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.
Hillary and this ever expanding, ever intrusive Federal Government agree with you...
Hard to believe the government has become so corrupt and inept, they let a 20 year old homosexual walk away with all their top secrets...Which in reality turns out to be a s**t load of gossip and conversations between these overpaid government idiots, that seem to be operating as if they were a private enterprise.
However, I love the stuff about the Saudis funding and supporting the terrorists....Of course, those capable of critical thought, knew this.
The man is an admitted America hating Anarchist.
I could care less about him...That’s what #21 is all about.
Tea Party is none of that. In fact, Tea Party is probably more pro-establishment than the 'establishment' themselves ... those in the 'establishment' who have 'defiantly rebelled' against the very Constitution they swore to uphold.
There is no "Stick it to The Man!" in the Tea Party lexicon ...
The motherland is upset that information is out. Who is more dangerous the US Govt or Wikileaks? Pretty obvious.
That's a ridiculous statement. Central control is not evil if the controlled have consented, and dispersion of knowledge to Osama bin Laden or any other enemies is not in my best interests (and I doubt yours either).
Even if you view all government property as stolen from you (and others), don't you want them to protect the value of that property until you recover it?
If you approve of damage to or theft of government property in this instance, you have no moral right to protest any other thefts or unauthorized uses of any other government property (including your FBI file and the street in front of your house).
I say (as a responsible libertarian) that if the facts are as they appear, we should all support convicting the soldier of treason and collecting from the Wikileaks people the billions of dollars worth of damage their theft and use of stolen property has caused to the property's rightful owners.
Well, ok, sue Wikileaks for the value of the damage they have done to We the People. Can you elaborate on that damage so that we all know, i.e on such and such a date Wikileaks released information on the following tactics to be employed by company K operating in Kandahar. Such tactics were secret and have never been used before. The taliban, anticipating these tactics, ambushed 5 soldiers from the company, shot 3 dead and are holding 2 captive.
Or sue them for what value Wikileaks got from the use of those secrets. Please elaborate what value Wikileaks obtained from the theft of these secrets.
Doctor, you are a freakin' nutcase.
WikiLeaks may make the powerful howl, but we are learning the truth
WikiLeaks has offered us glimpses of how the world works. And in most cases nothing but good can come of it
Assange is a scumbag, however the pointing of fingers for the real culprit is the homosexual and who the media will not talk about what so ever.
The media have deflected the attention away from the queer as it hurts their queer agenda.
How did he get the info?
Hpow did he get so much?
How is the chain of command?
the questions are endless and instead the media would rather have us all look at wikileaks as they should but not tot he point where they have and have ignored queer boy
Interesting comments. I am beginning to wonder if those who are so upset about WikiLeaks are really just shills for Liberals and Globalists? They seem to be the most hurt by the leaks
Gosh, the leaks have actually helped the legacy of GWB, even though he is too Globalist to figure it out. His Admin was correct on Iraq and WMD....according to the WikiLeaks
OK article; fascinating thread. Thanks to every poster.
The damages lie in the loss of diplomatic confidentiality. It is a particularly dangerous type of loss to excuse because the value of the pilfered material is worth much less to the thieves and their fences than to the owner because of all the damage that was done in removing the stolen property.
It would be similar to a situation in which a burglar steals some of your copper wiring and by doing so causes a fire which destroys your house, with the one difference being that in the Wikileaks case, the "fire" did not start until they they published the stolen property, making them just as responsible as the thief for the damage.
The owner is the People of the United States. Tell me, what relative damage was done vs what value might have acrued by placing this information in the hands of the public, and therefore the world at large, vs leaving it in the hands of "our" "trusted agents" the officials of the government who had legitimate access.
We should all note that what was not leaked were the the top secret codes to our military and diplomatic communications so that, say, Al Qaeda, could read everything about impending military operations. Of course once those codes are leaked it is imperative that the government know so that it can stop suing those codes.
In the latter case, knowing that an air strike was set for such and such a target at such and such a time would be invaluable information to an enemy, and of no practical use to the citizens, presuming that they authorized the conduct of military operations and have sufficient infomation to hold their officials accountable for the responsible prosecution of the war. Indeed, in this latter instance, the Pentagon papers were of far more value to the people than to the enemy. They already knew how screwed up our grand stratgy was, but the people did not, or at least did not in a manner that our officials had to fess up to the truth.