 |
| Sill-shot from Collateral Damage video |
Now that some of the fervor over the latest Wikileaks releases has subsided, many of us are left questioning where the organization stands in the political sphere. At times anarchistic, at times liberal-minded or even libertarian, Wikileaks and its ‘publicist’ Julian Assange are often inconsistent. Judging from recent developments, however, what has really happened is that the organization shifted from a semi-anarchistic dogma and melded itself into existing liberal politicking. What is interesting to note is the disparity between how the organization views itself and its actual place on the political spectrum.
To begin with, the actual leaking of documents (or the principle of leaking files—the most damning cables have been redacted at the behest of the Obama administration) was a direct attack on our society’s power structures. At least, it appears that way.
What Mr. Assange fails to realize is that power is not concentrated in a few figureheads at the top, latched onto our society like a Frankenstein-sized behemoth. Rather, power permeates throughout our lives. Wikileaks learned this lesson in the form of service terminations by MasterCard, Visa, Amazon, PayPal, Apple, etc. After all, how many of us carry those logos in our pockets?
Wikileaks’ naïveté is also evidenced by its method of publication: instead of freely releasing the files, it chose to work with five major corporate media conglomerates, failing to recognize that, among others, The New York Times, The Guardian, and Der Spiegel are deeply rooted within the existing power structures that Wikileaks seeks to disrupt.
It seems as if Wikileaks has a very traditional conception of power—as an evil conspiracy mainly located in the high echelons of government—and seeks to challenge that power through pathways that appear independent of such influences.
At least, that’s the story that Wikileaks itself tells. The actual files, however, give an entirely different reading. It is important to realize that the vast majority of leaked files give no new perspective on America. They simply confirm what alternative news sources have been insisting for decades, and name some of the actors who are obsessed with day-to-day maintenance of Empire’s dominance and their actions: direct collusion with corporations; tit-for-tat diplomatic spats; spying on the UN; secret meetings with world leaders.
Wikileaks itself doesn’t understand how to use its information effectively. Julian Assange is treating the leaked diplomatic cables as if they are evidence of a few power-hungry schemers. This misconception is nothing new. Human rights organizations already fruitlessly attempt to work within the system, through legal or political measures, missing that the problems arise from corporatism and the entire philosophy of American exceptionalism. Empire has proven that it will either adapt to or quash any existential threat immediately, as long as it flows through prearranged channels.
However, there is something incredibly radical about releasing this information, even in its currently limited form. Now, power knows that we know that it knows that we know its dirty little secrets. Like a couple with persistent infidelities, once everything is out in the open it’s hard to keep on living a lie.
In fact, by publishing the Wikileaks exposés, The New York Times is quietly tapping on its own death knell. Democracy Now! and other nonstandard news sources have been writing about these topics for years. We can no longer trust that corporate monoliths such as The New York Times and its European counterparts will dig incisively for valuable news rather than filler. The real value in the Cablegate leaks is that they disregard entirely those avenues that we usually turn to in challenging Empire and its cohorts. They also serve to show us, unsurprisingly, just how inherent power is in our societal structure.
This is why Cablegate gives us such hope: one of the disadvantages of mass is that momentum is a killer. It takes time to shift directions. The recent Wikileaks scandals have echoed around the world. For a second, power lost its footing. This is remarkable. As citizens we can move faster and, with the political space opened up by the leaks and events surrounding them, mobilize effectively against tyranny.
Recent events in Tunisia are directly linked to this. After 23 years in power, President Ben Ali was forced to step down after protests erupted throughout the country. The cause? Diplomatic cables, which confirmed that the U.S. supports Tunisia’s ruling family, were likely the spark to land on the tinder.
