Karin Spaink on Sun, 19 Dec 2010 20:07:30 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> [Fwd: [Goanet-News] Offtopic: Wikileaks and India] |
On Dec 18, 2010, at 15:53 , John Young wrote: > Five years ago Julian Assange was being stalked by Asian teens, [..] > Six years ago Julian Assange had an idea for a leak site, [..] > Seven years ago Julian Assange was at a loss about what to do [..] > Eight years ago Julian Assange was completing a world travel trip [..] > Nine years ago Julian assange was in the midst of a world travel > trip. [..] > Ten years ago Julian Assange was fed up with online meandering [..] ... and right now, December 19, 2010, I am getting quite fed up with you. There are plenty of interesting, possibly urgent questions surrounding Wikileaks. How do we define transparency in politics and negatiations; is there no place for secrecy at all, not even in diplomacy; how do we protect documents that merit secrecy, in an age where too many people have access to too much; where does the traditional definition of freedom of information work and where does it fail; how can whistleblowers be properly protected; how can anybody ascertain the authenticity of purported leaked documents; how can (should) we contextualize leaked documents; how can intermediaries cooperate with the press on behalf of whistleblowers; to what degree do we expect whistleblowing to affect policy; does the focus on 'real' documents that need to be unveiled perhaps, unwittingly, reinforce the existing trend towards paranoia and conspiracy thinking? But what you're doing right now is pusillanimous. What's worse; it's utterly irrelevant. Because you're doggedly narrowing political things down to matters that are entirely on a personal level. Even _if_ Julian Assange is a jerk, the above questions still stand and have been raised in a manner that renders any simple, pre-conceived answer void. You are insisting that the message can be discarded because you wish to pick a bone with its messenger. In the same gesture, you're thrashing content because of its form, and thereby you're also discarding your own previous efforts and stated goals. For fuck's sake, John, stop focusing on Julian. The Wikileaks debate is _not_ about Julian Assange, and if you reduce political debate to somebody's personal history morals, you're not doing anybody a favour, not even yourself. You're actively damaging a debate that you yourself wish to contribute to. - K - -- Do not ask me who I am and do not ask me to remain the same. Leave it to the customs officials and the bureaucrats to make sure our papers are in order. - Michel Foucault: Archeology of Knowledge # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org