surgery. Wikileaks is the people’s spy organization and the people are not a recognized global power.
But therein lies the true difference Georgiebc, Wikileaks is NOT a “spy” organization
Where spying is defined as any of the following,
1. To observe secretly with hostile intent.
2. To discover by close observation.
3. To catch sight of: spied the ship on the horizon.
4. To investigate intensively.
Rather, Wikileaks is the opposite of spying. Instead of investigating intensively to discover by close observation, it Blurts out nonchalantly to share by removed projection, but it isn’t really doing the blurting, merely serving as the amplifier and speaker. It’s kind of like Dealbreaker.com only with no sense of humor and much more credibility.
but what’s to stop agents from ‘leaking’ disinformation: e.g. North Korea shipping missiles to Iran – how to know which ‘leaks’ are authentic
Okay, I’m assuming Conspiracy2Riot is having a laugh.
Zach K, I don’t understand. The hacking metaphor you use would make Assange complicit with the very governments he is releasing secrets from. He would be trying to improve this ‘authoritarian conspiracy’ regime’s ability to manage secrets.
Still doesn’t answer how irresponsible his move has been, threatening the lives of U.S military troops, innocent informants and the like. Not to mention each nation’s ability to negotiate with each other.
Jake, perhaps this thought would help you to reconsider this essay (along with Assange’s): the oft-referenced conspiracy herein is nationalism. Threatening each nation’s ability to negotiate with each other seems precisely the point; a post-nationalist world is one where border disputes would be more about sharing resources and less about hoarding (or warring over) them. In other words, the grass is greener when there are no sides.
“the grass is greener when there are no sides.” I’m stealing this for the rest of my life. Well said!
The grass thing.
That was beautiful. I wanna steal it too.
ditto
I thoroughly agree that national borders are arbitrary and unnecessary in this abundant world. But too large a portion of the populace isn’t ready for the level of consciousness that reflects.
Just as each human has a different level of consciousness/maturity to handle certain truths at any given time, so too do collections of humans (Nations). It is not your place to force a nation into that growth in consciousness with a sledgehammer. (BTW: It’s not your place to do that to individuals either.)
That judgemental, self-righteous approach only generates resistance in most cases. Relating to those at other levels of awareness should still respect those others, accepting that they are where they’re at. Walking with others, guiding them and being an example work better in the long run. Brutal honesty is unkind.
That’s why diplomacy is a delicate dance. Giving leaders ways to save face, for example, while still bending in the direction of growth.
That’s some beautiful sentiment, maymay, but I’m not so sure that Assange’s experiment in social evolution is the only way to achieve the erasure of national borders, nor do I think it’s being conducted in the wisest manner.
One really needs to look no further than modern Western Europe and the EU to see national borders melting away, and I’d give you good odds that before the official merger of those republican, democratic welfare states, the governments of the future constituents secretly gathered intelligence and held closed-door meetings in formulating diplomatic positions in order to ease the transition into the EU. If I’m correct about this secrecy, then was it a bad thing that secrets were kept from the general public? And wouldn’t it be worth giving a chance for expansion the process that seems, so far, to have worked there?
This is, then, where I think you’re wrong about Assange’s motivations. Assange is, after all, an anarchist (whether an anarcho-syndicalist, anarcho-communist or some other strain, I’m not aware), which leads me to believe that his ultimate goal is the elimination of representative government (democratic or not)- in which the general public abdicates day-to-day decision making power to a governing class charged to stay informed on a stunning array of topics and to make the decisions which further the interest of the governed- and its replacement with, in the best case, a direct democracy. And while representative governments are certainly corruptible, direct democracy is in no way immune to imperfection: It presupposes not only a population full of individuals well-informed on stunning array of topics, but that a majority or constitutionally mandated super majority is wise, immune from demagoguery and incorruptible.
So, ultimately, as I see it, the question is do you want to try to tame the devil you do know, or face a brand new devil. And I think that Mr. Assange, in what could turn out to be the ultimate act of hubris, is forcing that new devil on us with his ill-contrived experiment. IMO, of course.
Jake: since no one has shown any actual harm caused by any of Wikileaks’ leaks, not even on a relatively small scale (say, analogous to the killing spree documented on the “Collateral Murder” video—which I suppose we’d never have seen in your version of a perfect world), pretending that somebody pointing out that fact is “having a laugh” is not responsive.
It’s nice that in this comment (unlike your first) you seem to show some concern for people who aren’t American soldiers, but those American soldiers wouldn’t be in danger if the US hadn’t sent them overseas, and even then they wouldn’t be in danger if the US “authoritarian conspiracy”, as Assange characterizes it, hadn’t conspired to commit acts that lead people to want to hurt American soldiers. I mean, there are US soldiers in Germany, but the biggest threat to them is probably crashing their cars on the autobahn.
The idea that frequent leaks will impair governments’ “ability to negotiate with each other” doesn’t hold water. If Obama, Cameron, Merkel etc. want to negotiate a treaty, they can still pick up the phone; or, if you believe the giant visible hand of Julian Assange will magically tap all their secure lines, they can get in a room and talk.
What is impaired (though perhaps not enough) by incessant leaking is the ability of each government to “exert” its “influence” (that is, to fuck shit up); having the diplomatic corps steal credit card numbers becomes slightly harder when the whole world knows that’s what they’re trying to do, and creating such schemes in the first place becomes harder if you think the order will be leaked.
Thanks, TT. If we can get a discussion going about the appropriateness of projecting U.S. military force abroad, that would be a very good thing. That it was thought necessary to lie in order to justify the use of force in Iraq is an extremely interesting, and (in the long run) somewhat hopeful sign. However, speaking as one who was punched and told to “Go back to Moscow” while handing out leaflets in 1970 about the Vietnam War … I ain’t holding my breath.
The system works, and it will continue to work, that is the reason why MOST countries hates US. The United States of America is the most influential, powerful, and important country in the World, and you still think the system does not work?, Who the hell do you think you are?, You’re clearly retarded…
You’re a moron.
You’re a moron
yeah our system works by taking minerals from other companies and “shelfing” technologies that can run cars on h20
but hey it lets us pay for more research and development. which gives us new toys.
shit. yin yang.
The United States of America is the most influential, powerful, and important country in the World,
Exceptional fast food and exceptional dance moves!
lol
Thanks for the name calling… it clearly identifies you and your tactics as authoritarian.
Who am I? I am an American who sees what you and the US are about. Being the most powerful means being the most corrupt. As the US slides towards the cliff, I weep but I know my country is wrong in so many ways that it must fail and be reborn as a true democracy, not a kleptocracy.
I don’t get it. He’s trying to make the US State Department less effective because… effective coordination between nations is a terrible thing? This is nonsense. The military is using spurious means to spurious ends, and if you make things harder for them, it is conceivable that we will start fewer wars. But if you make things harder for the diplomats, we will start more wars, full stop.
Let me quote the relevant part:
“in a world where leaking is easy, secretive or unjust systems are nonlinearly hit relative to open, just systems.”
If this makes things harder for diplomats it’s because they are corrupt already, and good riddance to them.
If this makes things harder for diplomats it’s because they are corrupt already, and good riddance to them.
Don’t forget that nature abhors a vacuum.
If you’re going to topple the current regime you would be wise to have a better one in place to take over. If you don’t then you risk placing yourself and everyone else at the mercy of whoever does. And chances are good they’ll be worse than what you started with.
But don’t take my word for it. Read some history.
Despite the arguments for the head of Wiki leaks, the bottom line still is that the revelation of classified documents violates the laws of the United States of America and the numerous states involved. The head of Wiki leaks is criminally liable for the revelations of the same despite his non-sequitur argumentation.
Of course you’re right, but so what? Today’s “legal” is tomorrow’s “illegal”, and vice versa. Laws come and go, and they’re always relative to whoever wrote them.
As a U.S. taxpayer, I would posit that nothing was stolen; that in fact we should “own” those documents, because we paid for them, and that our government ought to start operating transparently, rather than hiding all of their nefarious and corrupt dealings from our view, while continuing to sell us a flawed narrative about how the world really works.
bump
BUMP-BUMP (also of 1000 journals//same some guy!?) In any event, yes, let’s DO take ownership of that which we have PAID for!!
Sure, we own all these documents. That does not mean they all should be equally transparent.
Not all secrets equate to corruption. For example, I want my husband to keep my Christmas present secret until the right time for me to know. And I’m ok with my daughter believing in Santa Clause for now. Secret Santa is no fun unless there’s some secrecy. Yes, there’s conspiracy involved, but they aren’t dangerous, or in need of being exposed.
And how do you define “secret” anyway? If I’ve told even one person a secret, is it still a secret? Do I have to tell every person every secret to meet the standard of “transparency”?
Hey, so I am going to steal all of your belongings and then kill you. I mean what is “illegal” today is “legal” tomorrow right?
The revelation of classified documents is against the law… for those who agreed to keep them secret. It’s therefore likely that the leaker of the documents could face charges, whoever s/he is. But there exist legal defenses under American statutes for what is termed “whistleblowers.” These exist to exempt people from the penalties that leaking carries, so long as the information they brought to the public was of pressing public interest.
Wikileaks, however, may not have violated any laws at all: http://www.lasisblog.com/2010/11/12/wikileaks-has-committed-no-crime/
Which United States laws? We have no state secrets laws. It is illegal to disclose classified information only if it has been entrusted to you. The disclosure of classified information by third parties is not illegal.
This is why the NYTimes can print disclosed documents, the pentagon papers, etc. Wikileaks was never given a security clearance, therefore it is not illegal for them to disclose the documents.
Whoever leaked the documents to them, however, most likely committed a crime.
See Pentagon Papers, etc.
Read the Espionage Act.
In what way is the head of wikileaks liable? They have stolen nothing. They have hacked nothing. They are doing the work that journalists are supposed to do, but have failed to do. I think that you’ve missed the point totally. eg; the contrived reasons for the invasion and occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan. And next on the line will be the Big Bank dealings, which the U$A Govt bailed out using tax payers money so the banks could pay off their debts to their creditors. Also, it’s time that Amerikan people realised just how they became so affluent, on the backs of 3rd world countries. They might care about this, or they might not. I really think that the people of the U$A prefer to remain in ignorance, so they can live under the illusion that they are so great. The rest of the world think they are just plain ignorant.
Well said Barbara
Stealing information by hacking can never be justified by the use of argumentation and esoteric terms. It is still STEALING. The only justification is where a state is at war with groups, personalities and/or other states. Cyber War justifies hacking.
Nope. We are citizens who, constitutionally, have HIRED these jokers to serve us. They have so gamed the system that our Founders’ initial vision has been turned on its head. The rapid spread of secrets combined with the proven illegal and dishonest acts of our elected ‘representatives’, even at the highest levels, is evidence that the public’s employees have seized control from their bosses. The actual stealing has been done by those who hide what they do from us and would make it a crime for us to discover it.
I use this unfamiliar terminology for two treasons – to remind Americans that this was the original vision in our founding, and that today these guys exploit us as much as the banksters exploit their customers and shareholders.
Please don’t beg the question.
Julian A’s. theories are all fallacy and non-sequitur in the real world. How much is his net worth? Following his line of deluded thought… the tax man would be most interested to hack his accounts to determine his profits from the classified documents leaks.
again – JA’s theories are less important than the authenticity of the ‘leaks’ – striking, the overwhelming failure to question that and in consideration that they might be fabricated, to consider who benefits from leaking disinformation – i.e. the intended effect of the psyop
What are you talking, about Jesus? Nobody stole anything by hacking anything.
All of the information Wikileaks has ever published has been leaked to it by insiders.
Actually that is not true: the UAE mails were definitively stolen by hacking, not leaked. The hackers even broke into the website realclimate and attempted to upload the files there.
It’s the one time I’ve been disappointed in wikileaks. They were definitively used, tricked into lending their credibility to something that was 1. Not a leak, and 2. Guaranteed to be published elsewhere, as there are lots and lots of people who will publish (and even pay for) anti-climate science material.
So X7o you are saying the insiders of Julian A. stole the classified information for him….. Correct? The defense rests.
no jesus, do your homework before you reply. the cables were stolen by a us serviceman who downloaded them over a period of eight months while working at a govt base. he ANONYMOUSLY donated them to wikileaks’ “digital dump box” on their website for publication. wikileaks contacted the us gov’t at least twice for help,requesting assistance in censoring out (redacting) names and details that would harm or imperil others. the US told them to eff off. so they did it on their own, and are slowly releasing the cables, along with several other well respected news organisations aroung the world. there’s lots of information available out there. maybe you should have a look.
Dipshit idiot Americans who think their laws apply to everyone.
Assange aint a US citizen so their fucking espionage act doesn’t apply to him.
dear fucking dipshit yourself (calling people names is fun!!)– hearings are being held on capital hill as we speak to determine how Mr. Assange will be prosecuted. I guess those will now be halted since a distinguished authority such as yourself has now deigned to speak and eloquently explain that the US has no extra-territorial laws. LMAO at you.
TR’s shadow government sounds a whole lot like the biopolitical government of unelected functionaries Agamben goes on about at the end of, um, I think, State of Exception. When the book came out, I found it chillingly close to reality. Now I think it’s not perceptive or insightful at all; it’s a fucking instruction manual for contemporary governments.
His logic has an error. leaks to wikileaks happened so far in “conspiracies” with light punishments of offenders and quite open access that makes them more unconspirational. the closer knit a conspiring group is(bonding together like a unit of soldiers, firemen or policemen), the more immune they are because they lack members who are disenfranchised. so in effect wikileaks creates a selective environment where such groups thrive. the same thing as wikileaks tries does the police to fight organized crime by penetrating their information system and leaking out. However, organized crime remains and the remnants learn to adapt, like ethnically closed groups or extended families.
Exactly.
Wow, this is great. Plenty of confirmation of things I’ve suspected about the WL project – implied by certain comments and philosophical leanings, mostly on Assange’s part. I would dearly love to see him write at length on his theoretical stuff. That Frontline Club article was a nice insight, although all I could see was the front page. Until then, I guess, there’s plenty to digest here.
–x7o
Latest Blog Post on Wikileaks
Assange is an enemy of The United States. I hope out government completely shuts him down. It is only a matter of time.
Assange and Bradley Manning should be killed publicly.
Yeah, a public beheading just like in Saudi Arabia perhaps? What a ridiculous and irrational response. Murder people for exposing lies, hypocracy and crimes committed by governments and institutions.
ANONS ET AL “How fucked up you are!” (Harriet and Blah Blah know what from what epic I quote!)
He has insurance. Try and kill him. You’ll martyr him, and unleash the insurance. Remember, Julian has never failed to carry through on a threat, and it would be very easy to give the DoD a pass phrase that opened the insurance file, had some damning documents and another locked insurance2 file.
I think he’s untouchable. He might be one of the most powerful people in the world.
Americans like you should stop fighting the Taliban, and just sign up. You seem to be just like them. Disgusting beyond measure.
The killing mentioned is a figure of speech…. get it?
don’t get too excited – you may one day learn they’re rich assets in service to western intelligence – though more likely they’re being used – certain of the docs lead the way to expanding the war into Iran and Pakistan – see if you can think of a cleverer way of putting that out
[…] Read more Rating 3.00 out of 5 Read more from Freedom, Just Me, Leadership, Politics, Society 2010, Government, Julian Assange, media, Terrorist Conspiracies, truth, US Click here to cancel reply. […]
Assange is one of the greatest contemporary person i’m reading about nowadays. And “Anon” why should united states should see an enemy in Assange if they are so clean? Every empire have it’s start, it’s peak and it’s end. I’ll wait for the day us will stay in their shithole. Damn terorrists. I’m sure the zionist are trying to shut it down at all costs but in the end i hope Julian will win and the mass of fouls to make a big revolution against the evil that conducts the planet.
Assange is a cyber-terrorist. What he did is clearly wrong. Leaking diplomatic cables only undermines the ability of governments working together on shared issues. Cablegate will only make the world a more closed place. I think we will see that, in the end, these leaks will have unintended consequences that are contrary to what Assange envisioned.
That’s patently false. Cyber terrorism? Qualify that. He’s a cyber terrorist because… why?
Wikileaks isn’t involved in cyber terrorism. Simply because if you take away the “cyber,” you arrive at the conclusion that Ellsberg was… a terrorist?
No. You need a different word. Disapprove all you want, but please, have the lexical discipline to use words appropriate to what is meant, and avoid this sort of hyperbole.
He is a Cyber Terrorist because he gave aid and comfort to terrorists by his broad revelations of classified information. For the sake of argument, which portions of the voluminous cables are considered whistle blowing? Are all these whistle blowing? I say he is also an anarchist.
by vilifying him, you lend more weight to the importance of the ‘leaks’, the authenticity of which are in question; i.e. did North Korea really supply Iran with missiles? if this ‘leak’ is designed to misinform, what would be the goal, whom would it benefit, Israel perhaps, could JA be Mossad?
If the content of the cables is capable of undermining the ability of governments to work together on common issues – i.e. if it exposes the illegal and immoral actions of those governments – then how is it wrong to expose such things? To not expose it would mean being an accomplice to those crimes.
If the content is not immoral or illegal, where’s the problem with releasing it?
Thank YOU Jonas! Stop the whining folks, if it smells like dog shit and looks like dog shit, it probably IS dog shit!!! Get a life whiners! Government ‘officials’ world-wide, (small reminder here for the dim-witted…in most cases those folks YOU voted for/hired) are hiding all sorts of ELEPHANTS and their shit REALLY stinks – and the ‘officials’ are probably making more $$ shoveling DUNG for their few ‘appointed’ years than you’ll make in your entire working lifetime – then they’ll make a few more millions on their MEMOIRS detailing the ‘public version’ of their (groveling for mo’ money and…) shoveling & hiding of DUNG!!!
L M C ask yourself the question…. How much did Julian A. earn for all his classified documents leaks. The tax man of his domicile or alternate residences should be interested to hack his profit and expense accounts. Now this should be transparent for all to see given his convoluted theories of how the system should be run. He is not above this line of thought.
Timing can be the undermining factor, not necessarily the release of the information itself (although that too can have life-threatening consequences – just ask Valerie Plame Wilson!)
E.g., while we talk to Israel’s leaders and Palestinian leaders independently, to attempt to get them to the table for direct talks, revealing the content of those conversations prematurely could have devastating consequences.
I think the point is that most of us as individuals do not have the breadth of knowledge needed to know what’s the appropriate content and timing for sharing diplomatic info. I agree that too much is probably protected by the “classified” “national security” umbrella. But I don’t want us to throw out the baby with the bath water. I consider myself very intelligent & well-informed. And … I can acknowledge that I don’t understand the mobile-like effect revealing a secret about one country can have on another country.
@Jesus: LOVE your tax man analogy!!!
No, Anon. The US and the Zionists are the greatest treat to human kind.
Treats? Freudian slip? lol
They may be many things, but I am not sure ‘treat’ is amongst them! 🙂
Kardeş Türkçesi var mı bu yazının?
we are living history right now. this stuff will be in the history books.
question is, will he expose the new world order or is the nwo using this to see just how little the average joe cares about politics?
You mean like Hitler’s My Struggle and the Communist manifesto?
read up on the Pentagon Papers – in large part fabricated disinfo. – in large part to get the CIA off the hook for its failures and atrocities in SE Asia – some of these ‘leaks’ are smelling quite the same
[…] Make a conspiracy “so paranoid of itself that it can no longer conspire.” […]
This is an excellent analysis. Thanks for writing it!
[…] Full article HERE […]
[…] November 30 update: Here’s a very useful analysis of some of the theory behind Wikileaks as it relates to the “authoritarianism” of the US government: Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”. […]
Excellent, excellent article and links. Thank you, I loved that article by Assange and have been amazed at how few people in the media (or apparently the pentagon) had read it. Makes you wonder what they do all day. Nice to meet you.
1. Of course all government is authoritarian. The ‘state’ is conspiratorial, it exercises its power by authority (in a democracy the authority is theoretically drawn from the Will of the People, but it’s still… authority), and it does seemingly morally suspect things because its modus vivendi is based on a utilitarian style of moral reasoning that identifies ‘continued existence’ and ‘security’ as the chief Goods. The question is if there is a better alternative.
2. Assange believes that what he calls ‘conspiracy’ is bad, that authority is bad. He regards these things as inherently ‘unjust’. He may not say it, or maybe the analyst who wrote this piece didn’t feel the need to draw it out, but his position logically requires him to regard the State as inherently unjust and evil. If he doesn’t, it can only be because he misapprehends the fundamental nature of the State. In short, Assange is an Anarchist, whether he realises it or not, and his agenda can be countered by every argument ever made for the value of the State as an institution.
3. States cannot be any other way, not least because they have to protect themselves from the conspiracies that we call ‘other States’. I suppose, theoretically, a World Government could be ‘open and just’ (in Assange’s parlance) but in a world of a multitude of States, every State has to operate as a secret conspiracy to some degree, because other States are always trying to undermine each other’s security and power – not least by attacking each other in the ways detailed in the article.
4. Likewise, the ‘international system’ operates, by necessity, as a conspiracy because States form alliances and partnerships and try to undermine each others’ alliances and partnerships. So diplomatic communication has to be kept secret in order to prevent it being used by enemies.
5. Assange argues that there exists a non-linear impact on States by leaks… that the more unjust a State is, the more it is damaged (or the more it damages itself in response). This response is carried out, presumably, in order to prevent the State’s actions from becoming known to its citizens, who would object. If one is simply looking at the US, there may be truth to his assertion, but we don’t exist in a vacuum. An attack on the security of diplomatic communications affects EVERY State, and when you expand the frame of reference to the world as a whole, his simple notion of who is affected and to what extent falls apart:
5a. A state that completely controls the flow of information to its people (such as China or North Korea and, to a lesser extent, Russia) has little to fear domestically from leaks, while such countries often maintain sufficient military power to have little to fear from foreign aggression. In the case of China, the economic muscle that it exercises, coupled with its military security, means that these leaks will barely weaken its international position, if at all.
5b. Meanwhile, open States, which have free or nearly free flow of information as a matter of law… ie, most of the developed world… or weak States that are unable to control the flow of information within their borders… ie, most of the rest of the world… will be relatively greatly affected, whether more or less just or not. The difference in impact between the ‘just’ and ‘unjust’ information-porous States will be minor compared to the difference between both of those sets and the very unjust information-closed States.
5c. In other words, Assange’s philosophy has the opposite effect from his desires, by increasing the relative security of some of the most ‘unjust’ states and weakening the more ‘just’ ones. That alone should see this individual drug before the ICC and tried for crimes against humanity.
6. The structure of his attack – threaten the State with an action, prompting the State to tighten its security, thereby choking the State’s ability to formulate rational and effective policy – is *exactly* the same format of cause and effect that a successful terrorism campaign takes, only he’s attacking information security instead of physical security. This is information terrorism, period.
6a. To look at it another way, he says that he wants to prompt the State into becoming MORE secretive, ie. more conspiratorial, until the secretiveness gets so bad that it strangles the ability to conspire. This process, as it’s playing out, will make the affected States MORE unjust… and we will all suffer for it while it happens. This is the same notion as Lenin’s famous “The worse, the better” approach. It’s an effective, but brutal strategy, and it reduces security – for States and for people in those States.
In conclusion… Assange’s more dangerous than Bin Laden. He’s found an effective way to destroy, in the deluded belief that, after destroying, some never-possible Utopian ideal will result. He’s a modern-day techno-Lenin who should be stopped before he can succeed in weakening the bulwarks against anarchy too much.
Incomitatus,
No. Please make the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate state action. According to Assange’s model, corruption is not a series of events that emerge from a bad system, but a quality of the system as a whole.
This can only flourish in secrecy. Power collects secrecy around itself so that it can continue unconstrained. It is a natural tendency of systems such as these, just the same way that broad scale weather systems like hurricanes in the Caribbean are predictable. They have systemic properties, and their makeup is such that they proceed in a particular way.
And that is away from what they were designed to do, which is proper governance.
The objective is not to disrupt the proper functioning of a state, but to restore it.
It’s a vast distortion to characterize this as “information terrorism.”
The main point is that corporate and government elites operate to further their (often hidden)agenda. If their agenda and their methods to further their agenda are amoral, unjust, criminal or simply marred by incompetent beaurocracy, they need to operate in secrecy and be in fear of the truth leaking out to Wikileaks. Organizations that are open, just, honest and efficient have nothing to fear from Wikileaks on the contrary they benefit from their corrupt competitors being exposed.
States that do not allow free flow of information to their citizens will suffer from leaks that expose their conduct as their relationship with states that are open, just and honest will suffer.
If a state has nothing to hide, then it has nothing to fear.
I totally agree, but I think Assange’s theory also neglects the interaction with very intelligent opponents. Basically, wikileaks is a conspiracy to change the mode of the world with all the weaknesses of the conspiracies they try to fight. They can be infiltrated, they can become pawns (for example help them publish material that sheds a bad light on your opponents). I think it will only be a matter of time before wikileak’s security is breached by humint or sigint, making the whistleblowers afraid and stopping the wikileak’s editors flow of information. And it remains to be seen how long Assange can maintain the aura of a messias. Dirt campaigns have the tendency to make true or false claims stick to a person (just remember McCain and others). I think it will become even harder to determine what kind of man this Julian Assange is and what he wants (Becoming a celebrity like Paris Hilton and improving his sex life coz he’s phamous? He reminds me a bit of Jimbo Wales who is neither an all white hat guy.).
Please clarify your terms…. When you say authoritarian do you mean totalitarian or dictatorship. The U.S. government is a rule of law and not of men. It is a democracy and not a constitutional authoritarian government.
Well said!
Well. See; hear!
Wikileaks stands by the Government Story of 911. All the leaks put out, serve american an israeli interests. Iran is still hitler, pakistan bad, Al – Quaeda bigger and badder than ever. Maybe Julian has his heart in the right place. But the people giving this info know exactly what they are doing. What ever happened to that AIPAC spy ring trial that was supposed to happen?
you cannot underestimate the power of the attacked, and its range to bound and arrange official media brodcasting.,,.but also the impact of what wikileaks does by publicizing these documents and still to come documents about “a major bank in the USA”
for instance i read a message during the night, cause I was at work, that stated USA was “suposadly” spying the UN high executives. next day they changed it into USA was planning to spying UN high executives,.,.,wich states that it never happend.,,.and this is real power of information flow.,.,.
What i see in these cables is lack of communication in the middle east that could have done some good. If Israel knew so many of there neighbors wanted Iran bombed we could have fixed the Iran problem many years ago
1. You left out the part where a democracy is supposed to be a transparent organization, hence free of conspiracy.
2. You are equating ‘conspiracy’ with ‘state’ and arriving at the erroneous conclusion that no conspiracy must equal anarchy. You left out transparent governance. GIGO
3. As someone mentioned above, the states all know each other’s secets. It is only the governed who are left in the dark.
4.Secrecy is neither essential nor possible. Back to the international spying already happening.
5a. You don’t seem aware of the subversive climate in China. It will be difficult, (as with the US) but information will make a huge difference. Thousands cannot seriously govern billions without either agreement or ignorance.
5b. Your depiction of states as allowing free or nearly free flow of information goes very poorly with the idea that they will be the most affected.
5c. Your depiction of the US as a ‘just’ society goes very poorly with your demands that a citizen operating completely within the law be tried for ‘crimes against humanity’.
6. You are very afraid and illogical, period.
6a.Your numbering system becomes more incoherent as your thoughts do. That’s interesting.
1. Says who? How does that function? Find me, in all of history, a democracy without secrets and I’ll consider conceding the point, until then I will continue to believe that such a society is a chimera. That’s leaving aside the point that there are no pure democracies in the world, which I consider to be a condition caused by their lack of viability, but perhaps you’d beg to differ?
2. I do so on the basis of the assumption that a state without secrets is an impossibility and Assange’s premise that state’s with secrets are conspiracies. I explicitly deny feasibility of transparent governance, not least because it cannot fulfil the fundamental goal of the state: providing security from foreign aggression.
3. Really? Believing that requires you to believe that every intelligence agency in every country works perfectly… which is a logical impossibility, since a perfectly working intelligence agency would perfectly protect their own state’s secrets. Unless we’re to believe that every state is perfect at intelligence gathering but absolutely imperfect at intelligence keeping, in which case the citizens don’t know because they… don’t bother to look? I’d rather believe that every state knows some of the secrets of some of the other states, it saves me from twisting my brain into impossible knots.
4. Reference my response to your above point. Add to it that even if it is true that no secret can be kept forever, sometimes they don’t have to be: the ‘when’ in “Who knows what, when” can be very important.
5. I’m aware enough of the subversive climate in China to believe that you overestimate its strength, its access to information, its ability to make a clear judgement about the merits of information it has access to (a result of the information control exercised by the Chinese State making it hard to verify information), and the impact that information can have on a society as rigidly controlled as China’s. Which is not to discount the very real internal instabilities that exist within the Chinese system, such as the growing economic gap between the coastal and internal provinces or the growing pressures of maintaining a dual economic system or continued religious unrest in the more remote regions or the impact of continuing severe environmental degradation from heavy manufactures and public health issues from the mass burning of coal for electricity. Those fault lines aren’t likely to be affected by anything WikiLeaks releases about China’s foreign policy.
5b. They will be more affected *relative* to States which do an effective job of clamping down on information flows. Think of it as a bell curve, if that helps. You have societies tending toward perfectly just on one end (of which there are none, hence the ‘tending toward’) and societies which have strong governments and are very unjust at the other end, being less affected than the middle, in which are the open-but-dubiously-un/just countries that are the developed world and the want-to-be-closed-but-too-weak-to-do-it countries that comprise a lot of the rest, which are relatively more affected than either end.
5c. The US isn’t a just society. It’s a relatively just society when compared to, say, North Korea. Further, the ICC isn’t controlled by the United States… so I hardly see your point. Assange certainly shouldn’t be put on trial for breaking US law, because he hasn’t (maybe that’s good or maybe it means it’s time to write a law, either he way he gets a pass from us, for now). He has, however, articulated a desire to attack the international system… are you suggesting that the international system, through the International Criminal Court or some other means does not have the right to defend itself?
6. Afraid, yes. It’s funny how revolutionaries tend to have that effect… it’s this clearly illogical aversion to sociopathic autocrats (for what else can you call an individual who takes it upon himself to try to remake the world without regard to consequences?) that I have.
6a. Unfortunately, the coherence of *my* thoughts has nothing to do with your not comprehending how concepts can be judged relative to each other, not knowing that the ICC isn’t part of the United States legal system, and not knowing how to visualise a bell curve (although the latter is partly my fault for being unclear). As for my numbering system, I suppose if I have to explain it can’t be redeemed, but that’s still no reason to get insulting.
Let’s scrap the numbering system if that’s ok. There is no such thing as an absolutely secret or transparent governance, but there are ideals. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are valued more in the US than in any other part of the world. In theory. In practice, both the government and a great many of the citizens are acting like they adhere to the same ideals as North Korea.
What are these ‘crimes against humanity’ and ICC crimes you keep harping on about? Wikileaks publishes data. period. If you have found a law against what they do, in the US, Australia or international court, a lot of people would be very glad to hear from you. A lot of people are committing crimes against him at this point, and they should end up in the ICC, as should Bush and Obama for war crimes and crimes against humanity and Hilary Clinton for spying, but Wikileaks has committed no crime.
Incomitatus surely is on the high ground within his context. Georgie, I’m curious about your statement about the war crimes that Bush and Obama have committed. Where are these crimes against humanity or evidence of Clinton spying. The only crimes being committed are by treasonous fellows like the Army Private who downloaded all of these cables, the way the Taliban treats their own women and children, and the terrorists who are continually killing innocent people and wage their shadow war secretly without being uniformed or following any type of doctrine.
Julian Assange is definitely a modern day anarchist, doing his own will whether it affects innocent people or harms others, and for what type of gratification is he gaining from the release of all this.
He is exposing some sort of diabolical Freemason idea to take over the world, or maybe he has a bone to pick with the way diplomats carry out their business. It sometimes is hard to see what’s going on in the big picture, I can empathize when people get caught up in the world view and don’t understand. As a former Unoted States Marine, I saw Sheiks given money, copious amounts, and wo deride what they did, but nation building is a long term effort, if we have to grease palms, assassinate nasty folks, or help a military coup happen for the greater good, then this is what we have to do.
This Julian Assange will be imprisoned hopefully or in my humble opinion shot for treason. Their is absolutely no justification for what he’s done, he is no better then Bin Laden and his other cronies.
I don’t understand why you people keep comparing assange with bin laden, he is the medium, he didn’t conspire with manning to publish the documents, wikileaks published their leaks at the same time as 3 other major news corporations, so do their chief execs need shooting too? I love the united states and it’s people but I despise your government and the way they operate. Assange has helped bring to light the foul immoral way your govern me t operate. Your media feeds you nonsense and breeds ignorance to the rest of the world. How can you charge him with treason when he did nothing in USA, you people are upset because you have nothing at all to get your hands on him for so it’s more dirty tricks in the way of a witch hunt by way of sexual molestation in Sweden, what a joke. Don’t believe everything your biased news outlets feed you because now we are learning that it’s controlled by the state. Please wake up and see the light, georgiebc is right
This ties in with one of my favorite themes: the achievement of the desktop revolution (as Tom Coates put it) in blurring the distinction between the quality of work that can be accomplished at work and what can be accomplished at home. The average worker in the information or cultural realm is probably more productive with open-source desktop- or browser-based productivity software than he is with the klunky proprietary crap he has to use at his job. And the effective cost of a printing press or sound editing studio is now a few hundred dollars.
The most important possibility for such desktop production, though, is the regulatory state. Back when only a giant organization could afford the enormously expensive machinery for manufacturing, it required a large organization like a state to act as countervailing power. And the state itself could only be countervailed by another centralized, hierarchical branch of the state.
Now the desktop and network revolutions have put it within the reach of anyone who can afford a desktop computer to be a regulatory state or civil rights division of one.
This is off-topic somewhat, but I feel that you are over-estimating new media. Certainly, it is easier to publish information, but it may actually be harder to get people to read, listen, or watch it. There is a lot out there floating around and that is great, but readership is generally limited to smaller communities. The internet sites, blogs, etc., that transcend their smaller communities are usually directly associated with or owe their massive popularity to exposure by traditional media outlets. For example, would Wikileaks be read outside of 4chan users, conspiracy crazies, and the relatively limited number of people with both the time and interest for extensive reading in foreign policy if CNN or die Welt didn’t decide it was newsworthy? Simply because there is so much out there, it is more difficult to establish authority and credibility on a subject and traditional media sources possess and bestow that authority and credibility. I agree that my personal websites runs more smoothly and is more attractive, and is more functional than the one my work asks me to maintain (as a side project, no less) because I have to use company-approved software, layouts, and code. But the logo at the top of the office page brings a lot more readership and carries a lot more weight than any other site that I maintain. And the information on it is assumed to be more reliable (that is perhaps correct).
Moreover, I have no data, but I would theorize that most people aren’t even reading Wikileaks; they’re reading summaries of the leaked cables from other media sources. That’s still a filter that this information has to go through and it is a filter tied to the governments that Assange believes are conspiratorial.
Wikileaks is certainly something new and is a different challenge to the government of a nation-state, but I don’t think it is going to be particularly formidable at the moment. The impediment is the centralization of readership, not the decentralization of information dissemination.
[…] out this must-read lengthy analysis of Julian Assange’s writing about Wikileaks. While the media is almost entirely focused on the […]
Yes, the piece above is good verbiage but verbiage alone does not end misery. When the adversary takes up the gun his power is derived from the barrel of that gun and we have no power, our votes are meaningless for change. Our form of government is meaningless because every member accepts bribes. Do I have to spell it out? Mao said power flows out the the barrel of a gun and America follows Mao in that respect. Peace marches are worthless, marching head first into a barrage of pigs with clubs and dogs and guns does nothing to change the situation. What works is closing a city down, many cities down like they did in Seattle, please see that movie, better yet, read the book, there in find the blue print for change. Bring an end to the march of the monster of death, money! The Battle of Seattle by David Solnit and Rebecca Solnit
Ghandi and the peacefully attempted occupation of the salt production plant led to the freeing of India. ‘Nuff said?
The interesting thing is, those “pigs” you speak of – they’re the first ones you call when you need protection… you skewer them with your words for attention and adoration from your socialist tree huggin’ friends, but when your laptop’s off, and you’re out in that parking garage, walking with your keys between your fingers to your car, hoping you’re not carjacked, you know dialing 911 is a button away…. oh – but I forgot – they’re pigs. So I guess dialing 911 isn’t an option for you?
“but when your laptop’s off, and you’re out in that parking garage, walking with your keys between your fingers to your car, hoping you’re not carjacked, you know dialing 911 is a button away”
Last things first, “dialing 911 is a button away” actually on most phones its 4 buttons away 9,1,1, and send unless you’re really so fearful and paranoid that you keep it on speed dial?
Second, do you know who else provides “protection”?
Third, Socialists and tree-huggers are two separate parties, comrade, and the socialist-tree-huggers no longer stump, get it, stump.
Fourth, how do you walk with your keys to your car? I think most people keep them between their fingers. There was that movie though, what was it, My Left Foot? I’ll bet that guy keeps his keys between his toes.
Fifth, I kinda just leave my laptop on all the time, It goes into sleep mode or hibernate or whatever particular REM cycle it feels like.
Sixth, I called the police once when I spotted two itinerants shadily casing and then breaking into a house on my college campus 10 minutes before they got into the house. I then waited for the popo to come while watching, hidden. 25 Minutes and 3 calls later I watched the thieves successfully exit and take off. The “pigs” never did show up.
well all very academic..and sending me to sleep.
As far as I am concerned Life is a Conspiracy.
Get over it.
This is an absolutely brilliant post, thank you. I’m not into idolization, but it’s undeniable that Assange and Wikileaks will be marked in history for what they’re doing.
One thing I don’t understand in all this: Wikileaks continues to have establishment news organizations read and analyze documents in advance, then frame and present them to the readers before the leaks go public. There’s an argument to be made that these media outlets are themselves conspiracies, given their lack of transparency, their well-documented gate-keeping functions, and closeness to state and corporate power. You and Assange both have radical critiques of these media pursuing their own narrow self interests, or simply being incompetent… so why with this latest leak are the vast majority of the cables still in the dark, with only these largely unaccountable ‘professional’ journalists having seen them? In a sense, Wikileaks is conspiring with them in the slow release of these cables.
I’m an independent journalist in Haiti – been here for over a year and seen firsthand how the establishment media disfunctions in reporting on this poor country whose people are fighting for self-determination and survival. There are approx. 1200 cables from the US Embassy in Port-au-Prince yet to be released, while it appears a fraudulent election financed in large part by the US and foreign governments is being forced on the population. Why the delay? The time, at least for Haiti, is now. Why not let the public have at these documents? Why reinforce the privileged access of the establishment media? I understand the appeal of major news outlets splashing Wikileaks headlines on their front pages while utilizing their research capacity. But I think by now Wikileaks has made such a name for itself that it could release these leaks to the public at large – including highly dedicated members of the alternative and independent press – and still generate the headlines and impact in line with its objectives.
Wikileaks is being careful in an attempt to keep interest high and people reading. So few people even read any of the 0.1% released initially (not to mention all of the stuff they released prior to 2010) that you can imagine how few would bother to approach the full database. Releasing it immediately straight to the public was the initial model, and it didn’t work. If no one reads this, the point is lost. People being tortured already know they are being tortured – it has to be read by everyone else.
That said, have you contacted them about prior access to the data, explained why you need it now and what the dates are you are working with? They are dealing with a lot of media organization’s schedules and releasing information about almost every country in the world, they need a hand to note everything noteworthy. Contact them.
Thanks… Any ideas on how I contact them? I looked already and I don’t see a way anywhere on their website.
[…] CableGate + Google search strings – enter a keyword or country Espionage alleged against Wikileaks (a press organization… who’s next? Drudge?) Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” […]
well… US govt cud publish anything and its acceptable; wikileaks publish and its not right ? now where is the freedom of speech or wat so ever free will ?
the Govt is jsut using excuse and all reasoning is jsut to shield and protect its administration … all these years US been poking its nose everywhere but now the truth is coming out.. how uncivilized and barabric they are ….!!!
good work Assang… All my support with u …
wikileak kind of encourages distrust and talk behind your neighbor. Reminds me the stasi im.
It’s food for media and consumer: learn about things you were not supposed to know like spying at a promi foto. But privacy/secrecy has its place, imo.
In other cultures Ass. would be saked and bingo (good that he isn’t here)
[…] […]
This is all well and good, but there is a reason he is not leaking any Russian or Chinese stuff. Very good reason too, it is called self preservation and it is why this approach only works vs Western world.
So you make the claim he’s a coward still alive due to the grace of the US president who seems to consider him more of a nuisance, unlike the dead Iranian nuclear scientist recently or the hovering threat over al-Quaida scholars, whatever their nationality.
Interesting read, and actually sheds fair light on his next step, he announced that a bank will be the target of the next leak.
Tackle the war, tackle diplomatic cables and get the government off-balance. Next up tackle a bank, which may be one of the shady, corrupt, behind-the-scenes string pullers, at least in his mind?
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” “To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that […] […]
I am waiting for the big bank reveal…It will hard to be shocked after the last 10 years on this ride to hell.
I fully support and respect what Julian Assange is doing.
That is all.
Hear, Hear.
This is the best thing I’ve read about Wikileaks, Assange, and their intentions. It clarified much for me. I too support wikileaks. It’s nice to have some semblance of a press back.
The objective of Assange definition of conspiracy theory leaks is purported aimed so as to “carry us through the mire of politically distorted language, and into a position of clarity,” a strategy for how exposing secrets will ultimately impede the production of future secrets” I find this ethical high moral ground rather grandiose if somewhat a dangerous position by all affected parties, ie, in placing real peoples lives in the cross hairs of public scrutiny, albeit, to potential public humiliation, defamation, and, moreover, their lives in peril. The simple power of conspiracy leaks, in affecting the character of a person, in besmirching a persons character, for the sole intention of revealing an opportunist evil or a blundering political decesionmaking public policy may indeed be a matter of journalistic sensationalism and a typical case of Aussie larrikanism, which is very notorious for their “tall poppiesm”. More particularly, you have omitted the affect of Lord Acton’s dictim on ‘power’, particularly by those who possess it, and how this affects the rapacious antics of conspiratous cabals, ie, political ‘rivals’ within the fold who will endeavour to lob down a “tall poppy”.
We must be wary of those recipient of this information who are privy to this disclosure of wikileak publication, and whether we are fully cognisant of the information decernment desemination process, ie, in confirming or denying the veracity of such a wikileak publication. The power and attention fueled by the public domain, the worldwide media, upon the Julian Assange wikileaks website will only give him more political clout. This is perhaps the worse case scenario for those people already affected by the wikileaks activities.
Moreover, what is more important, is the fact that even if wikileaks is shut down, more replicated websites will arise.
Cheers mate!
Again with this lie. If people are placed in danger, why was the U.S. government forced to acknowledge that not a single individual was affected by the previous leaks?
Mate, this is purely a pre-supposition you cretin psuedo-intellect! Mate, youre some halfwitted moron on the internet. Piss-off you dimwit!
Finally, as an Australian, I don’t give two bricks on the value of any purported American reports, whether it be considered as hearsay, speculative, or otherwise. I propose a salient situation based purely on an educated observation on the role of the international media, via the internet, the result of such intelligence gathering, its disemmination, and articulation. If this is considered as an equivocation of facts or a process of disinformation and or misinformation is a matter of your and my interpretation. Even your quotation from a purported US source is highly subjective and suspect and you only need to dessiminate such information as unsubstantiated.
Have a good day, people.
Tofa soifua,
Tim Tufuga from Brisbane, Australia
[…] December 1st, 2010 § Leave a Comment “To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us, and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not. Firstly we must understand what aspect of government or neocorporatist behavior we wish to change or remove. Secondly we must develop a way of thin … Read More […]
[…] This essay about Julian Assange is easily the best thing I’ve read about Wikileaks since they’ve come to my attention (I probably shouldn’t conflate Assange and Wikileaks, but so it goes). Reading Assange’s own intentions in addition to zunguzungu’s breakdown-within-the-larger-context made me more enthusiastic about Wikileaks than I already was, and I’m all about open information networks. […]
[…] https://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/julian-assange-and-the-computer-conspiracy-%E2%80%9Cto-de… Esta entrada fue publicada en Uncategorized. Guarda el enlace permanente. ← Entrada anterior LikeBe the first to like this post. […]
This analysis basically makes Assange’s writings Hegelian, with a dose of analytic conundrum enough to make conspiracy concrete. But that’s what makes this good, the way presence and absence work environmentally, they do produce one another, that is my axiom too. The eidos of conspiracy, the individuality among them, act predictably. Among the devious actions is the shrouding of aletheia, also enough to instill in truth telling the only way to go.
“….In the media’s coverage of the WikiLeaks, its massive exposure of classified material is almost invariably described as “unprecedented.” In reality, there is one historical precedent. It accompanied the conquest of state power by the Russian working class in October 1917.”
“One of the first acts of the new workers’ government was to publish the secret treaties and diplomatic documents that had fallen into its hands. These treaties laid bare the predatory war aims of Britain, France and Tsarist Russia in World War I, which included the redrawing of national boundaries and re-division of the colonial world. In exposing them, Russia’s new revolutionary workers’ government sought to advance its program of an immediate armistice to end the slaughter.”
“Leon Trotsky, then People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs, explained the principles underlying the exposure of these state secrets. “Secret diplomacy,” he wrote, “is a necessary tool for a propertied minority, which is compelled to deceive the majority in order to subject it to its interests. Imperialism, with its dark plans of conquest and its robber alliances and deals, developed the system of secret diplomacy to the highest level. The struggle against imperialism, which is exhausting and destroying the peoples of Europe, is at the same time a struggle against capitalist diplomacy, which has cause enough to fear the light of day.”–ICFI
http://wsws.org/articles/2010/nov2010/pers-n30.shtml
The problem is, those writings of J.A. while admirable, were from 2006. This is 2010, and the content, manner and timing of recent Wikileaks efforts raises suspicions that Wikileaks has somehow become some kind of CIA or Israeli ‘public perceptions management’ organ.
An honest information liberation effort doesn’t need to be pre-announced, doled out in small bites, orchestrated in cooperation with the NYT, etc. Witness the CRU emails – just showed up one day as a big zip file on several fileshare sites. That’s all it takes. Anything more stinks of PR, spin and content cherry picking for unknown agendas.
Notice which small but significant country is *not* being harmed particularly by the diplomatic cable leaks.
a giant zip file in the inbox of The New York Times is not enough to assure publication. The Times itself acts a a censor, having agreed with the State Dept. to withhold some of the information.
The NYT has had all the documents for some time, but are themselves waiting for Wikileaks to take the first step with every cable.
[…] como yo, tienen problemas para entender la estrategia general de Wikileaks, tal vez les interese esta lectura cuidadosa (vía Vega) de un viejo artículo de Assange donde desarrolla la idea de los gobiernos autoritarios […]
What he advocates could be summarized as an open-source form of government, but then, who manages the CVS ?
“You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” – Mahatma Gandhi
How naive you folks all are. The only thing Assange will end up doing is making life more difficult for the rest of us as Western “democratic” governments tighten things up in order to limit the damage of and prevent future instances of leaked “secrets”. We will become more like the Chinese is all and you people will have your self fulfilling prophecy.
That’s the point, silly. If we can do that, and continue to do that, to the point that the government is ineffectual and completely pathetic in the eyes of the people, it will be reformed.
So the first re-formation is into something ineffectual & pathetic. How far into this ineffectual & pathetic re-forming will we have to go before the re-reformation? How much & what kind of damage will be done during that period of decline & can you honestly predict that over the long term we all are going to be better off for having taken this approach? As opposed to building from where we are?
i saved everything!
i loved it all and saved the stuff!
reinvestigate 9/11 a false flag operation executed by the cia and the bush admin!
Oh Sue, Sue, Sue… I’ve got a ticket to Pakistan for you so you can get all your mysteries solved. Have tea with Bin Laden – I’m sure he’ll welcome you with open arms and explain how it all really went down (just before he chops your head off). You know, my car was acting up today – damn that President Bush! I’m SURE it’s all his fault!!!
All Sue said was something quite sensible – reinvestigate 9/11. There are many questions that have never been answered. That is a stone cold FACT. As for what you just said… it sounds like you checked your intelligence and brain at the door.
To anyone concerned that the smart quotes in the URL of this page might cause trouble when passed on to others, I find that running the URL through tinyurl, e.g.
http://tinyurl.com/39bnlgx
works.
I would like to propose a wikileaks faithful community boycot of all Swedish goods and services until they drop their politically motivated charges against Julian Assange. Rock on the economic sanctions agenda of the people.
[…] into Assange's modus operandi…written by Assange (somehow the media missed this one completely): https://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010…ent%E2%80%9D/# ____________________________Top Gear Rullz 4ever! Reply With […]
“Authoritarian regimes give rise to forces which oppose them by pushing against the individual and collective will to freedom, truth and self realization.”
Assange mistakenly believes that revealing the truth and promoting freedom, will be something people truly want and result in a “better world.” Or at least he never expands on the premise and assumes its a desirable goal. The role of government, and social contract in general, is to transform conflict and difference into manageable, agreeable terms. Oftentimes, this involves lying to others and to yourself, to perpetuate the contract aims: that conflict is something other than what how it exists in a pure environment. It is a system of lies to protect society against its natural tendencies, which would result in sending it back to the dark ages if left to instinct.
In a nutshell, Assange is an anarchist, and anarchy is something human kind has rejected many times throughout history.
The sense I get is “anarchist” is a less refined interpretation of what this is. I don’t actually think this is anarchy, though I understand how it can be mistaken for it. It’s not absence of government, or power or regulation, which is what anarchy would espouse, it’s more the absence of secrecy surrounding power and regulation, I guess.
Anarchist is too good for him – what Assange is (other than an Ass) – is an ethnocentric – a media whore. Perhaps he’s the antichrist.. making the world believe he is their “savior”.. but underneath that wicked hair is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
[…] On Julian Assange […]
[…] analysis of the motivation and goals impelling Wikileaks, via “Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; ‘To destroy this invisible government’… The question for an ethical human being — and Assange always emphasizes his ethics — has to be […]
Putin is Alpha Dog? He is a bastard with his tail between a whore’s legs.
LOL
Aaron’s blog is now famous (http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/latest-updates-on-leak-of-u-s-cables-day-3/):
On Tuesday afternoon, the official WikiLeaks Twitter feed drew more attention to the manifesto “State and Terrorist Conspiracies,” by calling an academic’s blog post that quotes it at length a “good essay on one of the key ideas behind WikiLeaks.”
Given that Mr. Assange has been accused of anti-Americanism by his critics, it is interesting to note that “State and Terrorist Conspiracies” begins with a quote from the platform Theodore Roosevelt’s Progressive Party adopted when he ran for the presidency in 1912:
Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.
As Aaron Bady, the author of that blog post WikiLeaks advised its fans to read on Tuesday, pointed out, Teddy Roosevelt has also been credited with coining the word “muckrake,” now commonly used to describe the dogged work of investigative journalists.
[…] users would do well to follow Tom Murphy for all their development and aid news, and do check out zunguzungu’s excellent post on Julian Assange and […]
We need an Assange in the Corporate world too…because even here not all is well.
I’d support that 100%. We elect our government so I don’t support what WikiLeaks has done so far. But “Corporate America” is not elected and abuses we citizens regularly!
That is a complete illusion. We don’t elect our government and I haven’t seen a democracy in my lifetime anywhere. When you must choose between two (or more) options that someone else gives you that is not democracy and even if we were to elect a leader for the first time to give him/her complete power is absurd
[…] Internet* Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” https://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/julian-assange-and-the-computer-conspiracy-%E2%80%9Cto-de… I…guys holy crap I don’t know why there isn’t more talk about this article […]
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; ?To destroy this invisible government? zunguzungu Make of it what you will. No doubt one or two on here will be getting the noose / rifles out. […]
Since a conspiracy is a type of cognitive device that acts on information acquired from its environment, distorting or restricting these inputs means acts based on them are likely to be misplaced. Programmers call this effect garbage in, garbage out. Usually the effect runs the other way; it is conspiracy that is the agent of deception and information restriction. In the US, the programmer’s aphorism is sometimes called “the Fox News effect”.
this is such a funny statement,..,
I really enjoyed this exercise in critical thinking.
It made Assange’s explanations much clearer.
This is history being changed at a profound level, and it helps to know the reasoning of its prime participant.
Thanks much for your effort here.
This sounds very reasonable. You can compare it to the way the police would most effectively fight a big mafia organisation:
It´s much more effective to pressure one of its members and make the insider´s information he offers public, via the media, than to take out a few gangsters, because it will result in increased paranoïa and turn the organisation against itself (it won´t be able to trust anyone).
But I see one major obstacle here, Glenn Greenwald points it out in the following article: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/11/30/wikileaks/index.html, namely: what if a large part of the media is actually part of this ´conspiratorial power´?
Ola? (Pt), Claro, denuncias e mais denuncias, a onde vamos chegar? A liberdade só é dada por Deus, por mais que conhecemos, os conhecimentos do mundo nada são, mas o que está oculto será revelado.
Paulo
I have a question…. Which part of the voluminous classified diplomatic cables is considered whistle blowing and which part is not considered as such? Julian seems to have a messianic view with his own esoteric terminology. If the majority of the released classified documents is not whistle blowing who then is criminally liable?
Fuck Roosevelt! he was a socialist cocksucker.
Go Wikileaks!
Fuck anyone who says Assange is a criminal, you’re a fucking criminal, paying taxes blindly to thugs who start wars and kill millions, fuck you all, I spit on the troops, and spit on anyone who likes the government, you’re the fucking criminals.
Anyone who works for the government deserves to be fucking shot in the fucking head and killed.
I’m a supporter of Wikileaks and a government critic (as any citizen in a republic is required to be) who worked for the government for nineteen years. The guiding philosophy of Wikileaks is precisely the opposite of what this “supporter” of theirs shows here, namely that government is not monolithic, that there are many people within corrupt organizations who mean well and desire change who if given an adequate outlet will help you learn the truth about the organizations they work for.
Lumping them all in together is simple-minded bigotry, and advocating violence against them passes the bounds of free speech. I don’t understand why this barbaric hate-speech post has not been deleted.
9 s d f j, your statement ‘Fuck anyone who says Julian A. is a criminal, your’e a fucking criminal…’ is a fallacy in terms. Please clarify your terms. Your argumentation is flawed.
[…] “To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us, and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not. Firstly we must understand what aspect of government or neocorporatist behavior we wish to change or remove. Secondly we must develop a way of thin … Read More […]
[…] ein Kommentar in dieser Diskussion um einen Text von Julian Assange. Dort wird auch eine Frage diskutiert, die ich mir ebenfalls stelle: Wird durch […]
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To wreck th… […]
[…] Julian Assange and the computer system Conspiracy; “To eradicate … […]
All this nonsense of complete transparency in government must be the product of Julian A’s. deluded imagination. Since the beginning of civilizations, diplomatic assessments cum espionage and secrets have formed part of theory and practice in governance. The Chinese Art of War has a chapter devoted to spies and the safeguarding of secrets. A state without secrets can easily be defeated in war. Thus… In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace. The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence under no circumstances can it be neglected… ISBN: 0-385-29985-0
‘All this nonsense of complete transparency in government must be the product of Julian A’s. deluded imagination. Since the beginning of civilizations, diplomatic assessments cum espionage and secrets have formed part of theory and practice in governance. The Chinese Art of War has a chapter devoted to spies and the safeguarding of secrets. A state without secrets can easily be defeated in war. Thus… In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace. The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence under no circumstances can it be neglected… ISBN: 0-385-29985-0’
The ‘art’ of war is becoming far too risky in the nuclear age. The fact that states always had secrets doesn’t make it right. Just because we’ve always done something doesn’t make it right. The First World War was called ‘the war to end all wars’ for a reason. If nation-states really require secret, then maybe it’s time to rethink the nation-state. It is of course very important that this leaking of secrets will also include major corporations and many other governments in the future, so that the need for keeping secrets is reduced on all sides.
Name a state that has no secrets or diplomatic assessments of the situation. Give away all secrets including industrial secrets on formulas and plans? You might as well sell the country down the drain. If Julian A. is so right why doesn’t he be transparent and reveal what he made in terms of financial profits for being a principal in direct participation or inducement for the hacking of classified information? He should practice what he preaches!
Countries, like Equador, who are offering “safe haven” to Wikileaks are doing so out of a frantic effort to keep their own government documents from showing up in a wikidump… get real people. I’m tempted to create an Assangeleaks site.. Hmmm!
Why aren’t the leakers held to that same standard of transparency? J.A. is the publisher, but the leakers get to hide – perpetuating the very kind of system they purport to overturn! Hypocrisy!
In summation….. we the jury find Julian A. guilty of 250,000 counts in violation of the Espionage Act of the United States of America. Good night and God bless us all.
By the way…. I am a citizen of the Republic of the Philippines and a proud ally of the United States of America.
Your comments do not support freedom of speech as Assange did absolutely nothing different than tell the truth and produced info. that most of us already know–besides–compare/contrast what Bush did with ousting a CIA agent and placing the entire world “on hold” with the Iraq occupation based on bogus info. based on torture confessions proving absolutely NOTHING to warrant what has happened since. The REAL “enemy of the State” is Cheney/Bush et. al.–the Clintons whom Obama put into office–are probably part of the hidden secret government of the US.
[…] topic is analysed more fully by Zunguzungu in a post entitled Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”. The author points to Julian Assange’s essays from 2006 on the nature of government and his […]
Sorry folks, I don’t see anything Mr. Assange has done that amounts to a hill of beans. He’s created a media ‘sensation’ and a distraction.
Finally. The voice of reason. And you didn’t have to write the words to Imagine or sing Kumbaya to make your point! I’ve not read ONE “wikidump” that’s remotely surprising so far. I’m hoping there will be a mention of UFO’s though.. or big foot. Let’s at least solve some mysteries and have all this media hoopla bear some fruit!
i hope someone of note actually comes across this post…really well thought out and written.
http://dearexgirlfriend.com/
[…] think that’s essentially correct. But as zunguzungu explains in a excellent WikiLeaks-sympathetic post this is likely Julian Assange’s actual strategy and not some failure on his part. The post is […]
[…] nie tylko zwykłym klikaczom na Facebooku, ale i amerykańskim dyplomatom? Nieistotne. Assange już osiągnął swój cel. Zasiał strach wśród tych, którym szczególnie zależy na utrzymaniu sekretów. Wpoił im […]
[…] commentary (zunguzungu, 29 Nov 2010) commentary (workwithoutdread.blogspot.com, 27 Nov 2010) […]
[…] being a clever guy, is well aware of this reality; indeed, his own writings suggest that he’s counting on it. Like the Marxists of yore, he’s a heighten-the-contradictions kind of guy. Here’s his […]
[…] A close reading of a 2006 Julian Assange essay, useful for understanding the motivations behind Wikileaks. (via Ethan Zuckerman) […]
I’ll have to read it myself to be sure, but if that is his plan it’s really very clever. I’ve always believed in the notion of using the system against others, but using the system against itself is a stroke of genius. More than that I’m glad to see he has a plan, if he’s set on martyrdom at least he leaves behind a legacy.
That really is very clever.
“Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
IMAGINE THERE IS NO COUNTRIES
IT ISN’T HARD TO DO
NOTHING TO KILL OR DIE FOR
AND NO RELIGION TOO
IMAGINE ALL THE PEOPLE
LIVING LIFE IN PEACE
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one”
—-
yeah, the system does work
and world is living in peace.
you americans have no idea about peace.
That’s right, damnit. The Americans have no idea about peace.. it’s baffling why so many people, by the millions every year, flock to its shores to escape oppression, famine, torture, poverty, and political or religious persecution.
I mean – shouldn’t these folks be flocking to North Korea or Iran where there is just SO much peace and love? Ahh.. imagine that.
Or Greece, which almost wasn’t a country anymore.
Oh, wait …
Have you heard about the non-Americans bombing people who don’t belong(read: who are different) to their society in Southeast Asia?
So much about American and not knowing peace.
Hey – Have you heard about the Americans bombing people and invading countries who don’t belong (read: who are different) to their society?
Sure you have – They do it all over the world.
So much for Americans knowing peace.
Oh, wait. No heaven, no hell, no religion [and no faith]? “Dreamers” who are and will believe on that might as well perish now. Even if you unite all and have no One who is Higher… well then you didn’t really live. You’re alive, yet you’re dead.
Buy in the bright side, I like your comment on, “Americans really don’t no a thing about true peace.”
Jesus is pretty much the only one in the comments to make sound sense. Julian Assange is effectively a criminal. He has subverted and broken laws for his own ends. His motives are selfish and relative, revolutionary and anarchial. He is no better than many of the governments, individuals and institutions he’s railing against to take down.
And by breaking laws, he will have no one responsible but himself when he is taken down. He will not be a martyr. He will be a fool of his own making. Only a fool believes that standing on the shifting sands of personally relativistic moral grounds will keep him immune from harm or hailed as a paragon for humanity.
Laws exist because people need structure. You work within the system to change/correct the system. You do not work outside of the system to change it, because doing so makes you a law breaker and nullifies any claim to morality or righteousness. If you stand on relativity, you cannot claim that your actions are right and better.
Assange has clipped his own legs out from under him as he tries “To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us…”
Other countries are preparing to go after Assange when/if they see fit. Assange is being sought internationally. He is friendless, and when his organization is sifted, it’ll be quite interesting to see who’s behind Julian. Already connections have been made between Assange and Soros.
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.
The founding fathers of the United States were also criminals in the eyes of the British Crown. I suppose you would have been calling them criminals around your dinner table as well.
Assange shouldn’t be friendless, he should have the support of the people. But of course, when the people are dependent upon government teats, Assange becomes an enemy.
– mike
According to the book of Romans in the Bible, yes, the founding fathers were breaking God’s laws when they rebelled against the British Crown.
Now, something good came out of something bad, but that doesn’t excuse breaking the law in the first place. The founding fathers believed the British Crown and government had broken God’s laws, thereby giving them an excuse to ignore/break England’s laws and rebel against them.
What’s Julian’s excuse?
Oh, so because the founding fathers could twist the Bible to justify their actions, that makes it ok?
So all Assange needs to do is throw out some scriptures to justify his actions and it would be ok?
– mike
“Assange shouldn’t be friendless, he should have the support of the people. But of course, when the people are dependent upon government teats, Assange becomes an enemy.”
ooorrrrr …
How about we just don’t care?
I mean, it’s not a conspiracy if most of the fifteen hundred documents I’ve perused so far (I’m losing my eyesight) are stuff I already knew or suspected.
Seriously though, you’re trying to rally a few generations that don’t care enough about this stuff to action. It’s not that people love the government – they just don’t feel compelled to do anything since it means more work about something that will end up broken once it also turns into a bureaucracy and so on.
Subversive church you quoted the same statement ‘one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter… Are you justifying Julian A’s actions? How many so-called freedom fighters murdered and pillaged around the globe? The Hutu and the Tutsi? The Khmer Rouge? The Philippine’s New People’s Army? The Jihad groups? Are you validating the fact that the terrorist in Julian means he is a freedom fighter? Read the most beautiful instrument of freedom ever written…. the American Declaration of Independence! These be truths without fallacies in their clear statements.
Jesus,
Listing only the “bad” freedom fighters is disingenuous, Jesus. I could reverse your list and name the various empires that have also raped and pilliaged and killed their way to the top, which having been victorious, can justify their brutality and decry the violence of others.
My point in using that quote is that its all about perspective.
May I remind you that your “most beautiful instrument of freedom” had to be realized with deadly force? And may I remind you that the land our founding fathers wrested from the British was also wrested from the Iroquoi Nation who had in turn wrested it from smaller groups of Native Americans.
Wake up. There are only those who have power and those who don’t. If you aren’t the powerful trying to hold on to power or the less powerful trying to become more powerful, you are just a pawn in that game.
– mike
Sorry mike your arguments are still fallacies in terms and non-sequitur. In all fairness, history records the fact that the then colonies rebelled because of tyranny. Monarchy is absolute rule premised on the divinity of monarchs to rule by God’s will. You can say the colonists were fighting against this absolute dictatorial rule.
The U.S. became great because of Democracy and they the founding fathers were treading on unknown ground. 200+ years and the U.S. is still going strong. All the principles of the law and democracy as it is today were invented by the American intellect.
Clarify your description of power…. benevolent or authoritarian? The U.S. is a benevolent power. The then Russian Empire swallowed up all of Eastern Europe to create the iron curtain after World War II. Your country the U.S. liberated my country the Philippines with no strings attached.
The native a m e r i c a n s now enjoy the blessings of a free democracy and even have a six nations organization.
Mike- In my experience there is a very thin line dividing the terms freedom fighter and terrorists. Most of the so-called Liberation Movements have committed the crimes against humanity in the name of terrorism. I say piracy which is also a crime against humanity should be equated with terrorism.
Julian A. is a Cyber Terrorist masquerading as a-f
Sorry mike to continue…… masquerading as a so-called freedom fighter.
I said it was a matter of perspective. To the British, including those who were loyalists in America, how do you think a bunch of rebelling colonists looked? Remember that maybe, MAYBE 20% of the population were active patriots. So the majority of folks didn’t participate in the revolution, and less than half supported the rebels.
And let’s face it, what the country was 200 years ago is NOT what the country is today.
Power is not benevolent. It may have an appearance of benevolence, but when push comes to shove, it is not benevolent. That my friend is the fallacy.
I find it ironic that you choose to not mention that the Philippines fought a war of independence from America and use the term “liberated”. And don’t forget you kicked out our military in the ’90. And don’t forget that we still want a military base there. We tried to broker a deal with MILF (I still love that acronym) that had us putting a base in their territory. And we wil try again over the row with North Korea.
Real benevolent.
Speaking of MILF, I know you have seen violence in your country under the name of “liberation” that was/is very questionable that I have not. Still, it is a matter of perspective. Those who would fight against your established government have a perspecitve that, even though you think it is skewed, is, in their eyes, completely justified.
Nothing I said is non-sequitur or a fallacy. It is just from a different perspective.
– mike
Nice one Mike… and for Jesus, too. But somehow Jesus… “Americans have liberated the Philippines with no strings attached…”??
I don’t think so.
Remember there are bases in the U.S. here that can’t be trespassed upon by our countrymen… and yet their base is on our land. Hmmm…
Read the book that talks about this… ‘Gapo.
“He has subverted and broken laws for his own ends”
Name them. Name one, even. Laws of his own country that is.
Or do you really think that every citizen should be bound by the laws of every country? That they should be prevented from doing something which is not illegal in the jurisdiction in which they do it just because it happens to be illegal elsewhere?
Apparently, you do. And so, I surely hope you’re respecting all the laws of every single nation.
Just because something is illegal in (say) the USA does not mean that it is illegal everywhere. Nor does it mean that it should be.
It looks as if the stubborn Jesus will not budge on this one, totally irrational pointsnof view, somewhat biased stance on a man who has done absolutely nothing illegal, that’s right NOTHING!!! That is why the only way the americans can detain him is by launching a witch hunt in Britain for a crime which isn’t even a crime in Britain and pressure other nations and corporations to act on their behalf like puppets of their dodgy foreign policy. I hate USA and I’m Australian
Nice one Anonymous (who you might be), and for Richard, too.
Even if we counter-argue with Jesus, he will not change all of his beliefs, views and opinions about this matter.
Well Julian Assange could have known long before that one can’t convince virtually everyone in your plan.
[…] a government plot or if you question his authenticity. Zunguzungu has a post entitled Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”. There is no reason for me to rehash the post, so here are a few quotes that really stuck out to […]
[…] http://cryptome.org/0002/ja-conspiracies.pdf is some writing by Julian Assange that is analyzed here. from the secondary source […]
[…] that is really that shocking… just what wikileaks is/hopes to do…. this blog about is good … Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” zunguzungu quite theoretical but interesting… twine and stuff __________________ Vocoustics Promotions […]
‘To destroy this invisible government’ validates the fact that anarchist Julian A. is inciting the ignorant and the naive to sedition and/or rebellion. His view is no different than the ‘messianic men on horseback’who twist facts by esoteric terms in even ignoring proven truths about the U.S.
This blog is very interesting and it is great to read peoples views- some of which are very conflicting. The problem I find is peoples views are too one way or too the other way. Everyone needs to be as open minded as possible and try to be balanced in knowledge.
Great post zunguzungu.
Anyone who calls Assange a criminal needs to be shot in the fucking face.
He’s not a criminal when the laws are unjust.
I fucking hate anyone who stands up for and makes excuses for governments.
I would not lose any sleep if you fucking died of cancer.
wow…. that’s mature.
anarchist.
Nice, such a wonderful, civil attitude to have in a discussion, even if you do agree with the blog in question.
You’re an embarassment.
9 s d f j the fact that you can make statements like ‘anyone who calls Julian A. a criminal should be shot in the face’ shows you as a ‘freedom fighter’ cum terrorist. It also shows the just laws of the U.S. as tolerant of psychotics like your good self since that is your own opinionated statement.
A government of the people, by the people and for the people is the essence of U.S. democracy. Where are you from pilgrim?
Unfortunately, there are probably 150 of us to each one of you and the anarchist spew is wasted on those in control, as we know that together we are strong. I don’t require civility as it’s over rated. In college they teach carefully choosing words for healthy rhetoric; the streets of LA however, they taught me how what jail is for. Enjoy your trip~ he’s not only a criminal, but a douche bag with an agenda that is not approved by the masses. He needs permission from the populace to act an ass. Remember that chump while you pull the combat boot out of your ass. 😉
i suggest to give Nobel to Assange
Oh absolutely – yes, yes, give him the Nobel.. it’s so meaningless now, why not bring it to a new level of “low”. I mean, Obama got his Nobel – before he even did anything that could be documented or even slightly tangible. Besides, his mum says he’s “fighting the baddies”, so that’s good enough for me.
Give him Nobel?
I mean, that’s a pretty crappy thing to give someone – a dead guy.
“Here, take this.”
“What is it?”
“It’s the remains of Alfred Nobel.”
“Ew, ick!”
Assange’s thinking, cogent though it may be, is undermined by his “ends justify means” rationalization. He has appointed himself and his organizatin to be judge, jury, and executioner. Executioner is particularly apt if the ends really do justify the means – I wouldn’t want to be him should the people whom he seeks to undermine adopt his ethos in total.
Exactly!
True enough!
…and it’s working as predicted! Well done, WikiLeaks. Quod erat demonstrandum.
:
LOL
SIPRnet wasn’t exactly a conspiracy. It’s an extention of a network that was around before the entire 9/11 attack happened. They’ll still communicate, and they’ll go back to the same ole same ole in about a year, just that everyone and their mom in the military won’t be able to see it.
Exactly like before 9/11.
While I’m not entirely on the same line with Assange and think he and Wikileaks could tighten up their process to prevent some collateral damage, I do think that it’s good to have this stuff come out every once in awhile.
The only issue I’m having with your assessment is that I don’t think it’s having the impact intended. All that’s happening – from my internal viewpoint on the process – is that the government is changing the channel through which the same old thing is done. Right now, it’s already dying down, and most of the international community is reacting against Assange instead of with him.
There’s a reason why North Korea or China or Russia people haven’t leaked anything of value to Wikileaks: their people are pretty tight and guarded against just such attempts. While China may be seeing some internal strife, the country is still able to keep its people in the system under control through fanaticism and/or tighter regimes. And that’s the weakness of the plan – Assange assumes that there is no amount of control that can stop leaks. There is, and it starts at the government becoming fanataically controlled by fanatics that are backed by other fanatics who don’t care. And apathy. Apathy kills the Wikileak’s plan, as well.
Luckily, the US is an easy target. He makes it seem easy. But at the same time, things slide off the backs of a lot of Americans and other people in First World countries. There’s no revolution – I’ve been hearing that since 1984 that it’s just around the corner, that all it’s going to take is just another inch or two. Nothing’s happened for 20+ years, because a majority just don’t care.
You just can’t ween these people off what you call the Kool-aid. I’m sure in 20+ years I’ll still be hearing the same manifesto.
M c c l a u d there will be no revolution in the U.S. whether leftist, rightist or centrist sourced. America is a free democracy not an authoritarian, totalitarian, dictatorship as pointed out by Julian A. The government of the people by the people and for the people is successful. It may have had its trying times but a great democracy like the U.S.A. has lasted more than 200 years now. You seem to have forgotten history.
What are you talking about?
Did you read the above article?
Some people are calling for revolution, hoping WikiLeaks inspires people to open their eyes and throw off the shackles of a conspiracy.
I’m not advocating anything – I’m pointing out that whether it is to inspire transparency or revolution, these dumps are doing nothing. They are merely entertaining a few people, causing the governments (or conspirators, as Mr. Assange contends) to make their networks more secure, and boring the rest of us to death.
It’s a sensationalist fad. It will die out in a few weeks, and the Internets will go back to obsessing over something else. Which is the exact opposite of what WikiLeaks wants. Or maybe they do want that – to be a one-hit wonder for the fame and money. I dunno.
You seem strong about your views about this… and so “Iron Curtain-ed” that you won’t give up on your defenses for America.
Well you appreciate the original themes of their Government, but what about the people within? It’s not like if the original Vision/Mission of their Government is pure, the people who act in the Government today will be that pure also.
You can tell very quickly who is actually thinking before they post there comments. As a student of economics and foreign policy studies this Essay reminds my of what my wise mother once told me; learning is a learned process. It is an understatement to say that the philosophies addressed in this essay are merely interesting ideas, international development philosophies is a more fitting term. Some would even say light upon light…..ideas are infectious.
…information is knowledge and knowledge is power, no matter how you frame it. The world order has been turned on it head…and blood is rushing to its face. The most recent WikiLeak is a very mature yet classic case of, introduce the messenger to the nearest guillotine.
The idea of an anti-conspirator, a kind of New Energy era Robin Hood of international development….Makes me feel like a real Moore. Kevin Costner and Morgan Freeman were great in that film….we they not?
“The world order has been turned on it head…and blood is rushing to its face.”
Explain the events happening right now that prove this.
Right now, people are merely apologizing and scrutinizing who has access to confidential information in the US.
Is there an actual outbreak of violence attributed to Wikileaks changing the present world order and the way anything is done? Are we currently experiencing a vast wave of transparency from governments about their secrets? Has anyone toppled a government conspiracy due to this?
This is what I was talking about – I hear this all the time, that this event is turning the world upside-down and this event is bringing us closer to revealing the conspiracy, etc.
Apathy is winning. I just asked a room full of college students that includes students from the US, India, Iran, Turkey, Russia and Japan what they thought about this recent Wikilink dump. They are all pretty politically involved. All of them either didn’t care, were convinced it’s business as normal in the world community, or that it was a rather good joke. None of them think it’s any basis for concern or motion to revolt.
I don’t understand what frame of reference you people use to make statements about the impact of various events. I work in a position where I see things on a very broad scale both internally and externally for the State Department. It’s like you invent these scenarios or events in your head. Give me proof instead of making broad, general statements.
I admit that I have to roll my eyes at how out-of-touch most of the government people I work with are, as well.
Agreed, the world is not on its head, but the point of this was not to cause revolution, or transparency of governments. Assange says the opposite, that an increase in secrecy would result.
Great essay!
Ah, the days when a politician could cite Pilgrim’s Progress and know that most people would be familiar with it.
Like none of us knew the sort of wheeling & dealing going on behind closed doors between governments was going on. Are we supposed to be shocked? Surprised? I am neither. I have seen no titillating revelations.. nothing shocking or awe inspiring. Wikileaks has provided nothing to the common man other than more of what we were already getting on t.v., in the media, and in fictional movies that we had a hunch was based on some tidbit of reality. Yawn.
All Wikileaks will reap from their self-absorbed-look-at-me-look-what-i-can-do-fest is responsibility for some poor government schmuck’s murder… or, more seriously, our men and women in uniform being killed in retaliation. You’ve enlightened us not, wikileaks.
Except for the last part:
That’s about what I’m getting from 90% of the people who actually know what’s going on. This is exactly what I’m talking about. There are two main reactions happening all over the place –
1. “We already knew or suspected this, we don’t care.”
OR
2. “We’re mad but we don’t care enough to do anything about it.”
Save for a handful of individuals out of 6 billion, most people don’t care enough. They just don’t. Effort mostly wasted.
I don’t really agree with the last bit – we send our people there, they get killed there whether or not we call Putin a dick in a diplomatic cable.
I’m mad & I do care. I don’t know what to do though. Any suggestions?
You can’t do it alone. You’d have to get enough people together and get them to care, and then get them to care enough to act. That’s four giant battles right there – lack of cohesion, apathy, lethargy and then the system/opponent.
As the Internet broadens, the world shrinks and the economic gap widens, apathy and lethargy only get stronger.
Good luck. If you can do it, more power to you.
*if you couldn’t tell already, i don’t care *
very good post! great read for me.
http://enjoibeing.wordpress.com/
[…] Californian blogger named Zunguzungu describes Assanges “philosophy”. If I get him (and Assange himself) right, Wikileaks doesn’t want to aim at specific secret […]
Wikileaks is only legitimate if they “dump” as well the correspondence of OTHER GOVERNMENTS in the world. All this broohaha about Zionists – phooey. Have you nothing better to do with your God given day today? You people talk as if it’s JUST America playing political games??? Ecuador is peeing its pants with worry that someone with “access” will sell their secrets to Assange.. so what do they do? They offer SAFE HAVEN to Wikileaks… wow… how sweet. And other countries are in the Bribery line along with Ecuador. Hilarious.
Zunguzungu, thank you for this well-written piece! It was a delight to read!
Evil
http://www.evilcyber.com
Well, this makes the muck-raking a little clearer for me, now. You’ve given me lots to digest. Thanks.
[…] following is an interesting analysis (by ‘zunguzungu’) of a text by Wikileaks leader Julian Assange, probably written around […]
[…] and Terrorist Conspiracies” (pdf) von Julian Assange und diese beiden Artikel darüber (Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” und “Assange and Information Restriction” ) gelesen habe, bin ich geneigt, meinen nicht […]
http://bit.ly/g2aqq3
its cool
the best money site
http://www.AWSurveys.com/HomeMain.cfm?RefID=alonso13
Here’s the deal: what Assange is doing is NO DIFFERENT than what Daniel Ellsberg did 40 years ago in leaking the Pentagon Papers. That is, exposing the hypocrisy in government.
But to see Barry Obama and Co. having a shit fit over this is the GREATEST hypocrisy of all. After all, these are the very same people who back in the ’70s APPLAUDED Ellsberg for leaking (and the NY Times/Washington Post/LA Times/etc. for publishing) the Pentagon Papers.
But then again, that IS America for you…
Obama was, what, 12 when the Pentagon Papers came out?
While you may think of ‘liberal’ and ‘democrat’ as an undifferentiated mass, there’s actually quite a range of opinion about the propriety of these sorts of actions.
And changing your mind due to changing circumstances is not the same thing as hypocrisy.
Want to try again?
The notion of “effective action” is interesting. I can’t remember the last time I saw politicians react to traditional activism (protests etc) much like this. Traditional protests hold the votes of the protesters at ransom. This action holds everyone’s vote at ransom, because this action attacks trust. Here is a small blog on that perspective – http://asimplerefusal.wordpress.com/
Julian Assange & Bradley Manning deserve our support and protection for helping truth to be told, even though there are no earthshaking revelations here. The documents show a disregard for rule of law and appalling lack of concern for human rights, but so do the policies of the USA under both major parties. Remember these documents were only classified as ‘secret.’ Imagine what a ‘top secret’ leak might reveal.
Very good post.
When a conspirator hides information, it is often for the fear of being found out. This is why WikiLeaks is so necessary, it uncovers all the information conspirators do not want the governed to know.
It’s about time.
This is a very well written, concise, and brilliant article in its description and portrayal of the purpose and intention of WikiLeaks.
Julian Assange is a genius. He has a ‘beautiful mind’. He has an amazing ability to analyze data and build a strategy of defense. He is definitely a modern day Jesus, or Robin Hood if you prefer and are atheist.
Julian Assange is a master of ‘combanatorial game theory’ and the right man for the job; and he is ‘equal to the task’. In combanatorial game theory, zero is an automatic win. To reduce [to zero] the ability of a conspiracy to operate by weaking its very core, the flow of information, is brilliant. Under exposure, the conspiracy will implode.
A conspiracy can only conspire under the shield of secrecy. That is why our government and other world governments uphold and defend vehemently what they like to term ‘national security’ by both, withholding and hiding information to prevent disclosure; and flooding the media with disinformation for the purpose of misleading those who would expose the truth.
Thank you, Julian, for being bold enough, intelligent enough, and connected enough to develop and implement WikiLeaks. The people of this world need to know the truth, and for some unexplainable reason, manifest reality is not obvious enough for many to see that truth or want to admit it to themselves, empowering them to take a stand against the force that enslaves them to a deception.
Many demand ‘hard evidence’ and ‘proof’ before they are willing to see what is right before their eyes. You are providing that evidence and proof, which is badly needed and long overdue.
Thank you for taking the risks necessary to expose that which haunts our past and threatens our future, and for being courageous enough to face the odds on our behalf. I hope and pray that you are not captured and jailed before you complete your intended tasks. God be with you and keep you safe on your journey to expose the TRUTH!!
Thank you also to Daniel Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and Anthony Russo for laying the foundation many years ago for this phase of the plan to be fulfilled. And, thank you today for your ongoing efforts and defense of Julian Assange and his WikiLeaks project.
Who elected Julian A? He is an anarchist, a man who would like to incite sedition and rebellion to the naive and ignorant. The U.S. like the Philippines believes in the rule of law. His ideas will be remembered as similar to other convoluted ideas like My Struggle and the Communist Manifesto. Wake up Julian the rule of law will soon be applied to you!
Who elected the boy who said “the emperor has no clothes”?
Who elected your trouble-making namesake? You know, the one who made all the trouble for the money changers…
And who asked you? Are you usually able to correctly interpret an article, or does it require special medication? You’re entitled to your point of view, but given your ability to spell, and type in lower-case – why don’t you try reading some source material and interpreting, instead of just listening and regurgitating. All your lines sound very similar to Newt Ging-thingy. Paternalistic, sophistic, populist, patently and demonstrably wrong, and woefully ignorant.
I think you’ll find Julian is awake – has been all his life.
Wake up Jesus – check the history of the Phillipines and the USA. All the good laws came at a cost, a cost generally borne by people like Julian.
Ask yourself why only you can “see” Julian “inciting sedition and rebellion to the naive and ignorant”. He’s certainly not guilty of inciting anyone – but I’m sure that somewhere in the last 10 years of his writings I overlooked something you’re going to point out…
As to “naive and ignorant” – wouldn’t that mean The Dr Phil Show, Oprah, Fox, MSN. Take another look at the people involved in Sunshine Press, Wikileaks, Tor – read IQ org. Maybe then you’re arguments’ll sound less shill-like.
Perhaps you’re suggesting that the leakers are the naive and ignorant? Maybe you should take that up with the recruiters, profilers, and selectors.
The evidence suggest it’s you that rely on the naive and ignorant – or those to illiterate to check the facts.
@INT13 Nice one! But I don’t know if Jesus will still hold his Iron Curtain as his defense for America or give up now.
Evidently the social media site I belong to has changed the URL to my blog recently. I am posting this second comment, as the former post will not take you to the blog.
Warning: My blog is extremely geared towards political activism and the truth of our government. If you don’t have the stomach for reading opposition to the U.S. government and its politicians, you won’t like my blog.
Again, to Julian Assange and all who have the courage to stand up for the truth: YEAH TEAM!!!
…..and the truth shall set us free. Sadly, the truth is an esoteric treatise designed to incite the naive and ignorant to sedition and rebellion. Teri the U.S. government is the best in the world. It may have its trying times but the rule of law is there to guide it. 200 plus years of freedom and the Declaration of Independence can’t be wrong.
What replacement government would you want, an activist left or right of center one? I am sorry that you believe that the ends justify the means in stealing and unjustly profiting from hacking classified information.
“the U.S. government is the best in the world.”
That’s the best laugh I’ve had all week!
Again, Teri, keep your agenda as personal as your own religion. I am a grown man and do not need a childish mouthpiece to look for, or make, “conspiracies”, “wrong-doing”, and “activism”. Perhaps your agenda is harder to choke down than that of many professional politicians? Food for thought.
His philosophy is rather scary. It’s almost like the movie “The Matrix”
I’m still dubious about the credibility if this Wikileaks. For all we know, it could be about money since the media is actually buying into it. I say, Mr Assuage apply what he ‘envisions” which is transparency. Show the public his Assets, Liablities and Equity.
Other than that, what Wikileaks are “leaking” isn’t really that controversial at all. It’s someone who watches news everyday would guess. If it is what it really is “fighting” for, they’d really bare the real issues. Death toll under count and ‘coding’ by the US and its allies isn’t a real “secret”. It’s something even an ordinary person would have accurately guessed.
I agree with hottea4m3
Assange comes off as merely an anti-American than really for reform. We all know that it’s not only the US who has sent soldiers to Afghanistan and Iraq. Basically, the whole west has, and some Asian countries.
Even Iran, an “enemy” of the US do not trust the leaks. And how come he is not trying to get into Cambodia and China’s system. Cambodia’s human rights are almost null. Maoist China has long suppressed and violate the Tibetans right to sovereignty?
Maybe he could also hack into Pakistan and Indonesia where there are Taliban-inspired groups to get information from the extremists who bomb Southeast Asian nations that don’t wage war against any countries.
Or maybe, into the system of North Korea for randomly shooting the island in South Korea where there are about a thousand CIVILIANS.
I’m not pro-American either. I am for the pull-out of the US bases overseas. But I’m not anti-American. It’s just that, I see this Wikileaks brouhaha nothing but anti-US propaganda and not standing for what is claims for.
They want change? Reveal ALL governments (of all countries/states) conspiracy and dirtiness.
And besides..Wiki is something that is EDITABLE by nature. Maybe Wikileaks is EDITED. Who knows, Wikileaks itself could be a conspiracy. Heck, nothing is impossible in the age of the internet!
Wiki is a word from Hawaii meaning quickly – as I’m certain a “Wiki”pedia search will confirm ;-p
Wikileaks didn’t start last week, the main site is currently being rebuilt, I won’t post the most recent mirrors here – but, Google (in this case) is your friend. Some of the mirrors have the original index up which will allow you to search globe by country for leaked material. The mainstream media has made it appear (in recent weeks) as if all the material is about America – don’t take my word for it (please) – verify for yourself.
Don’t rely on the mainstream media to give you all the leaks – they are not all releasing the same stories, and most of the major outlets are leaving the hottest material out.
I suspect the Julian will re-emerge from custody – I certainly hope so. Regardless, more information will be released – banking next.
Hey buddy, unless you didn’t notice…Wikileaks has released plenty of information on other government regimes and motives
I had never read any of Assanges writings before this – so thanks for bringing it to our attention.
I’m not sure about his strategy so much, though:
“Assange has a clearly articulated vision for how Wikileaks’ activities will ‘carry us through the mire of politically distorted language, and into a position of clarity,’ a strategy for how exposing secrets will ultimately impede the production of future secrets.”
I’m not particlarly convinced that simply “exposing secrets” impedes in any serious way the creation of new secrets. Wikileaks is not the first, nor will they be the last, group of people to expose and leak U.S. government documents – and none of the previous groups really stopped any future secrets.
The value of wikileaks is that it gives amunition for our movements to use – amunition for the anti-war and anti-capitalist movements. Without a movement, wikileaks is arguably pretty useless.
-john
“The truth will set you free.”
Unless you are evil, then it will just terrorize you.
“Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known. Therefore whatever you have spoken in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have spoken in the ear in inner rooms will be proclaimed on the housetops.”
–Jesus, in Luke 12:1-3
The problem this creates for the government conspiracy then becomes the organizational problem it must solve: if the conspiracy must operate in secrecy, how is it to communicate, plan, make decisions, discipline itself, and transform itself to meet new challenges? The answer is: by controlling information flows.
Unfortunately, it seems that the US govt is not trying to control its own information flow, but rather cut off Wikileaks information flow. Senator Joe Liberman lead the charge today using his political influence to pressure Amazon.com to withhold its hosting services to Wikileaks. It’s like the US is a petulant child that completely misses the point.
[…] battle lines being drawn? “Fox News is never right!” but they think everyone else is wrong. Julian Assange is trying to help people share the worlds secrets and getting so much resistance from those who either disagree with his […]
Uh, dumb-ass, I don’t need a mouthpiece; I’m grown.
Dear Sir/Madams,
I would like to draw your attention to some extreme and horrendous criminality being conducted by United States Government.
United States government looted everything from me. USA put me into into concentration camp in the USA for two years.
In year 2004, I travelled to washington, D.C. and was making a movie on the street. I did not violate any rule or regulation at that time. CIA’s seizure and retainted my China Passport and movie products and other properties constituted an improper exaction in contravention of the Innocent Owner Exception Provisions of 21 U.S.C. §§ 801, 881 (1988 & Cum. Supp. 1997), and 18 U.S.C. § 981 (a)(2) for which it is entitled to damages or other monetary relief.
In year 2008, this unlawful search and seizured passport was passed to immigration judge at 5520 greens road, Houston, TX 77032. this passport is currently in possession of Houston Processing Center, a branch of Department of Homeland Security at the same address as the immigration judge’s.
Department of Homeland Security and Immigration Judge use unlawful searched and seizured properties for public use and as evidences in conspiracy of violation of U.S. Constitution and Statute and malicious prosecution against plaintiff.
United States government looted everything from me. I was deported to China with $0.00 on April, 2010.
All of my properties have been looted by USA by the same way as Nazi Germany treated Jews in 1930’s and 1940’s.
All my legal and court document was looted and destroied by USA.
Two of my car was towed and stolen in front of my house.
I have a house in Houston. but I am out of countol.
I wish United Nations Human Rights Council and you should investigate the serious violation of the Chart of United Nations.
I was deported to China with $0.00, USA looted everything from me . My properties have been looted by USA the same way as Nazi Germany treated Jews in 1930’s and 1940’s.
All my legal and court document was looted by USA. I have a house in Houston. but I am out of countol. Two of my car was towed and stolen in front of my house.
I was sent to a concentration camp in USA for more than too years. I graduated from University of Houston with a master ‘s degree. I have been unlawfully deported by ICE/DHS，USA. I lose almost all of my legal documents and my whole life properties.
I filed law suits against U.S. government before deportation including CIA agent and federal prisons in U.S.A. for damages and monetary relief.U.S.A. conducted a series of violation of U.S. Constitution and norms of international law of human rights and the law of nations or a treaty of the United States in year 2004, 2008, 2009 and 2010. United States discarded its fundamental: separation of powers.
The U.S. courts works together with the U.S. government to punish the individual. Individual do not have any human rights in U.S.A.
I wish you could interfere with my cases because the cases involve serious violation of human rights and law.
I wish you could contact a lawyer for me for my lawsuits, I wish that the lawyer would takes contingent fee for services.
All of the cases have good merits for civil rights, I have went through most of the court pleadings.
List of the case numbers are as following, you may check the case by enter
1.Case #:2010-5079，the address of the court
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
717 Madison Place, NW， Washington, DC 20439
Court document:fedcirbrief0317.rtf
2. Case #:10-20117，the address of the court
Office of the Clerk, United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
600 S. Maestri Place, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-3408
Appealing Brief:20117BRIEF0331.rtf
3. Case #:09-5425 the address of the court
The United States Court of Appeals for District Columbia Circuit333 Constitution Ave. NW Room#5523，Washington, DC 20001-2866Appealing Brief:5425appeal0112.rtf
4. Against the prison violation of human rights (Mississippi）Case #:09-4133 the address of the court
United States District Court, Southern District of Texas at:
P.O.Box 61010, Houston, TX 77208-1010
Law suit document:4133Hou0122.rtf
5. Against the prison violation of human rights (Houston, Texas)
Case #:4:10-cv-00743,the address of the court
United States District Court, Southern District of Texas at:
P.O.Box 61010, Houston, TX 77208-1010
Law suit document: 743-HPC0302.RTF
6. My vehicles were towed away from my home in Houston without proper cause.
Case #:2009- 71863 the address of the court
The 55 th District Court of Harris County
Loren Jackson, District Clerk
P.O.Box 4651, Houston, TX 77210
Law suit document:71863wreck0927.rtf
7. Against Harris county jail violation of human rights
Case #:10-00383
the address of the court
United States District Court, Southern District of Texas at:
P.O.Box 61010, Houston, TX 77208-1010
Law suit document: harris0201.rtf
8. Against DHS/ICE violation of human rights
Filename:fedclaim0316b-1495_franco.rtf
the address of the court:
The United States Court of Federal Claims
717 Madison place N.W., Wahsington, DC 20005
While all my cases panding, I was unlawfully deported, I have I-485 case pending with USCIS, the case numbers are I-360:EAC-10-026-50727 ，I-485: EAC-10-026-50728, I am currently in Urumqi, China.
While this case is pending in the Supreme Court, ICE/Houston locked me up with handcuffs and shackles and chains and sandbags over shackles on/or about April 8th, 2010.
And on/or about April 9th 2010, ICE/Houston carried me on an airplane by force. I was shipped like a parcel from IAH airport, and shipped me to Newark airport, then shipped me PEK airport, China, then turned me to China custody with prisoner’s uniform.
During the whole flights, I was shackled and handcuffed in excruciating pain because of ICE/Houston put big sand bags over shackles, and the shackles edges cut into my skin.
No one gave a single penny of money. ICE try to murder me by starvation. I do not have any money of my own, I have to beg for food for one weeks until I find friends for help.
I am not able to access any legal document, because ICE refused to give them to me.
ICE Denied me to access the court by refusing to provide enough printing paper and postages.
I finished the petition of writ of Certiorari on March 15, 2010, but ICE refused to provide enough printing paper and postages to mail it to the Court.
The the petition of writ of Certiorari was mailed on March, 29th ,2010, ICE intended to delay delivery the court document which is serious violation of the law.
ICE Denied me to access the court by denial of me to carry my court documents with me.
On April 29th, 2010, ICE refused me to take all me court document with me, less than 1/100 of my legal documents were allow to carry with me. Almost all of my legal paper was lost, ICE is responsible for the loss of my legal paper, with is serious violation of the law.
ICE/Houston brutally injured my leg by put sand bags over shackles on both of my leg.
The sharp edges of shackles cut both of my legs, and caused my leg bleeding.
I wish you could contact a lawyer for me for my lawsuits, I wish that the lawyer would takes contingent fee for services.
All of the cases have good merits for civil rights, I have went through most of the court pleadings.
Sincerely,
Name: Qian ZHAO
Phone(in China):(01186) -18703036212
Qian Zhao
You may contact the Filipino named Jesus on this post.I brag about american democracy
Yeah… Jesus, my fellow countrymen. Somehow he has very positive views about the U.S.
Maybe in Qian ZHAO’s post he will change his view… or still hold his Iron Curtain” defense for U.S.
Yeah… Jesus, my fellow countrymen. Somehow he has very positive views about the U.S.
Maybe in Qian ZHAO’s post he will change his view… or still hold his Iron Curtain defense for U.S.
I think Assange is going to have a lot of time for persnoal reflecting eventually after some of his own secrets are revealed.
This post is extremely important in the knowing of the World’s Overall Landscape! However, I fear that the true nature of what Mr. Assange’s intent will not be remembered the way it was intended. Already he has become a wanted man, not wanted in the sense of Dead or Alive but wanted by the establishment probably to be deprogrammed! lol… Interpol released a statement that while he is on their coveted “Most Wanted” they want to offer him a Job! Wow! I wonder what will become of Mr. Assange should they locate him and actually offer him a position with Interpol? Time will tell
Julian A. is not the solution. He is the problem. He presents an esoteric treatise that is convoluted; incites the naive and ignorant to sedition and anarchy. His view is myopic as his claims are against the U.S. and his own set standards are not followed. He mentions transparency yet does not reveal his own unjust profits made by way of hacking a.k.a. ‘stealing’ of classified information from U.S. computer sites. The taxes from his profits are still receivables from his domicile or residence point of view.
His treatise is a study in anarchy and will be remember just as My Struggle and the Communist Manifesto is remembered. He substitutes the truth with half-lies, lies and messianic prophecies leading many into believing his unjust cause.
The cause of a free democracy will never perish from the earth. If and when there are discrepancies or mistakes in government then the rule of law is there to correct the same.
A government of the people, by the people and for the people is the universal truth of a successful system. The U.S. weathered all past crisis and will do so again as the system is great and truth shall set us free!
For the record, I say Julian A. is also guilty of inciting the people to sedition and rebellion and that the conspiracy emanates from him and his organization who are unjustly enriching themselves at the expense of all concerned.
It is a balmy afternoon here in the Republic of the Philippines.
I hope Julian A’s. treatise is studied by the legal authorities of the U.S. Inciting to Sedition and Rebellion through the medium of writing may be punishable in the U.S. as it is punishable in the Philippines.
jesus you are retared. you clearly dont understand what wikileaks is trying to do.
Anonymous, I know exactly what the criminal organization Wiki Leaks is trying to do. You want to impose the will of one man named Julian A. using illegal, criminal ends and means.
You want his convoluted u t o p i a n Philosophy to be posted as a great work of intellect substituting it for the rule of law and due process. The fact is you acted beyond the law. Live with it. You can never destroy a great democracy by your evil actions.
The false prophet Julian suffers from delusions of grandeur. By the way….. My I.Q. is 145.
Ha ha ha, anonymous is now owned.
Julian may be whatever, your understanding of freedom and the function of secrecy in a democracy is seriously retarded. Did you even read the blogpost you are commenting on.. or is literacy also illegal in the Philippines
http://thedistrictsleepsalonetonight.wordpress.com/
Just for grins.
Julian Assange has committed no crime. All he’s done is returned information to the people who actually paid for it.
By the way, if we’ve learned one thing over the last decade it’s that more transparency for governments and big corporations is inherently a good thing. It keeps young boys and girls from getting killed half way around the world for all sorts of abstract ideals, and big companies from getting too greedy for their own good.
Enough said.
Alexandria, he committed the crime of illegally transferring classified information by means of hacking and is a principal by direct participation or inducement. The organization called Wiki leaks is also as liable as he is.
Why is Julian now asking for donations for a defense fund? If you or the others give him money then you fall for the oldest scam in the world. You make him richer at the expense of a lot of people compromised by the illegal revelations. Which is whistle blowing and which is not? There are voluminous documents all classified. Julian is acting like a judge, jury and executioner. In other words, he took the law into his own hands.
See Jesus it’s that sort of crapulence that contradicts your alleged Stanford-Binet score… it’s called bearing false witness, otherwise know as bullshit. You know – slime and slander, weapons of toads?
Julian Assange is not a “hacker”.
In my youth I was a dozen IQ points dumber than you – and age has robbed me of more, but it took me all of two minutes to determine you *are* full of it. And less than that to see you have too great an emotional investment in your own opinion to realize that the great self-healing “democracy” is not – it’s the actions of those people like the organizations that Julian represents the keep democracy safe. It’s not the unquestioning worship of self-aggrandizing fools like you that keeps us free and safe.
Strangely you forgot to accuse Julian of rape… guess you’re focusing on spinning the egotistical, anarchist, con artist line.
Hint: when it’s obvious your accusations don’t apply to the person you accuse – I ask myself who is that Jesus is describing?
@INT13…. I really wonder what Einstein will think about this? This thinking of Julian A.
I think he’ll really support Julian.
Even though this is off-topic, I’d like to say that Einstein once quoted, “The hardest thing to understand in the world is income tax”.
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” (via zunguzungu) Posted on 2 December, 2010 by Jarle Petterson “To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us, and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not. Firstly we must understand what aspect of government or neocorporatist behavior we wish to change or remove. Secondly we must develop a way of thin … Read More […]
Great article, very well written. I had heard of Assange but did not fully understand what he is about.
Interesting post about the possible motives and the pro and anti reactions are entertaining as well. This model is useful to apply to local bodies like city councils, state level politicians, etc.
For the current nation-state models this type of disruption is a problem, how significant is difficult to say at this point. But the reactions have been intense enough to suggest a strong perception of threat. Will this become the norm? How will it be seen 20 years from now?
Only time will tell, probably all security systems will adapt to this contingency and evolve models including their own misinformation wikileak models.
I believe more legislation will be enacted to protect the rights of private corporations to be secure from cyber-theft. Secrets could express or imply plans like CAD designs, programs or secret formula or even recipes. Industrial espionage is a crime.
This businessman named Julian will be making a lot of money when he or his co-conspirators steals the aforementioned. Imagine K F C recipe for chicken and secret spices revealed for the sake of transparency. Plans sold to the highest bidder. It may be a funny scenario for now but wait till the American economy is affected.
Julian A. is a dangerous man! He is an enemy of honest industry, and the capitalist economy!
When the economy a.k.a. wall street is shaken by multiple wiki leaks cyber-theft revelations how will it react? Will investors pullout because the nation state failed to secure the welfare of the people concerned? Will anarchy in this form destroy the corporate veil of corporations and initiate more trouble like hostile takeovers or failures? Only time will tell.
This is a personal message to Julian A… YOU are not a God to judge what is and what is not right in the world. Let the rule of law take care of it Julian. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law. Your cyber-theft is beyond due process and deprives people of life, liberty, and property. Wait for due process to reach you. It will come soon. You will receive what you are trying to deprive concerned parties by your cyber-thefts.
Jesus you are in my view an astroturfer!
Nothing was stolen but given. and ‘wait till the American economy is affected’? No need its here with its enormous debts. You will see how it will affect you in the future.
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy th&… […]
Somewhere up there, Spencer said
“The system doesn’t work because there is still staggering and worldwide poverty, starvation, death and suffering that could easily be prevented if it weren’t for the horrible way countries like the United States act in the world.”
Spencer, this is an incredibly strong statement. All these things could easily – easily! – be prevented? And the actions of countries like the United States are the main thing that stop this from happening? The last time I checked, the US didn’t have much to do with there being almost a billion more people born on Earth every ten years. And yet presumably that has something to do with poverty in the world.
So justify what you said. If solving the world’s problems is in principle so simple, please tell us what we’d have to do.
Julian A. YOU are not God. See my writing on 140.
Maybe this will end the ‘we already knew this and we don’t care’ attitude:
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/1/us_pressured_spain_to_drop_case
It should be clear by now that the word ‘conspiration’ is not an exaggeration.
Again –
I don’t care. And apparently neither does a large portion of Europe or the US.
Collateral damage kills people. Wars cause a lot of stupid collateral damage. I knew that going to war in Iraq was going to cause a lot of collateral damage that killed a lot of innocent people. I protested that war, and I’ve moved on.
To say that the US hasn’t covered up the killing of innocent people in war is being naive and/or stupid. If it took this leak to inform you that the US killed innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan and covered it up, then you are incredibly stupid and/or naive.
Again, NOTHING NEW THAT MAKES ME CARE MORE ABOUT ANYTHING.
[…] “Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy” This entry was posted on Thursday, December 2nd, 2010 at 9:27 am and posted in Blogposts. You […]
hai i read this . very good.
[…] – Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible […]
[…] – Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible […]
Quote at the top of the article cited on Katrineholm, Sweden’s “K-hole Wall o’ Shame” at the bottom of the blog.
Flight is an indication of guilt. Julian has gone into hiding.
Dear Jesus… Surely then you believe anonymity is an indication of guilt. You’re not clean enough to throw the first stone…
Judas i mentioned a principle in criminal law. The accused who takes flight is presumed to be guilty.
I threw no stone. Julian A. threw a lot of stones in his self-righteous messianic movement to destroy the ‘invisible government’. The statement of Julian’s flight is a fact.
Are you begging me to be naive?
elialehman.wordpress.com
children does it matter that it was done ITS DONE no going back no changing such, its a matter did he accomplish it alone i think not, he brought forth what others gave, whom how where why to what pretext or to what purpose, only those involved can answer such, we live in a world of change, techinquoloy will continue until the day we must start again, is it close or is it yet centries away who can say there is lots out there that predict but no actual proof of. as with this it to will fade into the darkness, will all survive? this is NOT A FIRST NOR WILL IT BE A LAST! TRUTH! JUSTICE! PEACE! FREEDOM! where did it all go, why how was it all lost? what took its place? lies deceptions fraudulant and corruptive acts, a sad state in which we live, i know not nor understand, maybe it the next life we will
Pseudo-Situationist drivel that barely rises above coffee shop bull session fare. Assange’s actual accomplishments amount to little more than petty vandalism. He’s a child, a grandiose know-it-all in the back of the class yelling vapid slogans. This is how insecure no-accounts show the world How Smart They Are. Pathetic, dangerous and inexcusable.
The world is not your grad-school seminar experiment, children. Grow the fuck up.
Right, Cornkits. Why can’t Mr assange conduct himself with a measure of maturity, like you?
Outlier, when I say fuck you, and the moldy stack of Adbusters you’re sitting on, it’s simply an act of petulant trolling. It’s not, for instance, quasi-intellectual infantile ego-fueled grandstanding masquerading as an altruistic campaign built on 60-year old post-marxist rationales that wouldn’t impress a community college history professor.
I’ll put in my two cents, perhaps he is an attention whore, and dangerous without question, but the coffee house drivel carries misconstruction and can dismantle bonds between authoritarian figures whose impact can be greater than the coffee house. He’s a toad and a criminal; he’s a narcissistic punk. But really, “post-Marxist rationales”, how in the hell does that stack up without the Marxist followers. Ball one. The followers are over privileged school children who have a half-ass grasp on government and want to be master chief from the Halo game. I’d like to think Marxism had a more profound meaning considering the size……the last part of your statement is also an oxymoron. It is, in order to impress the professor, it is not, in order to impress a professor of higher calling than community college (Perhaps Harvard)….slow down, the words will fit.
[…] and Julian Assange’s “theory of change”, I strongly recommend Aaron Bady’s Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” on zunguzungu and his followup comment […]
Wow, It would seem that most commenters either didn’t read this article or Assanges writings or just didn’t understand! “The best party is but a kind of conspiracy against the rest of the nation.”
[…] I linked to Douthat, and apparently I should have actually linked to this essay, which describes Assange’s philosophy in much more detail. My […]
[…] is well worth reading, it would be good if he wrote more, as he writes well. See also Zunguzungu’s post, where I found the […]
It’s a pity that Assange uses the word “conspiracy”. It’s too easily dismissed by those who associate the word with wingnuts. Rahim Salim, the conservative pundit, uses what is apparently the academically approved euphemism “accretion of interests” whenever he means conspiracy, and that seems to put everyone at ease. According to Salim, accretions of interests are a normal by-product of open systems/free markets. Ironicly, accretion of interests more accurately describes what Assange is trying to disrupt with wikileaks.
Now that accretion of interests is the code word, perhaps he’ll realize that he’s playing in the real thing…not a video game, but you’ll have to break it down to him. Conspiracy is tired as an explanation of normal circumstance with extraordinary outcome, often used by the paranoid and falling hand in hand with talking to god. The criminal profile is right on spot. Anarchy, defiance, paranoia, narcissism, and running scared; yep he leaked it, and only now it’s a conspiracy? HA HA HA hahahahah HA HA HA!
It’s a pity that Outlier didn’t read the original referenced material – or it’d be clear that Julian doesn’t mean lizard people when he says conspiracy. And he does think people who believe 9/11 was an inside job are arseclowns. Here’s a quote:-
“I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by
false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide
evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”
And Bidpops – a little research’d make you appear less of a fucktard. As I’ve said elsewhere, Wikileaks didn’t start last week. Sure he (sic) thinks it’s a game, a game with consequences, and a game that, eventually, he *will* lose. It’s called life. He said goodbye to his mum and his son. How would you handle death and kidnap threats made against your family? How straight is your spine? It’s taken ten years to get to now, and I’m surprised he still has a sense of humour, or any patience with the mainstream media – given that the serious threats began at least 6 years ago. And serious does not mean a skinhead on crack with pointy stick…
Get a glimpse at his (an Australian) perspective. Spend 20 minutes in Google, try looking up the Falcon and the Snowman + the Whitlam cables + loans affair, do a little digging on heroin in Australia + Nugan Hand, check out the story of Joseph T. Thomas. Now ask yourself if Julian is naif about the risks. he hardly needs Hollywood to convince him of the seriousness of the situation.
Have a look at his maths credentials and ask yourself whether he’s incapable of extrapolating the total risks of his actions.
Do a quick dig through the last couple of years of slashdot at stories about Australia and ask yourself if may be he should have reconsidered the need to take the risks.
Giggle away – the reality is that an arrest warrant was only issued a couple of hours before writing this, that up until then he hasn’t been “running” from any courts. And once the warrant was issued he made himself available – despite having a number of other options available to him. No matter what happens now – the Wikileaks style exposures will continue.
And no, I don’t actually share his beliefs – though I understand his motivation. I think his strategy is sound, just not actually implementable. He believes he can stifle the growth of evil, and even reduce it. I think it’ll just be used for the justification of a totalitarian regime – that’s coming anyway. I suspect very few people, even if they take the time to “read for themselves” will have their eyes opened, or their opinions changed by the material he releases. It’ll either confirm what they all ready suspect or wish to believe, or they’ll refuse to accept the evidence that contradicts their beliefs. What is likely to change peoples minds, and open their eyes, is what will unfold as a consequence of this.
I suspect one of those changes will be that none of us will be able to have these types of exchanges in the future.
Many Australian’s are having another think about the rest of the world, not because of Julian’s actions, but because we’ve known of him for years – the ignorant stories and theories being trotted out now are old hat here. Even some of his most vocal Australian critics are starting to take pride in just how seriously the average American has underestimated him.
But then, what would you expect from a country whose magazine (Time) is about to name a basketball player as the most influencial person for this year!
And Julian’s biggest mistake? Overestimating the intelligence of the general public.
Well INT13 I agree. And then Julian A. must have known this before, that, “You can’t really convince everyone to your plans even if they are for the good.”
[…] little substantial engagement with Assange’s philosophy, a gap that has been filled by some particularly insightful bloggers. The attempt in the mainstream media (for instance, CNN), has been to prove the news […]
[…] one essay, Assange notes: “The some-more sly or unfair an classification is, a some-more leaks satisfy fear and paranoia […]
Empire has gone agonal!!!
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” (en Español) […]
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” « zunguzungu "There is a certain vicious amorality about the Mark Zuckerberg-ian philosophy that all transparency is always and everywhere a good thing, particularly when it’s uttered by the guy who’s busily monetizing your radical transparency. … According to his essay, Julian Assange is trying to do something else. …The question for an ethical human being … has to be the question of what exposing secrets will actually accomplish, what good it will do, what better state of affairs it will bring about. And whether you buy his argument or not, Assange has a clearly articulated vision … a strategy for how exposing secrets will ultimately impede the production of future secrets. The point of Wikileaks — as Assange argues — is simply to make Wikileaks unnecessary." […]
[…] a pretty good analysis here on what the WikiLeaks strategy actually is. You should read the whole article, but the grist of it […]
The problem with wikileaks is that it has the wrong target. It’s like cops going after speeding drivers, while ignoring the drug dealers and human smugglers at work in the next block.
Yes there are flaws in the western world, but if you’d rather live under an authoritarian repressive regime, then move to Burma, N. Korea, Iran, Egypt, Russia… The list of more appropriate targets for truly secretive and dangerous regimes is long. And if you don’t believe that, you have lived a very sheltered life.
the blaming of US soldier Bradley Manning for the entire contents of the latest Wikileaks papers now makes a lot more sense to me.
instead of finding many individuals or internal dissenting collectives responsible, one person is blamed as a way for the conspiracy (as assange defines it) to defend itself against this attack.
the only way for assange’s project to fail is if one person is successfully held responsible for the breakdown of the information sharing system that maintains the conspiracy. hence fall-guy found so quickly and publicly, thereby preserving self-belief (delusion) of conspirators that system is still functional, and so amongst conspirators there is no perceived need for the conspiracy to wither behind its own walls by limiting information flow. the limiting of the information flow, and the resultant dumbing down of the conspiracy, is what seems to be assange’s desired outcome.
it’s not a matter of discovering and diseminating the truth of how this happened, but a focus on self-preservation by the conspirators by making it seem that only one person is responsible – Bradley Manning or Assange himself.
Interesting piece. It made me wonder if Mr. Assange’s had thoughts on Debord’s notion of “The Spectacle,” and how it could relate to his mission. Specifically, the ability for a regime to absorb wikileaks and make it another piece of the narrative which furthers the conspiracy. One example that comes to mind is the breaking of the Abu Gharib story. After the deluge of criticism of the Bush administration’s policies, public opinion actually went up for the use of torture as a method to extract information from suspected terrorist. This is after intelligence experts explained that torture didn’t work, after it damaged on our foreign relations and our soldiers’ psyches, and after it was show it actually made us less safe. Yet, the myth that the Bush administration spun managed to substantially alter the public’s perception of the issue, such that it isn’t even called torture anymore, it is called enhanced interrogation technique. In other words, despite the damage caused by exposing our crimes, the “leaks” only increased the regime’s power and thus its ability to do those crimes. I just wonder if the same thing is going to happen with wikileaks. The more secrets are leaked the more the conspiracy will be able to solidify support for itself by turning the act of “leaking” secrets into part of the larger narrative that feeds the public support for authoritarianism.
When I was a boy, we’d call that feeding the monkey. Make him believe he is betraying authority, when actually he’s helping authority manipulate markets, leaders, and countrymen…he’s in over his head or he wouldn’t have to hide. He’s looking for a non existent revolution.
Johnathan: of course Mr. Assache, like every pinheaded wannabe postmodern blowhard with an attitude and a worn-out copy of Never Mind the Bollocks before him, has read Debord. Pick a college town of your choice, find the arts district, throw a rock and you’ll hit five late-to-the-party post-structuralists with a Handy-Dandy Bring-Down-The-System Theory Generator just like him. The difference between them and Our Julian is a colossal ego and a hypocritically large bank account.
“The point of Wikileaks — as Assange argues — is simply to make Wikileaks unnecessary.”
Brilliant recursive sub. When it’s done it dissolves. Is it ever going to be done?
Will it be allowed to run its course? Is it going to be yanked from memory? Will it be corrupted by ?
Your voices – for or against – (Socrates) and Wikileaks (Plato) – to frame and narrate a dialog – in order to stimulate thought and *hopefully* remedy inadequacies…
Sounds Nobel?
In this cablegate case, I don’t mind comparing the American Empire with the Roman Empire from time to time. There are some interesting similarities.
After reading this: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/11/control_fraud.html
I couldn’t help but think of Verres sucking Sicily dry. (And launching Cicero to stardom). What ever happened to these proconsuls pillaging the country-side to make up for money borrowed? Oh, right J.C. came along and did one better. What happened to Cicero? Wrote himself into history, but also lost his hands…it will remain a dangerous game, hence the insurance file.
But unlike chickpea it seems JA doesn’t want to be a player in the current game. Just an independent publisher and oracle of truth will do. A humble sweeper keeping the streets clean while keeping his head high? A Roosevelt muck-raker par excellence with ethereal vision? A super dirt collector, but without the need to extort? An information Ghandi? Or more simply: just someone passioned about technology, free speech and enabling upset people with an anonymous outlet?
Btw, can someone point me to a good paper of “the democracy which hacked it’s own democracy?”. Something like: “Reflections On Trusting Trust” (Computing), but on politics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backdoor_(computing)#Reflections_on_Trusting_Trust
It’s been a while since I read such interesting news.
DEATH PENALTY PLEASE!!
I dearly hope for the death penalty for Assange, he is a spy. Espionage carries a death penalty in wartime. Similar enemies of freedom and the marketplace must be discouraged in every way; this will make the communist/muslim alliances tails curl under their bellies and ensure compliance and our victory.
By publishing casualty data, Assange enabled the enemies of the Western hegemony to potentiate the use of their ordinance against western troops. His treasonous actions have murderous consequences.
Go the west! Go US forces!!
best regards
NPK
Take a breath Nick, you know what it does to your pimple rash.
If Manning leaked those documents then he should face a court martial, which he is. A court martial will determine whether he committed a crime. If he leaked all the diplomatic posts then he can be found guilty. Of leaking Secret and below information.
Under current US law Julian cannot be found guilty for material released through Wikileaks. Period.
1. Whether you like it or not, releasing the information was “journalism”. First verified for authenticity, then redacted to protect the innocent. Redacted, but essentially intact source. The most accurate form of journalism. And yes, the US government didn’t officially take part in the redactions, but you can bet they unofficially did through the news agencies that assisted with the redaction process. As another Jesus (former CIA director) once said “we control everyone important in the media”.
2. If the released materials were published by the New York Times then they are by indisputable definition – news.
3. Julian did not steal the documents – it is alleged that Manning did that.
Now go and look up “Watergate” and “Pentagon Papers” and the associated law cases. Then go back and have a look at points 1, 2, and 3.
Now, clean the spittle of your screen, take your meds, lace up your boxing gloves, and get a little sleep.
And no, you don’t get to determine who is a journalist. Wanker.
One problem WikiLeaks will have to face in my opinion is, that it by far won’t get the whole people of the world support them. People desire solid structures around them, which they can predict and understand to some extent. So they will even fall back into trusting governmental structures they were actually complaining about in the first place.
This is because there are no (visible!) comparably constant/solid structures at the moment. The world community connected by the internet can’t be simplified to one (or at least few) “world decider(s)”. What you need is:
1. to enable the broad mass of people around the world to cope with the uncountable “voices” when listening to the “collective” ( via twitter / news / social networks / …)
2. to have this “collective” to emerge to decisions/opinions/statements more reliable, consistent and persistent than the ones of the established systems at the moment.
Just imagine two tv channels. The one switches images, faces, sounds and voices, 10 times a second, in a very disturbing way. The other channel shows a small group of men all saying the same: “Trust us. Don’t trust the other channel.”
I’m sure, most people will alway choose the second channel. Even if they know they sometimes get lied. But this is okay in comparison to the noisy channel. Because they’re used to it and it’s predictable.
So what could help at the moment are new tools to visualize and understand the collective mind emerging via the internet. And to hope it WILL emerge to something useful, like the decision of a human brain (which has similar structures to the internet).
Maybe we should get inspired by the Borg in the Star Trek universe a bit 😉
I’ll certainly agree with your first paragraph. People will mostly try and reject change – often with violence, witness to posts in this thread. I call it armchair apathy. They’ll fight you for their right to do nothing – a lot of noise and spit, but no motion. The sort of persons who tend to say “if [insert situation here] I’d [insert violent response here]” – but never, ever, do. I’m guessing they see change, bravery, and principle as some sort of challenge where they come up short. And insecurity coupled with shame brings out vociferous denial.
As for the rest of your post – well, I tried but I can’t quite understand/relate to what you’re saying. You worry me with the brain/internet analogy – but then I know more about the OSI model than I do about synaptic systems.
I’d of thought the opposite to paragraph 5 – constant television or radio’d drive me nuts. But I know a lot of people seem to need that constant noise. Dealing with many people through the internet is no different in practice than dealing with a lot of people in real life – that are for the most part strangers. Except you have more control over who, and when.
Yeah INT13. And I’ll compare this to Mobile Suit Gundam 00 where the Celestial Being performed Armed Interventions to unite the world to prevent war even if they would be hypocrites…. starting their version of war.
In our realm, Julian does provide WikiLeaks to provide anonymous cyber-users to leak information that is secretive, even if they would be hypocrites in the way they will be held anonymous… or secret.
He starts off being a load of shit. In order to blindly see authoritarianism as conspiracy requires profound narcissism and loathing for authority, which in itself is rebellion and anarchist belief. Assange’s intention is to undermine authority as a whole, seeing himself as above reproach and plays intent on acting like a spoiled child. No government, no secrets…then hey, no banks, no rules, no laws…..sounds like a really bad plan. Since he seems to have so many followers, and I’m not the one looking to defy government rule or boundary, perhaps he can keep himself safe by understanding people other than himself and realize that he’s in over his head. In other words, when I feel the affect in my home for his malicious and self serving cause, that is a can of worms opened that I fear no one can close for him. Another martyr for a lost cause, that’s the nail that fits, and all for what? Uh…you’re greatly outnumbered by people who will silence you….and now you hide.
Here’s what you do. Print a copy of this thread and mail it to Glenn Beck. When he sees what a loyal attack dog you are maybe he’ll make you head barker in Religious Persecution Land.
Ladies and gentlemen the race is on as to who will arrest him first. Interpol or the United States Government?
All the original Wiki leaks websites are down. Wiki leaks has transferred to a website in Switzerland and is still revealing classified information. Makes you wonder on who is really funding the continued existence of the illegal classified information leaks. Julian A. should be transparent enough to reveal his assets and resources.
I listed down some conspiracy theories on the possible intentions of Julian A. He says he just wants to reveal the truth. Here it is:
1. The Wiki conspiracy was intended to initiate a political crisis in the U.S. thereby triggering resignations and causing political conflict and bickering leading to ineffective leadership. Nope it never happened.
2. The Wiki conspiracy was intended to shock the economy causing instability leading to political crisis. No this did not happen either.
3. The Wiki conspiracy was initiated to attract support and attention from reactionary groups within and without the U.S. These groups are the so-called enemy forces against the United States. Yes it is possible Julian A. may have attracted a following of anarchists and similar supporters.
4. The Wiki conspiracy was initiated to alienate and or disrupt alliances due to the sensitive nature of the documents revealed. There are no reports of alliances being disrupted.
In other words dear readers, the true intentions of Wiki leaks was farthest from the so-called misplaced truth of Mr. Julian A. His Cyber War intentions are now revealed.
5. The Wiki conspiracy was initiated to incite reactionary groups to sedition and anarchy. No this has not triggered riots or civil disturbances.
I am trying to be transparent here about the wiki leaks conspiracy ‘to destroy the invisible government’.
Imagine what can happen when corporations are hacked of their secrets? The economy will suffer! He wants to start with banks? Who elected him to be Chief Moralist? He must be ignorant of audit systems that check for human and systems flaws. I say he is less knowledgeable about the real world. He is a deluded false prophet and an anarchist…. a cyber-thief/terrorist masquerading as a moralist without scruples or ethics.
“The economy will suffer! He wants to start with banks?”
Lets run with that for a while shall we. Before we get to the interesting stuff about audits, systemic flaws and human fallibility.
The “real” economy (main street) is already suffering, though the reasons are far from transparent, nor is there a single reason for any of it, anyone who tells you different is a fool or has something to sell. This is especially true of politicians.
I can appreciate that sitting as you do in the USA you have a view that could be best described as “the Washington Consensus” Which can be broadly stated as market friendly policies, extending from the developed to the developing world, emphasising a system of export led growth based on Western style democratic institutions and the rule of law. Correct me if I’m wrong, it is not my intent to put words into your mouth.
It is this system, that was enforced by the IMF when emerging countries got into trouble, curiously, this is not the standard that “developed” peripheral European nations are being held too. Some say this is hypocrisy, others that the IMF has finally learned to listen, and that Austerity is not always the best policy.
Why is the “real” economy suffering? Because of an excess of (largely consumer) debt, who loaned them the money? Banks and other financial intermediaries, (credit card firms, mortgage brokers, etc.) It may amuse you to learn that most large companies have been paying down debt since the the Internet bubble burst during the prior recession. It’s the weight of consumer debt, and the need to rebuild savings, (which were negative in the USA until recently) that has lead to what economists call “a net drop in aggregate demand” simply stated, people stop buying stuff, so companies have to cut back on production and lay off staff. The natural remedy for this is infrastructure spending, it was successful in Latin America when the phrase “the Washington consensus” was originally coined, and it’s what the Obama administration tried with the initial Fiscal stimulus, hence all the talk about “shovel ready” projects.
So, Ordinary people are retrenching, companies are cash flow positive paying down debt, who do you think is making all the money while Main Street suffers? That would be Wall Street, and the cosy club that funds the largest lobbying fraternity in the USA, the one devoted to doing the bidding of the banks and other financial firms and their hangers on. Personally I appreciate the irony and the idealism of the American public who don’t want to see higher taxes for the wealthy on the grounds they may be rich one day too.
So, the economy is suffering, the rich are still rich, and getting richer, and the poor and (shock horror!) the middle class are getting poorer, so much for “truth, justice and the American way” eh?
Surprisingly enough it was the “auditors” (and the way they were paid) that has been instrumental in most of the major financial blow-ups of the past 10 years. Think Enron, Or any of the spate of large corporate collapses that followed. All had been blessed by a thorough audit. Ponder also the Government mandated ratings agencies, (purveyors of audits for financial products, bonds, etc.) that rubber stamped the alphabet soup of exotic/toxic derivatives that caused the implosion of the banking system in 2008, and the reason behind the US government bail out of the banks. All of which were run by the best and brightest the American university system had to offer, (and more besides) all of whom followed the rational incentive to enrich themselves at the expense of the stability of the system itself.
Of human and systemic flaws there are manifest examples, not least of which was the last financial crisis to threaten the system itself. That of the hedge fund, LTCM (Long Term Capital Management) run by a legendary fund manager, (John Merriweather) staffed by the financial equivalent of rocket scientists, advised by two economists who won the “Nobel prize” for Economics while working at the firm. Eventually the Fed asked the investment banks to bail it out, roll over LTCM’s debts, (which if left to expire would have caused a domino like collapse of the entire system) The banks complied, (well, all but one 🙂 the world was “saved” and then the banks thought (correctly) that if they ever got into real trouble, then they’d get saved too, so they loaded up on risk…
All of which would suggest that it is you that is less knowledgeable about the real world.
However, the thing I’m interested in is why you keep calling people anarchists? You wrote a very good description, One I agree with:
“Anarchism is a political philosophy that considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy.
It seeks to diminish or even abolish authority in the conduct of human relations.”
What I haven’t seen from you is why you think this is a bad thing? It seems to me that the GOP (Republican party) would like nothing better than to “starve the beast” make government smaller, and get it out of the way of the entrepreneurs and large corporations. They too would like to conduct business without regard to any impediment to profitability.
You could say that anarchy as stated is a utopian vision, and as such doomed to founder on the reality of human relationships, but then you could say the same about unfettered free market capitalism too.
I’m not actually expecting a reply, save perhaps a one line quip, mostly because I think you’re happy to heckle from the sidelines without getting into a more thoroughgoing debate on the subject. What say you?
What an amazingly unperceptive and otherwordly opinion. Yes, of course ALL corporations have absolutely infalliable systems that ensure that no corporation EVER breaks the law. After all, no corporation in the past 200+ years has ever tried to cover up wrongdoing or criminal behavior of any kind. Instead, every time some criminal activity has been conducted within a corporation, its “internal checks” have rapidly and efficiently dealt with the law breaking and, when necessary, notified the proper authorities. As a result, no high corporate officers have ever been imprisoned, and no fines have ever been imposed against a corporation for wrongdoing. This has happened a number of times over the last few years. For example, Enron quickly alerted the federal authorities when it discovered some insignificant accounting fraud and as a result was able to avoid any serious consequences. Today, it is one of the most successful companies in America and former CEO Jeff Skilling (After serving one term in the US Senate representing Texas) is contemplating running for President in 2012. The vice presidential slot is expected to be filled by the noted financial expert Bernard Madoff. Tobacco companies, using these same internal auditing measures, discovered their products might cause cancer, and as a result voluntarily removed all niccotine from their products. British Petroleum, known for its unblemished safety record, is currently producing from 100s of offshore wells and has been able to end American dependence on oil imports. The financial system of the country is completely stable, because of the spontaneous refusal of large banking institutions to become “to big to fail” or to issue worthless securities.
In this strange world, those involved in government do still commit crimes. Although they do this, as long as they keep them secret and only tell a select group of people about them they are not considered to be crimes because the state decides, in secret, without any democratic decisionmaking process, that they are acceptable. By contrast, if any individual reveals these crimes, they are commiting a TERRORIST ACT. (The definition of a terrorist act is exposing the state when it commits a criminal act or conspires to subvert the democratic process). Of course, they are only acceptable when the state itself commits them. You do seem to know something about a world somewhere (perhaps in the vicinity of Alpha Centauri) but it seems to bear no resemblence to the one that the rest of us inhabit.
Some dispatches from Planet Earth showing that Wikileaks has had an impact.
1. State Department “temporarily” shuts off military access to diplomatic cables.
2. Chief of Staff of the German Foreign Minister fired for disclosing details of political negotiations.
3. Several Latin American heads of state named in cables abruptly cancel trips to Ibero-American Summit with no reason given.
4. President Obama fails to meet with Hamid Karzai because of “heavy winds and fog” that are not detectable by ordinary people living in Kabul, and because he cannot drive there (I have no idea why, maybe some trivial problem with security that has not been publicly discussed along with all the “progress” that is being made?) Strangly, electronics seemed to fail as well because a video conference did not take place either. Fortunately, telephones were still in working order, allowing Obama to make a completely private telephone call to Karzai.
5. Turkish Prime Minister denounces American diplomats who accused him of corruption.
6. To be continued…
What a mix of canard and fallacies of lopsided observation ….
1. No corporate system is perfect they are subject to human and procedural glitches. Ever heard of legal technicalities? Corporation Law?
2.The juridical person known as a corporation is a separate entity from the natural persons comprising the board. How do you know that people or corporations were not subject to indictment or prosecution?
3. About tobacco companies and cancer… It was the Surgeon General that stated in labels that smoking is dangerous to your health. In other words, it was the health authorities that knew that tobacco could cause cancer. Check out your sources. Are you joking?
4. The government is also not perfect but the underlying principles of the Constitution like the rule of law is there to correct abuses. Your convoluted fallacy is apparent. There is the Justice System that takes care of this. There are oversight committees that act as watchdogs. Read ‘The Cult of Intelligence’.
There is the principle of Checks and Balances. When the Executive commits abuses of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction or what is referred to as tyranny, the Judiciary and/or the Legislature can stop this. There are statute laws, procedural laws and judicial rulings. The last time i heard there is a new legislation on whistle blowing. What people in government are you referring to? Leaders or followers? Clarify your statements and give concrete examples. The system is a lot better than North Korea or Iran. Julian does not seem to have checks and balances in his organization that is why he is in very hot water for his 250,000 +? abuses of indiscretion!
A l p h a C e n t a u r i is a star system and i do wish i was there to go where no man has gone before. This world is full of imperfection in reference to your fallacy assertions.You should see the Philippines. We have news on court trials for corruption; impeachment proceedings; investigations and so forth and so on. My point is in my real world we have the same systems you have and yet you want your world to be a funny farm of u t o p i a n junk that Julian A. seems to be so obsessed with. He is not above the law; he is not God and he is certainly deluded into thinking your world has a perfect concept in an imperfect real time not sidereal mind you…. world.
The impact you mentioned is written evidence of the damage done because your happy Julian allowed the illegal hacking of classified information. Wait till people die because of what you did. There is a principle of law that states you are liable for all the consequences of an act that causes damages, losses or injuries. You will answer for this soon.
Your response is just what I expected. Look up the meanings of SARCASM and SATIRE and review the comment that I responded to. Since you require explanation of the obvious, I was simply illustrating the absurdity of your assertion that information about criminal activities commited by corporations and the government should be covered up, and that corporations can be trusted to enforce the law themselves. In all the cases that I mentioned, either documents were leaked showing criminal behavior (Enron, internal documents showing tobacco companies knew that their products caused cancer) or an external investigation revealed wrongdoing, neglect of safety standards, etc. Without these actions by heroic individuals and investigators, this wrongdoing would likely never have been exposed. Thus leading to the potential continued existence of Enron, the lack of regulation of tobacco products, etc. You seem to believe that the “Real World” is utopian (That somehow all significant wrongdoing is detected and punished, and no outside oversight is necessary to correct abuses). This is wrong, as is proved by hundreds of examples. Examples from Wikileaks include, the Trasfigura scandal and evidence of massive fraud at Kaputhing bank in Iceland. Without leaked information (From whatever source) no one would have discovered that Trasfigura dumped vast quantities of toxic material off the coast of Africa, and would not have entered into a multi hundred million dollar settlement with those who were injured by its actions. You seem to believe that crimes commited by governments, and by corporations, should just be covered up or ignored when they decide this is in the interest of “national security” or “profits.”
Your hysterical response that “people might be killed” is equally absurd. The Pentagon has itself admitted that no one was harmed (ironically in a leaked document released at the same time it was continuing to fear monger in public) in any wikileaks releases, even when names were disclosed. IN fact, the Pentagon did not even see any need to warn those named about the potential danger. It should not be necessary to point out how many innocent civilians the US has killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and other places to illustrate the hypocrisy of your argument.
Your logic also fails when you equate exposing crimes and policies of governments which the people who elected those governments have a right to know about with a utopian vision. Improving the world by inhibiting the ability of certain actors to commit crimes or make unaccountable decisions by public exposure is not utopian. It is a common sense reaction to the likelihood that, without such exposure, these crimes will become increasingly more common and severe and populations in supposedly democratic states will lose control over the policy advanced by their governments.
You also changed your argument. First, you argued that there was no evidence that Wikileaks had any impact. Despite this, you referred to Assange as a terrorist. Only a mind who thinks that governments should not face accountability for their actions and be able to commit crimes in secret would refer to him as a “terrorist.” Than, you claim this impact means deaths will result in the future. The non attendance of leaders at a summit and dismissal of officials does not mean that murders will be commited because of this.
You seem to be under the impression that I am involved with Wikileaks or am involved with leaking information. I am not. You seem to believe that only Wikileaks should be held responsible for any injury it has caused. You do not seem to be concerned about the destruction that was inflicted on the people and nation of Iraq that the US government has caused. This shows your argument to be hypocritical and fallacious once again.
I call your satire and sarcasm nonsense.
Ernst, stop putting words into my mouth like a corrupt lawyer. You are an anarchist.
No they’re not conspiracy theories. They’re not secrets, and you’re the only one in the conversation. They’re just crackpot theories you created to shore up your ignorance and stupidity. You write like a teenager, yet you claim to be intelligent. How come you are incapable of basic research – the accounting for Sunshine Press, Wikileaks, and Julian is available, they’re just not going to give you contributor details. For the record, Julian has 20000eu + a legal contigency fund. That’s the Swiss PostFinance bank.
For a self-proclaimed smart guy you are pretty quick to leave a lifetime of proof your an arseclown. Do you think you’re government won’t be interested in who used your posting IP address at the time you posted on here. A page about Wikileaks. Sure your stance on Wikileaks will keep you from the watch list (or worse), but your stupidity will also go on the record, the sort of record that’ll score you all the “cutting edge” jobs. Testing chemicals and such.
And if the corrupt regime you live in should fall – don’t expect the new regime to thank you for sitting on your arse… best bet is for you to keep blindly supporting the current regime, hope the local general you choose to patronize doesn’t tumble or grow paranoid, and maybe, instead of testing chemicals, you’ll get a good job with the local rent-a-mob.
Oh, I know the Phillipines, and it’s not a place anyone with any knowledge of history should feel too bloody secure, but go on, tell me it become a more “democratic” place in the last fifty years. No corruption or state murder since Marcos right? How the financial sector? ‘Yep, people like Julian are a threat to your lifestyle’
You poor fucked up desperate bastard
T s k, t s k. I count your fallacies and i wonder why you cuss me.
[…] somebody should examine what the motives of Assange actually are; he’s written a manifesto of sorts years […]
[…] https://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/julian-assange-and-the-computer-conspiracy-“to-destroy-… […]
[…] and corporate corruption are invaluable. A couple days ago, Advocatus Diaboli sent me a link to a blog post outlining Assange’s true goals for Wikileaks. It’s truly a fascinating read: In this […]
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” […]
Good night to all and God bless us!
[…] on conspiracies Posted on December 3, 2010 by Deansdale On wikileaks, via In Mala Fide (original source here): “In this sense, most of the media commentary on the latest round of leaks has totally […]
[…] (en Español) “To radically shift regime behavior we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us, and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not. Firstly we must understand what aspect of government or neocorporatist behavior we wish to change or remove. Secondly we must develop … Read More […]
It’s not about ethics… it’s not about “doing good”… it’s about being honest.
Paying taxes – we pay politicians. They work for us. If an employee in a company “does shady things” and is “corrupt in a broader sense”, he will be fired.
Keeping related information “secret” or at least “non-public” will only support the illegal behaviour.
In the end, people like me start to wonder where the difference between “KZ Dachau” and “Guantanamo Bay” is… US and allies kicked Hitler’s ass, and ever since, the US used Nazi-like propaganda procedures, behaves like “the police of the world” and threatens everyone not cooperating with them by showing of “nuclear weapons” (which they got from a captive Nazi too btw.).
My 2 cents: Assange only shows the US is clearly failing it’s politics! And the more they scream “whistleblower”, the more they prove that they know their actions are wrong. Stop the war, close down Guantanamo and then… maybe… “yes, we can”. Until then, most non-US will say “erm, sure we can – but we won’t”!
You are entitled to your own canard opinion.
[…] original en https://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/julian-assange-and-the-computer-conspiracy-%E2%80%9Cto-de… […]
[…] though. He wants to bring down the system – in it’s entirety. Just look at the zunguzungu piece: “Assange has a clearly articulated vision for how Wikileaks’ activities will “carry us […]
[…] here is well worth reading, it would be good if he wrote more, as he writes well. See also Zunguzungu’s post, where I found the […]
[…] somebody should examine what the motives of Assange actually are; he’s written a manifesto of sorts years […]
Assange is completely correct in that the USA has been and is a conspiritorial regime NOT a Democracy. words to describe the USA by ALL other written informative sources based on facts have been “corptocracy”, “plutocracy”, “theocracy”, “fascism”, and ALL other terms apply. assange is not telling those of us who have followed the socio=political agenda especially since 2000, clearly know assange’s main thesis and DO continue to support it with facts. Its scary, but a nation of people cannot be propagandized when they know the truth. The US media does NOT tell americans the truth completely avoiding the REAL issues!
I absolutely agree. Assange is a modern hero, and its amazing the sort of shit he has put up with since, in his efforts to give us a bit of truth. A brave man trying to make things more democratic? Unthinkable! Lets accuse him of rape. That’ll sort him out.
[…] been some discussion in the comments. I highly recommend this post and the links in it, and not only to […]
[…] JULIAN ASSANGE AND THE COMPUTER CONSPIRACY: […]
[…] This one isn’t unsympathetic to what he imagines Assange’s goals to have been but is not convinced they will be accomplished in this manner: Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” […]
[…] most interesting thing I’ve read on Wikileaks and Julian Assange is here. Totally fascinating. I’m conflicted about Assange; part of feminism for me is to believe […]
Hey Julian see page 173. Is this your plan to destroy the ‘invisible government?’
Your conspiracy to destroy should be transparent…. It is now.
Jesus, would you please retire to your cross and never to resurect. You are the single most tiresome, banal and mediocre presence in the history of the internetz. And there are some real floats in competition in this comments section. The level of boot licking and mindless kow-towing toauthoritah, any authoritah is mind boggling. It sickens me to see people so willing to be slaves. Get a friggen grip and man up you weak suckwaddles.
Hey D e m i z e! Let me adopt a statement from U.S. argumentation. Here it is….. ‘Put a sock in it!’
I am Roman Catholic and if you are tolerant respect my faith! Hey man i am defending my faith in the democratic republican form of government and condemning a fake like Julian. We are free men in the free democratic Republic of the Philippines…. not slaves to d e m a g o u g e s like Julian A. He needs a psyche test. So do you.
Wake up Jesus – you’re a delusional half-witted fool. and even here, on the internet, everyone knows
How the fuck can Julian be a demagogue? Are you one of those “troofer” who think 9/11 was an inside job, and the “jews” run the world? Get a dictionary, you’ve seriously lost the plot if you think Julian is/or considers himself to be, a political leader. Jesus you’re a fucktard – you can’t call him an anarchist and a political leader. That’s not because I say so, it’s because it’s logically impossible. Like you and your claim to have an IQ of above average, when you say things like Hey Julian see page 173. Is this your plan to destroy the ‘invisible government?’. What? Do you think he’s following this story? How so? Does he use the same mechanism as your friend Santa Claus when he visits every chimney in the world in one night? Not that there is a “page 183” is this blog – it’s WordPress you fool! Do you not only imagine that Julian follows your posts and that he’s going to read that and… what? Give up? “Damn, games up, the super-smart Jesus has got me figured out – I’ve learnt me lesson now”. At what point do you think your just might be a little bit delusional?
How is attacking something/some one you demonstrably don’t understand “defending your faith”. You just said your “faith” is Catholic. Which Papal Bull says don’t bear witness. ’cause it sure isn’t in your bible – though I seem to remember the pope before last saying something about the sin of letting evil prosper by saying nothing.
Do you think if you do enough sucking, licking and grovelling the Americans will return to the Phillipines in force so you can have a good life living off your sister’s earnings. Get a grip on history.
Like the powers that be give a flying fuck for your support.
When you say Julian is a fake… are you implying he’s some sort of video projection. Did the voices tell you that? Or did you just pluck it out of your arse? ’cause you sure as shit haven’t met Julian, and you clearly haven’t done even the most basic research. No dickwad, the evening tv news and a couple of headlines + this severely truncated “blog entry” (pretty much the 2006 interview with Philip Adams on ABC Radio typed out) is not research
We just profiled your rants and you score 82% – as a Narcissistic Sociapath with possible pedophile tendencies, a hatred of women, most likely working in an unskilled job, below average intelligence, paranoid and grandious delusions, and probably a criminal record for vandalism or violence. A “psyche test”? Has the room you’re posting from got rubber wallpaper? No wonder you have so much free time to post your rants. Don’t they make you wear those long sleeved shirts with the zippers, and the sleeves that tie up behind you?
You’ve got a tendency to talk gibberish – despite the time period between posts:-
Let me adopt a statement from U.S. argumentation
Not that many generations ago your own church’d exorcise you for that sort of behavior – fortunately enlightment has penetrated that medieval superstitious mind-set, and medication is available.
Now, now temper temper! I must have struck a raw nerve. The defense rests….
Jesus, would you please retire to your cross and never to resurect. You are the single most tiresome, banal and mediocre presence in the history of the internetz. And there are some real doozys in competition with you in this comments section. The level of boot licking and mindless kow-towing toauthoritah, any authoritah is mind boggling. It sickens me to see people so willing to be slaves. Get a friggen grip and man up you weak suckwaddles.
Read my reply in p 192.
hy enjoy the xxxMAS:) great post really!!!
Ditto John! God bless!
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” […]
[…] Deconstruyendo Wikileaks: ¿cuál es el verdadero objetivo de las filtraciones? escrito por zunguzungu original en https://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/julian-assange-and-the-computer-conspiracy-%E2%80%9Cto-de… […]
[…] answer to this question is perhaps to be found in these writings (via via), in which Julian Assange lays out the intellectual framework that presumably motivates his […]
[…] insights I wanted, so I went across the blogosphere looking for different views and comments. This pertinent, critical analysis found by mistake (of which reading I would insist upon) has sown the seeds which I needed to initiate my own […]
Julian Assange,
Rulling class like a jealous and protective lover strikes Renaissance..,
In the world fewer kind-hearted – more evil, envious people.
In biological process of surviving always more weed; and if you cultivate it,valuable sorts cannot withstand it.They will degrade, losing the best quality of the breed. Therefore,in human environment the second category invariably stronger then the first one; because its talent and diligence are substituted by energy,great health,desire to suppress others and live at their expense. Evil people bring under control kind people, make their existence unbearable, break and mutilate their souls. At the end physically kill them,as less protected.
The act is irreversible; there is a hope for new standards in political game;
As a good lesson ,”Gentlemen hold your head up and keep your nose at a friendly level” (paraphrase)
[…] 1. Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” (via zunguz… […]
Amazing read, inspired me to write this song, “Forfeit the Conspiracy”
I hope Julian A. realizes that he attracted the attention of the enemies of the U.S.A. Any group can now set him up as an assassination target cum scapegoat so the U.S. can be blamed for everything including the kitchen sink. Julian you may have set yourself up to be a hit for extremists who will use your death in expectations of its effects in and outside the U.S. This scenario could happen.
Or….. the extremists may use your tactics and your sites as a way to get even with the U.S.
You started this Cyber War.
“Jesus”, you are anti-Jesus
Z o l e, your one-liner is full of fallacy.
@Zole
Concise, succinct, absolute truth.
And funny!
[…] and its mercurial founder Julian Assange is somewhat entertaining in light of the fact that Assange has laid it out in great detail — in essay form, no […]
[…] read about cablegate, the latest Wikileaks’s publication, Aaron Bady’s piece on “Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy” is among the best. It is a commentary on early Assange’s writings on conspiracies, […]
There was no doubt in my mind…. the true nature of your esoteric treatise is a very apparent attempt to destroy the visible government and the capitalist economy of the United States of America. Believe me Julian i don’t hate you. I pity you. You and your people cannot topple a state by blackmailing it with the impending release of more secrets. This includes corporate secrets, right?
You brought about a series of events that is now beyond your control. Your ‘insurance’ is nothing more than coercion. Release it now and it will have the same non-effect. Why wait for your detention?
Wrong again Jesus. It’s the invisible government.
It’s only days since you posted this crap and you’ve been shown wrong on every count. No one ever said the documents would not be released if Julian was not arrested. Just that there would be no warning before it’s release to give the guilty time to prepare. And now that an actual arrest warrant has been issued, and Julian has voluntarily gone to the police the situation does not change. All that was ever said by any one from Wikileaks, Sunshine Press, or by Julian is “if Julian is arrested or killed the material will still be released.
Don’t stop though – you’ve gone from unknown, through irritating, to hilarious and fucktard famous. I’m starting to wonder if you’re not what you claim to be, perhaps the right-wing-raving-lunatic thing is just an act… if so you’re one hell of lot smarter than I thought. In fact… the more I think about, the more I suspect you’re a plant from one of those S-11 type anarchist groups that want to bring down democracy and replace it with some sort of communist collective crap.
I mean, if I originally thought Julian was all about ego and picking up Swedish right-wing Christian women (left-wing in Sweden is right-wing kindof) – by now I’d be thinking sides just to avoid being associated with your rabid outpourings.
“Non-effect” – now that *is* psy-ops classic! Better than when Canute got them to carry him down to the beach!
You sure love to engage in fallacy….. Your character speaks for itself.
If you, Julian A. had gone the legal way instead of allowing the mass hacking and revelations of classified information in the internet the outcomes would have been very different. As i said before, which part is valid whistle blowing and which is not?
There are accepted ways in a democracy to do it…. The collateral murder video wasn’t murder as it should have been termed collateral damage through reckless imprudence. I agree Administrative discipline should be applied for negligence on those responsible.
My point? There are legal ways to reveal such abuses without compromising classified documents in one whole batch. You had the options of the U.S. Congress, the Courts, the Highest Executive Branch and the use of legitimate media. Following this up with peaceable assembly to express grievances is another form.
Julian why were you so dumb in allowing a mass release of hacked classified documents? Legitimate legal action was forgotten in the zeal to destroy the “invisible g o v e r n n m e n t” You probably forgot and put yourself in the precarious position you are now in.
Why not bargain with the U.S. government on the matter?
Just my honest opinion.
Good night all and God bless!
[…] Text ist eine Übersetzung aus dem Amerikanischen von Aaron Badys Beitrag zu Wikileaks vom 29. November 2010. Weitere Analysen zu Wikileaks finden sich in seinem […]
[…] is interesting, although you’ve probably already read […]
[…] and its mercurial founder Julian Assange is somewhat entertaining in light of the fact that Assange has laid it out in great detail — in essay form, no […]
Wikileaks is Mossad propaganda to force the US to support endless Wars for Israel, it all started nearly a decade ago under a false flag attack.
9/11 and Israel, here:
America Deceived II (free preview)
Aaron, im totally bewildered.
There is a field test of a closed information systems killer RUNNING RIGHT NAOW! and no one will even talk about it.
And it looks like it is WAI.
I dont know if Assanges OODA loop killer will work, but if it does the security state is dead, and we wont have to worry about it anymore.
People with clearances have gotten inhouse email telling them they could lose their clearances if they visit Wikileaks site.
Major Defense Contractor Blocks Anything With ‘WikiLeaks’ In URL
The nation’s biggest defense contractors, who employ thousands of people with security clearances, are taking steps to restrict their access to Wikileaks, including one company which is blocking employees from accessing any website, including news stories, with “wikileaks” in the URL.
White House Tells All Federal Agencies To Prohibit Unauthorized Employees From Wikileaks Site:
The Office of Management and Budget today directed all federal agencies to bar unauthorized employees from accessing the Wikileaks web site and its leaked diplomatic cables.
The Library of Congress also blocked access to Wikileaks on its public access computers TPM reported yesterday. That’s a reasonably big deal if you know how librarians feel about information access.
What is next? Universities?
Meanwhile Assange is playing the feds like a 10 pound brookie on 20 pound test. Its all kabuki.
The feds are running around like keystone cops trying to arrest him and giving him TONS of “maximum exposure” and the diplo cables are going drip drip drip one per hour.
Less than 700 of 250k have been released so far.
Because that is Assanges design—the feds havent stopped a thing.
AMG isnt that worth a FUCKING MENTION?
@Matoko-chan
🙂 Maybe because most of the people do the right thing most of the time.
I seriously doubt that the CIA and the FBI are bumblers. The evil empire of conspiracy by invisible government is not all powerful, there is no single conspiracy (that’s the province of nutters) just a bunch of different conspirators playing fuck-you-jack and waiting for their chance. At the very least some people will resign, and some noises will be made. Not everybody does something, and some just do their bit to protest a system they’ve lost faith in by doing things slowly, by the book. Read through the original diplomat reports, and view some of the political outbursts of late in the same light. Politicians can be just like diplomats when it comes to saying less than what they really mean. If needs be they’ll sacrifice one of their own without mercy, and say “I’m shocked and disappointed, [insert name here] has brought the [insert institution here] into disrepute…”
[…] Continue reading. Of course, the difficulties that increased secrecy will create for governments is part of the point of WikiLeaks, as Assange has explained. […]
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” […]
[…] Assange has a very western-lefty (think Chomsky) view of authoritarianism. In an earlier essay, as this excellent blog post points out, he describes the US as a kind of authoritarian state. Authoritarian regimes give rise […]
[…] i. Assange is een radicale gek. Radicaal is hij wel. De man streeft naar absolute transparantie. Dat lijk me wat veel van het goeie. Wikileaks en Assange stralen ook iets kinderlijks uit in de zin dat ieder geheim wel op corruptie moet wijzen! Iedereen heeft slechte intenties tot het tegendeel bewezen is — ook die gedachtegang is mij te duister. Maar gek is Assange niet. Hij is geen ongeleid projectiel. Kijk bijvoorbeeld naar zijn antwoorden op lezersvragen bij The Guardian (hier een Nederlandse weergave). Lees meer over Assange’s filosofie in dit essay. […]
Please notice you all fail to include one of the basic precepts of Wikileaks in your discussions: They do not solicit or seek out information. They RECIEVE what whistle blowers would like exposed. They then authenticate and release it. It is up to us, the public to decide how to respond to it.
Wikileaks and Julian Assange are responding to a need in the environment. The hackers and whistle blowers are created by the conspirators themselves. Wikileaks has simply given them an effective way of getting their information distributed. Transparency precludes any need for whistle blowers.
This is one of the more intelligent sites discussing Wikileaks and yet it is painfully clear that the greatest argument against democracy is a no longer a five minute conversation with the man on the street, but reading the e-mail responses to an attempt to present information to the public.
Hey A n w n, the information you receive is the product of systems hacking. No amount of excuses can make this your property. You don’t own it in the first place. Julian allowed it. That makes the act a criminal conspiracy.
I read the news and it says the “insurance” will be released if something happens to wiki leaks or to Julian A. Where does the organization end and the man begin? As i said before if extremist terrorists find this expedient to assassinate Julian they will do it because of the immense damage to U.S. popularity. His martyrdom will be at the expense of the U.S. The scenario could happen as the extremists cannot resist the psych war effects of it. You sure are dumb in setting him up as one.
Thank you for the posts.
Noam Cohen’s interesting NY Times article, “Wikileaks, Facebook, and the Perils of Oversharing,” culminates in–you guessed it–Aaron Bady:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/06/business/media/06link.html?pagewanted=1&hp
Keep in mind that government “links” and diplomats will not be the only victims here.
Read: http://conserveuganda.wordpress.com/2010/12/06/wikileaks-hurts-the-good-guys-too/
Mark, i read it. That is the correct perception.
1. The info leaked is surely available already to other govt.s that could use it to cause “harm”/risk to others through existing channels.
2. The only people who are really kept in the dark are “we the people”.
3. What I have seen so far merely confirms the existing “impression” we have of what is going on in the world. The revelation is that we now have confirmation, whereas previously we could be labelled reactionary conspiracists.
4. Democracy only exists when the people can make informed decisions and form opinions based on truth. Greater information can only lead to a better appreciation of “reality”, which can only lead to greater democracy. Information is power. And now we have a bit more, govt.s have a bit less. And thats why they’re angry. Thats a good thing.
5. As I type JA is still “at large” in SE UK (so the media say – and known location to HMG). Presumably at the behest of the home secretary. Long may it continue. Is HMG having an attack of principles I wonder ? Maybe too much to hope for, but the “not so special relationship” leak might be having a lasting sting.
[…] But Assange is not trying to produce a journalistic scandal which will then provoke red-faced government reforms or something, precisely because no one is all that scandalized by such things any more. Instead, he is trying to strangle the links that make the conspiracy possible, to expose the necessary porousness of the American state’s conspiratorial network in hopes that the security state will then try to shrink its computational network in response, thereby making itself dumber and slower and smaller. via zunguzungu. […]
When Julian A. released the illegally obtained classified information into the internet all enemy forces gained access to it. Yes he is worse than a spy.
His conspiratorial criminal acts are a bad precedent that will be emulated by the enemies of the U.S.
[…] The idea of the right to create new history also dovetails perfectly with what appears to be WikiLeaks’ more radical political agenda. This agenda can be inferred from two essays of Assange dated 2006 and entitled ‘State and Terrorist Conspiracies’ and ‘Conspiracy as Governance’ (original documents and a good overview can be found here). […]
Anarchism is a political philosophy that considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy.
It seeks to diminish or even abolish authority in the conduct of human relations.
The individualist wing of anarchism emphasizes negative liberty, i.e. opposition to state control over the individual.
Does the aforementioned sound familiar? Julian
A’s. philosophy subscribes to total transparency of all secrets regardless of the damage it may do to the state.
The ends does not justify the means in illegally hacking classified material for release to the internet. Julian is a classic anarchist.
[…] Jay: still the best thing I have read for understanding Assange and Wikileaks. Alan Bady (zunguzungu) Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”. […]
I hope some brave low level unaccountable bureaucrat releases to Wikileaks the latest Witness Protection List.
This will take Wikileaks’ premise to its logical conclusion since no person or bit of information should be allowed to hide under the veil/lie of government secrecy since by definition all information needs to be free.
Also, the same should be said with all bank accounts, SSNs, credit card numbers etc. – but only for US citizens, since they are perpetrators of everything evil in the world. Show me a Taliban that has a bank account or 401(k)?
John Locke is wrong, the state of nature can not be governed by law but by trust and transparency – no secrets allowed.
Also, Julian should post the contact information of those US paid Swedish sluts so wikifanboys can cast light on the truth and justice through transparency.
@Poi
It’s not about “total transparency”. Read the original essay in it’s full. IQ.org
You’ll find the published Wikileaks policy mirrors it.
Why do you think Julian isn’t giving out the addresses of the two women. It’s a private matter.
Their have been bank account details in leaked documents – but the were not leaked without warning.
[…] Alphonso (Interview), „Baut ein Denkmal für Julian Assange“ Alan Bady, Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy. Dan Gillmor, The censors are scoring a big win. Alexander Görlach, Ein großes Loch. The […]
[…] 3 Quarks Daily. The piece takes a much more skeptical view than the much-linked zunzuzungu piece it takes as its start: That Wikileaks will have real-world effects is indisputable; they’ve […]
Well, the problem is that this is supposed to be a democracy. In out and out dictatorships they just throw the tortured and murdered bodies in the street to keep people in line. As one of my professor puts it.
Well, the problem is that this is supposed to be a democracy. In out and out dictatorships they just throw the tortured and murdered bodies in the street to keep people in line. As one of my professors puts it.
supposed being the operative word… and dictatorships only leave the bodies in the street because they can get away with it…. the more civilised “democracies” prefer to keep the skeltons hidden… that doesn’t mean they aren’t there…..
[…] Jay: still the best thing I have read for understanding Assange. Alan Bady (zunguzungu) Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”. […]
[…] Julian Assange says that the authoritarian regimes of the world define themselves through their attempts at concealment and conspiracy. […]
Jim Adams…… which part of free market capitalism includes a neo fascist elite controlling massive extorted tax revenues, not to mention floating multi trillion dollar debts into the bond markets…. mainly so they can award Govt. contracts to private special interest corporations….
just as we’ve never really had a proper communist state, because they always collapsed into dictatorships, we’ve never really had a proper capitalist state, because Govt. always grows big and fat and starts distorting the real free market.
in the real free market there is no use for a $50 Billion aircraft carrier, or a $250M fighterjet, its useless, yet the Govt. is able to purloin those by coercing its population into paying for them on the basis of one fear or another. That’s no more freemarket captialism than Stalin’s USSR was communism.
But the truth is that before big Govt. took over, we have had pretty decent free market systems, and they have certainly built a lot more than any other system, because market reward people who do industrious, creative and useful things… the only time they don’t work is when Govt. combined with special interest stop allowing a level playing field.
[…] them even further. If they up their internal security, they’ll hinder their own operations, playing right into his hands. If they imprison Assange, he’ll become a living symbol of oppression and tyranny, the Nelson […]
[…] Zunguzungu: Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy – fabulous assessment of Assange’s philosophy through discussion of his essays. (Thanks […]
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” […]
[…] is not its private property. It is the general consensus to the contrary is, more than anything, the conspiracy that Wikileaks is seeking to turn against itself: this universal convergence that bridges dictators and democrats upon the privatization of the […]
Before you use blanket terms like Anarchist to sweep the subject under the table, try to understand their thinking….
“Because force is the most basic way of violating rights, any civilised society renounces the use of individual force, and hands this power (the ability to initiate force) over to a dispassionate government. I could just go around to my business partners house, he ripped me off and owes me money, i could take an axe to his front door and take his possession at gun point… but i don’t….. I rely on Govt. and court systems instead…..
This power – the power of destruction – should be there solely to protect the rights of individuals. Any government that uses this force to harry, cajole, intimidate and oppress individuals, to make them submit to Govt. rule without cause and without another individual’s complaint…. is a force for pure evil. They are beyond mere evil if they use this weapon to destroy man’s basic rights by, say:
1. Looting property through force without recompense and for Govt. benefit.
2. Arbitrarily passing laws to limit man’s reasonable pursuit of happiness.
3. Restricting liberty by creating thousands of crimeless / victimless laws.
So it will come as no surprise to you to learn that the government is your deadliest enemy in your pursuit of freedom. No hoodlum or bandit can come close to enslaving you as Govt. does.
Take even the craziest cases of mafia and drug lords. Drug abuse is a victimless crime, anyone who wants to take cocaine or heroin can buy it on any street corner in an inner city, regardless of a 30 year war on drugs. Who creates the drug lords is the Govt. by pushing up prices by restricting supply. WE don’t need protection from drug lords toting uzis, we need the Govt. to stop being so fxxking pious and self righteous, and trying to put everything right that it sees wrong with society.
The ONLY role of the Govt. should be to uphold very basic laws between individuals. To ensure the rule of law and that every citizen has an equal right to defend themselves against absue of their fellow citizens, be that through corporations or from one individual to another.
[…] Zunguzungu: Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy: “To destroy this invisible government&… “Most of the news media seems to be losing their minds over Wikileaks without actually reading these essays, even though [Wikileaks founder Julian Assange] describes the function and aims of an organization like Wikileaks in pretty straightforward terms. But, to summarize, he begins by describing a state like the US as essentially an authoritarian conspiracy, and then reasons that the practical strategy for combating that conspiracy is to degrade its ability to conspire, to hinder its ability to “think” as a conspiratorial mind. The metaphor of a computing network is mostly implicit, but utterly crucial: he seeks to oppose the power of the state by treating it like a computer and tossing sand in its diodes. […]
Julian to be arrested soon. I hope he doesn’t cut and run. That will make him a fugitive.
You’re all over the place Jesus. You’ve already posted that he “did” run and that is a “fugitive”. Remember? You tried to claim that meant he wasn’t “innocent”.
You’re getting sloppy Jesus, now be professional and try and make the screaming loony act a little more believable.
See those dates and times of postings? Got watch that stuff. Remember the training, and focus.
Still fallacy. You are like a corrupt lawyer putting words into my mouth.
[…] On the other hand, human systems can’t stand pure transparency. For negotiation to work, people’s stated positions have to change, but change is seen, almost universally, as weakness. People trying to come to consensus must be able to privately voice opinions they would publicly abjure, and may later abandon. Wikileaks plainly damages those abilities. (If Aaron Bady’s analysis is correct, it is the damage and not the oversight that Wikileaks is designed to create.*) […]
“In a disclosure of some of the most sensitive information yet revealed by wiki leaks, the website has put out a secret cable listing sites worldwide that the U.S. considers critical to national security. U.S. officials said the leak amounts to giving a hit list to terrorists…..” -Fox News
Julian A…. I repeat my question is this whistle blowing or revelations of secret information detrimental to the security of a nation state? Are you serious about having blood on your hands?
In the absence of showing that this secret cable contains abuses and the manner of its release, there can be no whistle blowing here. As i stated before on the forum…. what is and what isn’t considered whistle blowing among the thousands of classified documents? You and your people are in over your heads in very hot water. The U.S. criminal investigation is not yet finished. It looks like Interpol gets to arrest you first.
None of the cables released were marked Top Secret.
Even if they were, Wikileaks *is* a media organization – the American High Court has repeatedly ruled that journalists are not breaking the law publishing Top Secret documents.
Wikileaks stole nothing. Wikileaks copied nothing.
Any crime you accuse Wikileaks of you should also accuse the New York Times and Fox of too.
Wikileaks has always have a policy of testing submitted materials for authenticity, and reviewing before releasing.
This is not something that has happened overnight – this is 10 years of work, building on many more years of work.
Wikileaks is not alone, and they are not the first.
Wikileaks can, and has done what Crytonome could not – stay in business against opposition. Sure Crytonome is still around – but it took Microsoft 1 phone call to get offending material removed. And their security is laughable – 4chan style script kiddies hacked them. Pity any contributors there.
If North America is so great – why do their diplomats insist on lying to their allies? How long before Australia and New Zealand slip a sock full of sand into the American fuel tank in gratitude. For such a great country why is life so hard for so many? And why are so many in jail?
Read the Espionage Act. The revelations of secret documents are punishable. You did not publish it. You released all of it into the internet in violation of law.
We are all waiting for the conclusion of the U.S. criminal investigation. Until this happens…… you have the right to remain silent as anything you say or do, i.e. Print or Publish can and will be used against you in a court of law.
@jesus – in reply to your first sentence:-
Read the Espionage Act? Why? In this instance it no more applies than the Marine Protection or Bradly Acts.
Look up Watergate, Pentagon Papers.
If you can demonstrate that Wikileaks stole the documents, and is not a media organisation, and did not publicly release the documents (publish), and the documents are not newsworthy (clearly NYT thinks otherwise, as does the Saudi owned Fox) – then the Espionage Act “might” apply.
Get a dictionary, look up “publish”. While you’re there – look up “news”.
You clearly have no legal training.
Laws are defined by government – not wishful thinking and television education.
Claimer: IAL
In regards to the rest of your post… WTF? Have you been smoking crack?
If this is not applicable as you state…. Why then is the U.S. Attorney General investigating this for eventual prosecution? You seem to equate hacking with published “news”. The subject is not newsworthy as it is classified information. Yes I am a graduate of LLB Law in the Philippines.
You are a traitor of your own country and do not seem to give a damn of the damage done its security even in the revelations of sensitive facilities. I will tell you what i told Julian…. What is whistle blowing and what is not? How do you distinguish what is legitimate and what is not? The ends does not justify the means!
It is applicable as I state – unless the current laws are changed, and made retrospective. Imagine for a moment this whole scenario was able to be foreseen…. (sigh).
No the US Attorney says he’s investigating (to see whether he can find something to charge someone with) – it’s what you say when you’re not actually doing anything, but you have to arrive at an unacceptable conclusion. Remember the law school story? It’s what you say when the client pays a big fat retainer and asks a dumb question to which the answer is no. You tell the client you will have to consider the answer carefully and fully investigate the circumstances – then you tell the client no.
Focus – remember the role you’re playing Jesus. A law graduate should at least have a vague idea of what constitutes libel. Accusing someone of “hacking” when you know for a fact there was no “cracking” is bringing their reputation into disrepute.
You, on the other hand, don’t have a reputation to soil (as this page documents, your standing is not “good”), and I can call “truth”. You are an arseclown! 🙂
Regardless of your wishes – those libelous statements could provoke someone representing Julian to ask Workpress for you IP address, your ISP for you name and home address – then you get an invite to practice your preach (with a fool for client) in court. You’re supposed to be the law genius – tell me – if Julian has an “accident”, could his son sue you for contributing to the “accident” by tarnishing his reputation and promoting vigilantism? Perhaps you’d like to “investigate” that?
If I post you a letter – and you receive it, does that make you a mail “hacker”.
No cracking involved here – Manning didn’t break into the system – he just burnt it to CD.
Nice double act though – the “hacker” line is pure Fox. Which as you know, comrade, is majority owned by the same Saudi family that support Bin Laden – hell, they’re the same ones who insisted the CIA train and fund him back in the days when your Russian comrades were about to grab the Afghan oil for themselves.
Neither you nor some State Department doofus get to determine what is newsworthy – that’s a publisher’s determination. And that’s why there a dictionaries – so the dripdicks like yourself don’t go making up new meaning for words to suit themselves. Secrecy classifications have nothing to do with whether an item is newsworthy. Check you local history – see what was considered the most newsworthy of the end of the Marcos regimes stories? The secret documents.
Oh I give a damn all right. Freedom of speech and access to information about the world I live is vanishing fast. Those are things that people have paid dearly to have in the first place. Respect for those things is required. Any inconvenience I have to bear in order to defend them is minor compared to the lives that were lain down to gain them in the first place.
You will not “tell me what you told Julian” because you’ve never spoken to him and he’s never read anything you’ve written.
If the subject wasn’t newsworthy – why was it published by television, newspaper, blog, and radio?
What revelations of sensitive facilities? Seriously? Just because you didn’t know hardly makes them revelations – Jesus, nearly everything is a “revelation” to you – in a St John the bad acid Divine Book of Revelations way.
It’s not even classified secret. Though I’m sure some of the people living near some of the component manufacturers aren’t aware what’s there, they might be pissed off about that. (Yawn) – ’bout as dangerous as Google Earth. Or have you forgotten that furor. “Oh my god the terrorists will ruin everything now that they can see things” – (without having to go all the way to a library). Secrecy through obscurity only works if the bad guys don’t do their research – and they always have more motivation than the good guys.
How am I a traitor to my country? Ah, yes, of course! You have psychic insight (and poor analytical skills).
Whistle blowing (which, again, you haven’t told Julian, except in the way that you tell God things) is when you reveal an illegal secret. Remember the bachelor of law story? You’re supposed to know how to look up definitions.
No – the end does not justify the means. Apropos of what? That “viva la revolution” and “kill the pigs” you hear are just voices in your head, they come from forming non-existent relationships with your Fox friends. And a lack of actual flesh and blood friends in your life.
Put a sock in it man. The law is still the law. Your arguments in fallacy are nothing but rants from a disciple of anarchy.
[…] Julian Assange, who is resigned to the consequences of his public stance. Assange has stated the reason for Wikileaks’ existence is for there to be no need for a Wikileaks – exceptionalism must end and all governments be […]
[…] […]
[…] The idea of the right to create new history also dovetails perfectly with what appears to be WikiLeaks’ more radical political agenda. This agenda can be inferred from two essays of Assange dated 2006 and entitled ‘State and Terrorist Conspiracies’ and ‘Conspiracy as Governance’ (original documents and a good overview can be found here). […]
Well i did not win the bet…. The British police arrested Julian
A s s a n g e.
[…] Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy Fascinating overview of Julian Assange's motivations and philosophies which has led to some people describing him as a peaceful peer of the Unabomber… (tags: wikileaks philosophy conspiracy politics censorship) […]
[…] den initierade, läs även detta långa inlägg med Assange egna ord och syn på syftet med Wikileaks, kommenterat och […]
[…] “If total conspiratorial power is zero, then clearly there is no information flow between the cons… […]
[…] it is taking an absolutist position–nothing needs to be secret –and because it is increasingly clear it’s agenda is not really about open government and transparency. Before its most recent […]
[…] wrote an essay some time ago, that has been covered by zungazunga, which sets out some of his thinking about wikileaks. In short by removing secrecy, authoritarian […]
It’s kind of interesting he comes up with this concept of hosting leaked information. But since internet is not new the people who wanted to expose already had numerous avenues to publish their material including blogging. Why does Assange think his wikileaks is the authority on leaks? For the average internet user the Wikileaks is in the same level of trust as any other article/blog/forum articles. What makes him think that we believe what’s there is authentic information? There is no guarantee for it one way or the other. As there is no free lunch the establishments might actually use this wikileaks for spreading false information deliberately to aid their devious interests. What foolproof way does Assange have to avoid that?
Internet itself provides for a powerful means to share the information, whether conspiratorial or beneficial and it doesn’t have to be taken at wikileaks word. His intention appears noble but this ideology fails for the simple reason that wikileaks is another establishemnt.
First of all you missed the point, the point is, that to leak genuine Govt. documents inhibits the conspiracy of Govt. either by making them more open or by making them so secretive they can’t function properly and end up working against themselves…. a bit like making so many files on your PC invisible and encrypted that you PC keeps crashing, trying to process them all. That is his theory… and this obviously won’t work if he leaks garbage fakes…….
Second if his reputation is to be maintained he must vet the documents and make sure they are real, and by providing a portal he gives the leakers a more secure outlet. Anyone can post on a blog, but its not hard to be discovered via IP address, even if you use a public wifi you can be caught on a CCTV etc. He’s giving technology to help people remain anonymous and if they really want to be secretive they can use snail mail…… you can’t do that with a blog can you now ?
@Buddha
What other internet avenues? Citation please.
I’ll save you some effort – there is no safe venue for what has been leaked – remember the African toxic waste scandal – that had been published – and shut down.
Cryptome is a joke. Hacked by children – and the contributors identities were possibly compromised in the process, certainly it demonstrated the porosity of that site. Microsoft has no problem getting material they opposed seeing the light of day being removed from there.
I can shut down your blog – it’s called a DMCA take-down notice. Doesn’t mean I won’t be penalized – but I can shut it down. Try hosting some Tibetan resistance video footage there – see if attacks sourced from China don’t shut you down.
Do you think you can master Tor? Do you have the network in place that would inspire confidence in the leakers that you can protect their leaked documents? That you can get the documents to the mainstream media and not be ignored.
You might find the logistics a little more daunting than first thought. It requires a large network of dedicated, informed, clever, educated, brave people. One site wouldn’t last a day – and would have zero credibility. It’s not about a system, it’s about a capability to change and adapt a system. Continuity is everything. The public have a short memory- Wikileaks has to be in it for the long-haul.
Like you said – the internet is hardly new. In many ways though, it’s a much smaller internet now than it was thirty years ago.
Bad news for Julian….. He has been denied bail.
It’s an arrest for an extradition hearing – no application for bail was made – therefore it wasn’t denied.
Your info source is flawed. He was denied bail and its all over the news.
[…] them even further. If they up their internal security, they’ll hinder their own operations, playing right into his hands. If they imprison Assange, he’ll become a living symbol of oppression and tyranny, the Nelson […]
[…] On the other hand, human systems can’t stand pure transparency. For negotiation to work, people’s stated positions have to change, but change is seen, almost universally, as weakness. People trying to come to consensus must be able to privately voice opinions they would publicly abjure, and may later abandon. Wikileaks plainly damages those abilities. (If Aaron Bady’s analysis is correct, it is the damage and not the oversight that Wikileaks is designed to create.*) […]
[…] more secret. And that, perhaps counter-intuitively, is exactly the point. As Assange states (via), in a world where leaking is easy, secretive or unjust systems are nonlinearly hit relative to […]
[…] them even further. If they up their internal security, they’ll hinder their own operations, playing right into his hands. If they imprison Assange, he’ll become a living symbol of oppression and tyranny, the Nelson […]
[…] at Writing Without Paper, pointed me to this post by Robert P. Baird at 3 Quarks, who pointed me to Aaron Bady and these 2006 essays (pdf) by Julian Assange actually delineating his purpose in more detail than […]
[…] Link […]
[…] On the other hand, human systems can’t stand pure transparency. For negotiation to work, people’s stated positions have to change, but change is seen, almost universally, as weakness. People trying to come to consensus must be able to privately voice opinions they would publicly abjure, and may later abandon. Wikileaks plainly damages those abilities. (If Aaron Bady’s analysis is correct, it is the damage and not the oversight that Wikileaks is designed to create.*) […]
[…] (1) Julian Assange Arrested in London: The head of WikiLeaks turned himself in to Scotland Yard, was arrested, and was refused bail. He now faces possible extradition to Sweden, which he will resist. Here’s the story from the Guardian. Here’s something interesting on the charges against him in Sweden, from an Australian lawyer who had represented Assange: The Swedes Are Making It up As They Go Along. And here’s an interesting blog post analyzing Assange/WikiLeaks’ guiding philosophy, something that seems to have gotten little attention from the lapdog press: “To Destroy This Invisible Government.” […]
Thanks for this: “There is a certain vicious amorality about the Mark Zuckerberg-ian philosophy that all transparency is always and everywhere a good thing, particularly when it’s uttered by the guy who’s busily monetizing your radical transparency.” — it’s a public service, like this entire article.
I do want you to go further in following the implications of your diagnosis. You are too ready to say that “states do shady things”. Well, that’s not exactly what we’re finding with this latest batch of WikiLeaks cables. We are seeing the U.S. not doing anything but making private assessments of *other countries’ leaders* doing shady things — countries that Julian Assange myopically or naively — or with sinister intent — never “opens”.
I think it’s important not just to analyze the actions and effects of Assange and his comrades but their nature, and I would define it not merely as anarchyist in belief, but very specifically technocommunist.
http://3dblogger.typepad.com/wired_state/2010/12/wikileaks-is-about-war-for-power-not-rights-or-freedom.html
Well done!
Re: “The point of Wikileaks — as Assange argues — is simply to make Wikileaks unnecessary.”
The Bolsheviks sang that tune, too. Um, it didn’t happen.
They said the state would “wither away,” too.
It didn’t.
But of course, that was because Craig Newmark and Sergey Brin hadn’t been born yet…
[…] Patrice Riemens have advanced a set of hypotheses about WikiLeaks. Aaron Bady has identified the cybernetic obsessions of Julian Assange. Blogs, newspapers, and the beloved BBC are licking their chops talking about new media and the […]
[…] into the room so much as about throwing grit in the machine.” For further analysis, check out Aaron Brady‘s original blog […]
[…] 3 Quarks Daily, a very nuanced analysis of a deep reading by Aaron Bady of Julian Assange’s 2006 essays (pdf) explaining the motives behind WikiLeaks. Convolute and […]
Your Julian is bound to fail in his attempts to total transparency. His actions will unite all nation states against him.
Change obama cannot imagine
We NEED proper steering mechanism to survive the global society we created with technology. Transparency/involvement is needed. It’s urgent, at this moment our society has an obsolete 200 years old steering mechanism. How can a few wise leaders understand these complex global issues pending ?
Would we have gone to Iraq over Weapons of mass destruction is we were part of the diplomatic cable discussion ?
Better of with more transparency ? Credit Crises / Cable gate shows governments are not so much in control of the global society. Wasn’t it work of the press to tell us the truth ?
Can the government be specific what is so threatening, because NO ONE DIED by the cables released. People did die because the same amount of money did go to Foreign Affair as to public health care.
At least the cork out of the bottle. Fact is that secrets are harder to keep anno 2010. Shutting down is naive. Discuss it is the only option.. If democracy fails, the only solution is MORE democracy!. Fill the streets and discuss where the press fails.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-this-case-must-not-obscure-what-wikileaks-has-told-us-2154109.html
Also:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6B669H20101207
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11945558
Australia’s foreign minister has said the US is to blame for the release of thousands of diplomatic cables on Wikileaks, not its Australian founder, Julian Assange.
Kevin Rudd said the release raised questions about US security.
Mr Rudd said he did not “give a damn” about criticism of him in the cables.
Mr Assange, arrested in the UK over sex crime allegations in Sweden, has accused the Australian government of “disgraceful pandering” to the US.
The U.S. is not to blame. The proximate cause is Wiki leaks, Julian and his minions.
I thought this site allows all opinions. Why am i being blocked?
Idiocy and public nuisance
http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-britains-suspicious-decision-to-free-the-lockerbie-bomber-really-was-all-about-oil-2010-12
Among the biggest Wikileaks embarrassments for the UK came out last night, while Julian Assange waits in police custody.
Britain’s sudden release of the Lockerbie Bomber in August 2009, which everyone assumed was motivated by oil, really was all about oil (via Daily Mail).
Diplomatic papers reveal that Libyan officials “convinced UK embassy officers that the consequences if Megrahi were to die in prison… would be harsh, immediate and not easily remedied.”
Colonel Gaddafi threatened to cut Britain “off at the knees” if the terrorist wasn’t sent home.
Julian will be prosecuted by the U.S.
Let me fix that for you:
>Julian will be persecuted by the U.S.
Persecuted? Think again….. Thats the one thing the leftists and rightists would say.
[…] On the other hand, human systems can’t stand pure transparency. For negotiation to work, people’s stated positions have to change, but change is seen, almost universally, as weakness. People trying to come to consensus must be able to privately voice opinions they would publicly abjure, and may later abandon. Wikileaks plainly damages those abilities. (If Aaron Bady’s analysis is correct, it is the damage and not the oversight that Wikileaks is designed to create.*) […]
[…] They may have their reasons for this, specific to its current legal situation and broader issues that relate to motivation. However, this institutional definition is singularly unhelpful in trying to work out the general […]
“To function effectively, the primary authority has to be disassociated from all other members of the conspiracy, layers of mediation which have to be as opaque as possible to everyone concerned.”
Interesting…this is how we’ve been told the terrorists operate.
“To function effectively, the primary authority has to be disassociated from all other members of the conspiracy, layers of mediation which have to be as opaque as possible to everyone concerned.”
Interesting…this is how we’ve been told the terrorists operate, i.e. “terrorist cells”
http://blogs.hbr.org/haque/2010/12/why_wikileaks_matters_more_and.html
To focus only on WikiLeaks is to miss the big picture of what’s happening with information — just like focusing only on Napter in 1999 would have led you to miss the bigger revolution in digital music. The original Napster was shut down in 2001, but its P2P heirs continue to share pirated files, and it paved the way for the rise of iTunes and Pandora — and the fall of Tower Records. Similarly, you can jail Julian Assange, but you probably can’t jail every 17 year old hacker whose blood is boiling because you just jailed Julian Assange — nor can you get a restraining order on every fed-up associate, manager, or cashier who wants to blow the whistle on you.
The real scandal might just be this: There are few secrets bigger and more terrible than the ones that are hiding in plain sight. The ones we ignore, sweep under the rug, and won’t, don’t, or can’t discuss. (And in fact, many of the “embarassing” WikiLeaks cables only confirm — in sharper language — what informed readers already knew.)
http://www.businessinsider.com/this-backlash-against-wikileaks-is-outrageous-2010-12
Remember the Pentagon Papers?
Aren’t you glad the New York Times had the balls to publish them? So are we. And the same with just about everything else that has ever been published that some powerful people didn’t want published.
But now WikiLeaks has apparently crossed some Maginot line that now threatens our national security. We are now being told that, thanks to the evil Julian Assange, some American diplomats no longer allow notepads in meetings, for fear that WikiLeaks will eventually publish them.
This, we are told, is hurting America’s efforts to make the world a better place.
Bullsh*t.
Unless what is being discussed in those meetings is something that can’t withstand public scrutiny (secret cash payoffs, bribes, assassination plots, etc.), our diplomats should have no fear of being “exposed.”
[incidentally, Daniel Ellsberg, Author of the Pentagon Papers, had the following to say on twitter (http://twitter.com/DanielEllsberg)%5D
EVERY attack now made on Assange and @wikileaks was made against me and release of Pentagon Papers http://bit.ly/eZnep8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers
[…] into the room so much as about throwing grit in the machine.” For further analysis, check out Aaron Bady‘s original blog […]
[…] Bady on how Assange thinks. [Zunguzungu.wordpress.com] He decides, instead, that the most effective way to attack this kind of organization would be to […]
[…] Bady on how Assange thinks. [Zunguzungu.wordpress.com] He decides, instead, that the most effective way to attack this kind of organization would be to […]
[…] certainly seems to understand what he’s doing, and zunguzungu offers the best summary of Assange’s apparent strategy to undermine the conspiracies that call themselves governments: […]
[…] Zunguzungu in his piece Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiract;“To Destroy This Invisible Government” elucidates the philosophy behind the operation of WikiLeaks from a rarely taken point of view. […]
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2010/dec/08/information-palace/
The OED on Information, n.
Originally—and by originally I mean in the fourteenth century, when the written record begins, as far as the OED can tell—the word had a sinister flavor. It budged its way into the old gruff Anglo-Saxon as part of the Norman invasion. It meant something like “accusation” or “incrimination.” The earliest citation comes from the Rolls of Parliament for 1386: “Thanne were such proclamacions made‥bi suggestion & informacion of suche that wolde nought her falsnesse had be knowen to owre lige Lorde.” For centuries thereafter, informations were filed, or recorded, or laid, against people.
From then to now the word takes a twisty path, and the OED‘s lexicographers hold our hand around every corner. Information can be “a teaching; an instruction.” It can be “divine influence or direction; inspiration, esp. through the Holy spirit.” It can be “that of which one is apprised or told; intelligence, news.”
[…] Assange, “State and Terrorist Conspiracies” Citaat overgenomen van de Zunguzungu […]
It would be nice to share this url… if cut-and-paste didn’t munge the unicode characters in the url. If you want a URL to be shareable, don’t put unicode in the url, as it’s impossible for a human being to transcribe the url by *looking* at it. Alternatively, provide a short url that CAN be transcribe.
Excellent article, but I won’t be telling anyone about it.
Why is Obama afraid to take sides in this infowar? He hasn’t said a single word about WikiLeaks. If we had him as an ally on the WikiLeaks side things would change very very fast.
[…] Zunguzungu offers an analysis of the intellectual provenance of WikiLeaks. According to his summary, Assange […]
[…] pieces on Wikileaks Twelve theses on WikiLeaks Wikileaks, Now Best pieces on Assange Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government” What is Julian Assange Up […]
[…] was behind WikiLeaks’ activities, and a commenter pointed him to a number of articles (a, b, c), the latter two of them by Julien Assange himself, which spell out the vision which seems to […]
[…] the only effective strategy) to combat conspiracies is to steal and share the regime’s secrets. The conspirators then have two options: be more transparent (i.e. stop conspiring) or seize up with distrust. Leaking a group’s secret […]
[…] Motivation von WikiLeaks sei, worauf ihn ein Kommentator auf drei Artikel hingewiesen hat (a, b, c), die letzteren beiden von Assange selbst, in denen die Vision dargelegt wird, die momentan […]