Slashdot Mirror
Former MI6 Chief Credits WikiLeaks With Helping Spark Revolutions
EnergyScholar writes "Sir Richard Dearlove, former Intelligence Chief of MI6, credits WikiLeaks with helping spark revolutions in the Middle East, in (what was supposed to be) an off-the-record speech. 'I would definitely draw parallels at the moment between the wave of political unrest which is sweeping through the Middle East in a very exciting and rather extraordinary fashion and also the WikiLeaks phenomenon. Really, what ties these two events together, and of course a number of other events, is the diffusion of power, away from the states and the empowerment of individuals, and small groups of individuals, by technology,' he said."
I don't think that any causal relationship is being drawn by Richard Dearlove in the article: he merely says that they're driven by the same phenomena ("Diffusion of Power").
From the quotes in the article all the MI6 head said was that wikileaks and the revolutions both stem from the same empowerment of the public via technology, not that one caused the other.
I admit that I didn't watch the 20 minute video where it actual causality might be mentioned.
Technology in general facilitated the revolutions (but didn't cause them).
Economic policy probably had more to do with it.
First, the nations involved are effectively if not explicitly dollarized. Second, the dollar has been weakened due to US economic policy. When you consider that these people spend a much higher percentage of their incomes on food and other basic items that are heavily impacted by inflation, Ben Bernanke probably deserves more credit (or blame, depending on the outcome) for these changes.
Really though, even that is stretching it a bit. Dictatorships as heavy-handed as those are probably just unsustainable anyway. There was no WikiLeaks or global economic crisis impacting Eastern Europe in the late 1980s. They were all just sick and tired after a few decades of oppression, and did something about it.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Yeah, that's it. Just like all this tripe about the country being broke. Life is good in the USA for the most part still (way too good for some). Far far above what the rebels in these countries had been facing everyday. Attempting to equate these situations is a joke.
The technology he's talking about has been wide spread since 2001 at least, and here we are a few years into their last major release and we've got revolutions the like of which we haven't seen in 40 years. If nothing else, wikileaks made our rulers look like idiots, and their army's stopped supporting them. Any revolution ends when the military starts shooting, and in a few cases the army said no. This despite they've done it before. So there.
And besides, this is the former HEAD of British intelligence. He wouldn't bother making parallels for the sheer fun of it. He's trying to make a point.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
In case you haven't noticed, most revolutions suck. That's why the founders institutionalized revolution in the form of elections, and gave us cherished tools like freedom of speech and association with which to peacefully foment revolutions now and then.
So. Instead of just asking for revolution, why don't you name the shape and form of your desired change, broadcast it, and see if anybody else wants to associate with you.
Chances are, most don't. That's a major clue that your vision for revolution sucks.
Really, we got lucky to have the people in power that we had, when our revolution occured. Not only were these guys smart, they were wise and moral. It was the perfect combination that just doesn't come along often enough when things change like that.
In fact, there are already a lot of people working to bring about revolution in the USA, in the manner in which the founders envisioned. They're marching, they're blogging, they're voting. We already live in revolution. The revolution will not be revolutionized.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Wealth inequality without context is a bad measure of the quality of a civilization. For example, in America, there is a stark divide between the super-rich and the working poor, as they're called. But even the working poor are able to afford a roof over their heads, running water, in many cases cell phones and internet, and cable tv. And they're entitled to public services funded by taxes collected (somewhat disproportionatly) from the rich, as our taxation isn't a flat-fee per capita, but is progressive.
In China or Africa, on the other hand, there is also a stark gap between the rich and poor. But while the rich Chinese businessman or African landowner may live a close approximation of the life of the rich American, the rural poor in these places don't have access to running water, or medicine, or in some cases even electricity. So I'll take my chances with American inequality any day, thank you.
The quoted section is not crediting Wikileaks, but rather crediting a general movement and then citing Wikileaks as another EXAMPLE of the sort of things happening in said movement. He's pointing out correlation moreso than causation -- that is to say, they share the same causation.
That's why you don't "announce" leaks. You either release or don't release documents.
This is one of the reasons why Daniel Domscheit-Berg (and several others) left Wikileaks. He thought it was wrong of Julian Assange to make threats about releasing specific leaks.
Also: Since last year, Wikileaks doesn't have a working submission system. There's still no way to send wikileaks anything right now. Assange stated in several interviews that Wikileaks wasn't accepting documents anymore because they were overwhelmed with the Iraq war/Afghanistan/State cable leaks and that they didn't have the staff to process new submissions. That was only half of the story. The other half is that one of the Wikileaks members that left last year at the same time as Daniel Domscheit-Berg was the guy who coded the submission system. When the coder left, Wikileaks wasn't able to keep the submission system running because there was no one else capable of maintaining it and making sure it stayed secure (given that the submission system is probably the most sensitive part of the site).
Check out this interview with Domscheit-Berg for more about why he left Wikileaks.
I can't understand the people who constantly chant "government by the people", yet at the same time, call for Assange to be jailed and Wikileaks to be destroyed. WAKE UP -- Wikileaks is EXACTLY what "government by the people" needs, since government by the people is impossible if government fails to disclose precisely what they did "for the people".
If a man claims to be serving your interests and charges you a fee for those services, but refuses to disclose exactly what services are provided and when, would you buy into it? Of course not. Logically, he isn't serving your interests at all -- he's ripping you off. Wikileaks is letting us know that we're being ripped off. Repeat: Wikileaks is letting us know that we're being ripped off. We should be THANKING them, not mindlessly parroting the words of career politicians.