Re: [OPE] Wikileaks, Karl Marx and you

We arn't talking about 'people' (an expression charmingly neglectful of the
class composition of society) we are talking about imperialist diplomats,
and which in any case were only confidential documents and already
previously read by up to 3 million 'people'. The leaks will certainly have
been found very useful by the US as well in many areas. In any case
Wikileaks 'redacts' ( edits, cuts and censors) the material quite thoroughly
first and tries to act according to 'normal' journalists receiving info.
They don't do what 'The News of the World' did.( see current phone tap
scandal in UK)

With respect to the upcoming Swiss bank leaks .. tax avoiding stuff.. then
again no problems... why one law for us and another for the rich? My bank
accounts are open to god only knows how many corporate data purchasers, plus
every law enforcement agency that wants to snoop... what on earth are you
talking about... it seems that for you secret treaties have to stay secret
(against the nosey masses of course). You seem to think that inter
imperialist rivals actually have principles!

-----Original Message-----
From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu [mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu]
On Behalf Of GERALD LEVY
Sent: 18 January 2011 18:32
To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
Subject: Re: [OPE] Wikileaks, Karl Marx and you

> Personally I would not want to be associated with wikileaks, and I will
tell
> you why. It's not that what they do may not also turn out to have merits,
> such as demonstrating war crimes in the public domain, but rather that if
> you endorse the general principle of people releasing confidential or
> private information, or hacking into other people's databases, you invite
> others to do the same to you. It doesn't really help people to make their
> way in the world.
 
 
Hi Jurriaan:
 
wikileaks doesn't endorse a "general principle" that all confidential
information should become public.
 
I don't think they (or we) can apply the same standard to individuals as you
can
to corporations and states.
 
I suppose some might complain about an alleged double standard here,
but I don't see it.
 
 
> Perhaps most important of all, the indiscriminate release of a barrage of
> confidential information by wikileaks lacks a clearly articulated
political
> motive. It merely conveys the opinion that the public has a "right to
know",
> and that the confidentiality of the information is inappropriate or
unjust.
 
 
The 'right to know' is an important principle that we should apply to
states and other social institutions.
 
"The truth will set you free" may have a Biblical source but it also has
a political content. Most revolutionaries have understood this maxim (but
have not always applied it consistently).
 
It is quite different from an "anything goes" claim.
 
In solidarity, Jerry
 
PS: (speaking of truth, states, and Marx): what do you and others on the
list make of this: "All forms of the state have democracy for their truth,
and for that reason are false to the extent that they are not democracy"
(_Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right_)?
 
                                                
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Tue Jan 18 14:21:11 2011