Skip to comments.WikiLeaks and the Tea Party
Posted on 12/12/2010 5:37:52 PM PST by AndyJackson
Ron Paul and Julian Assange: Strange Bedfellows
In an unexpected convergence, the logic behind WikiLeaks is coming to resemble the ideology of the Tea Party movement. They are both anti-establishment, of course, and seem to relish rebellion and defiance. But Assange's hero is Daniel Ellsberg, which grounds him in the far left attacks on the military-industrial complex of the 60's, while Paul seems to want to allow business as much leeway as it wants as well as freedom from taxation.
But, then, Assange in a video interview for Time spoke about the importance of states rights. He expressed the view that the central authority of the federal government oppressed individual states, a position repeatedly espoused by the tea party. (See Time Video)
And Ron Paul was quoted as saying on Twitter: "Re: Wikileaks - In a free society, we are supposed to know the truth. In a society where truth becomes treason, we are in big trouble." (See "The Lede," New York Times)
What is the basis for their affinity? What underlying beliefs could they possibly have in common?
It seems to be a profound antipathy to any idea of organized, collective responsibility. No government should stand in the way of an individual exercising his rights to act in his own interests.
Such a radical individualism is not surprising in the United States, where groups and individuals have frequently practiced different forms of withdrawal and secession to protect their freedoms. For many years our frontier offered escape to those faced with the onerous and unacceptable task of working things out with others, compromising on common interests, learning to tolerate differences.
I'm not sure where Asssange gets his version of this attitude. Australia, of course, was also a former British colony, and its immense distance from the mother country nurtured a spirit of independence. He seems also to have been influenced by anarchist theory. The new ideology of the internet, with its naïve belief that "information wants to be free," may also play a part.
Moreover, both Paul and Assange appeal to that side of all of us that resents external control, especially when it restricts the full expression of any ideal we espouse.
Seeing the parallels at first is jarring to common sense and the familiar categories that organize our political opinions. It doesn't seem to make sense. We have to work at finding the connections.
This guy also does not undestand the English liberal tradition, which is a strong tradition, and similar to that of our founding fathers, namely individual liberty and broad based rational debate on decisions that affect all of society.
That philosphy is at least as strong in the other former colonies as it does here.
The Australian hates the US. What don’t you understand ace?
The Australian hates the US. What don’t you understand ace?
Assange is an anarchist scumbag. Anyone who thinks he’s some kind of hero is dog park tread fill.
I’m tryin to triple reply now :)
A dear PHD friend of mine says the DD is decidedly dumb, the MD mainly dumb but the PHD ..... the PHD is phenominally dumb.
Free is a hard point to suppress.
Like I said, Anarchist crap.
Since you believe in openness so much how about posting you and your families name and addresses plus their SSN’s? Do it now in a show of solidarity with Casper the Leaky Ghost.
I’m not sure he can be charged with anything but I do recognize him for what he is. Butt pirate soldier shouldn’t even be breating now in my opinion.
He’s no patriot or freedom fighter. He’s an admitted America hating Anarchist.
I don’t have the hand held reassurance’s.
“Hello, is that Ken Eisold, PhD? This is the Dean of the Graduate School. I’m sorry to have to tell you, we’re taking your PhD back, for incurable stupidity.”
People like that give psychology a bad name.
The Tea Party is about decentralization with the associated state and individual rights and responsibility vs. centralization/collectivism with its top down big government runs everything approach. ***The Tea Party is value based while the left/Democrats and the right/Republicans are power based (the end justifies the means).*** That’s the key difference. The Tea Party is as disgusted with many Republicans as they are Democrats, but this does not make them anti-establishment even though it may appear that way because of their dislike of both parties and most incumbents.
The Tea Party isn’t interested in “anti establishment” thinking. The theft of government property and the release of classified information that puts the lives of service members and our national security interests, our relations with others or allies at risk is something nearly every Tea Party supporter would disagree with. He’s putting words and thoughts into their mind and mouth and is committing a fallacy. This might as well be another BS article about how the Tea Party is racist. It’s easy to string together these sort of theories....... Hitler and the Catholic connection, Bush and his oil interests. The car industry and their conspiracy against the fuel efficient car.............
What Fedzilla is saying/doing in the name of We the People, behind our backs, is more troubling than a dweeb from Down Under.
lets get this straight and it is up to you, and everyone who has a brain to get the real truth out.
, the media is trying to twist this story to attack wikileaks, the real culprit is the homosexual private who stole the info and did it because of his queer agenda.
The media will not tell the truth nor will they investigate how he got the info because they too have a queer agenda.
it sickens me how many in the country actually do not know or never point the blame to the homosexual because of his agenda
Their women don’t seem to hate us.
notice how everyone talks about wikileaks but does not talk about the queer who is the real culprit?
Notice how no one talks about the real culprit because the media has twisted this story?
I have no use for those who think Assange is a hero but I agree that the real culprit was the soldier and whoever helped him.