Wikileaks

[tanithryudo]

Been reading articles about the whole Wikileaks hub-bub. A lot of it makes me want to roll my eyes. But one commenter on an article I think sums up my overall opinion:

"The benefit is not to the Russian's or America, or Poland's or any combinations of their relations. The benefits are to you personally; so that you can finally understand what the world you're actually living in, and know that all you where told about mom and apple pie was a pack of lies.

I believe Mr. Assange believes that the human race will be better off once the veil is rent from our eyes. Experience makes me doubt that it will; after all I used to think it would be wonderful if everyone could contribute to the public discourse, then I got the internet and quickly changed my mind! But seriously, letting people in on the truth about what we are and what are governments actually do in our name is an experiment worth trying, it'll probably all end in tears, but it's worth trying at least once in the species' history."

- OnlyJustWilliam (Source)

Yeah, this isn't gonna end well. Legally, I think this whole thing is illegal - it's basically espionage, except not on behalf of a particular foreign power. Morally, though, as long as no one dies from this entire fiasco (here's hoping), I think it is a good learning experience for the American public & government. Then again, ethics are relative.

On a lighter note, this makes me think again of the Stargate topic of Disclosure (I'm thinking of going back and picking up my SG fic). Are the same arguments over the secrecy of the SGC comparable here? Well, there are differences since the SGC is known to even less people than the stuff on the wikileak docs, and the info from SGC is about an enemy not native to the planet, but still, a lot of the possible consequences for keeping it secret still do apply...

Comments

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

Basically, what I got out of this was "oh hey, secret info leaked to public, oops". Which...is different from what governments have been doing for thousands of years...how?

The thing is, is this even an ethics question? The thing is, the ruling class only subscribed to ethics just enough to keep the ruled happy, that's all they ever did and all they ever will do. Just because "the people" deem it right or wrong is meaningless in unless it's placed in terms of politics: will this act undermine the ruling regime or strengthen it? If undermine, don't do it. If strengthen, do it. End of story.

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

Well, I don't think it's saying that leaking classified info is a new thing, as much as this amount of info (and concerning this many different sources, foreign governments, etc.) at the same time, over the internet and thus generating all the fanfare...

Eh, what would you call it if not an ethics question? Certainly it's not a legal question to agonize over since it's either legal or illegal given the laws.

And in terms of politics, you could then take it a step further depending on if the "ruling regime" is yours, your allies, rivals, etc. and how does the act affect "your regime"?

[cashew.insanejournal.com]

Well, it's only to be expected right? With new information technology innovations will come new ways for that information to get leaked out. ^_^

As for ethics, ethics argues the right/wrongness of the behavior. Now, each specific behavior in of itself might be an ethics' question, but for the entirety of the event, I'd say it's more a political strategy or ruling philosophy question rather than ethics. The fundamental question isn't "what is right?", but rather "what do we do to stay in power?"

And yes, I agree, in terms of politics, those are the kind of things you do need to think about. Allies, rivals, it's all political strategy with no right or wrong. Or if you really want to argue, the answer is rather straight forward: what keeps you (the ruler) in power = right, what takes you (the ruler) out of power = wrong. Now, what the specific action should be, that gets complicated, and philosophers have been debating the issue for thousands of years without coming to a consensus, I say it's safe we're not going to come to one in our life time either. (Or one could just subscribe to Confucius and be done with it. After 2000 years, it's certainly withstood the test of time. :P)

[tanithryudo.insanejournal.com]

Haha, now if only we can export that Confucian thinking outside of the country maybe people will shut up about China=bad. *shrug*