tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post4317009665285912769..comments2024-02-19T00:39:49.642-08:00Comments on We Alone on Earth: Year of the LeakMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05279969393617122722noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-55625220682526271312010-12-29T18:00:18.504-08:002010-12-29T18:00:18.504-08:00Yeah, sorry about the error. I forgot those were ...Yeah, sorry about the error. I forgot those were actually two different publications.<br /><br />But. I was not comparing anything to anything. Nor was I listing anything. I was illustrating a larger point. Of course I drift toward examples closer to home, because I know more about them. This is a fault of Americans too, it's my fault.Fhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13839876056962033224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-45010417071491708352010-12-29T17:41:55.338-08:002010-12-29T17:41:55.338-08:00The Atlantic, not the Economist (sorry, but errors...The Atlantic, not the Economist (sorry, but errors of attribution are especially irksome).<br /><br />I think the concern is not primarily with shifting public opinion, but with the leaked cables being used as pretense by Mugabe to bring criminal charges against Tsvangirai or to abandon the coalition government entirely. In the sense that this would hamper the reforms MDC are pushing, it is a Sir Arthur Conan the Barbarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166583814159612270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-40507470010147472062010-12-29T16:51:42.033-08:002010-12-29T16:51:42.033-08:00'Democracy' was definitely the wrong word ...'Democracy' was definitely the wrong word for the Economist to use. If Mugabe were to turn popular opinion against Tsvangirai, it would not be democracy that's suffering (after all, the people now have what they want -- a Mugabe government! right?) but good government. These are two of the three things that Americans commonly confuse:<br />(a) democracy<br />(b) good government<br /Fhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13839876056962033224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-6082575818043503062010-12-29T13:02:18.386-08:002010-12-29T13:02:18.386-08:00Hmm... Lanier seems to state that Wikileaks is too...Hmm... Lanier seems to state that Wikileaks is too biased, while the Zimbabwe nonsense indicates that Wikileaks is not biased enough.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05279969393617122722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-31766046490698948772010-12-29T12:07:36.018-08:002010-12-29T12:07:36.018-08:00@beck :
I mean, you're technically correct, ...@beck : <br /><br />I mean, you're technically correct, but I think missing the reality of the situation. Sir Arthur Conan the Barbarian ( hereafter abbreviated as SACtB ) makes better points than I have. But basically, you have this ideal of "don't lie to your people and make backroom deals". This ideal is fine, but you're complete screwed if you're competing against a Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05279969393617122722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-2633212313102045112010-12-29T11:21:02.808-08:002010-12-29T11:21:02.808-08:00Given that Mugabe's political party has wideps...Given that Mugabe's political party has widepsread control of the media in Zimbabwe and can use this information to unilaterally advance a narrative against the party pushing for democratic reforms, I would say that this definitely sets back the cause of democracy in Zimbabwe. Transparency is a useful trait of a successful democracy, but they are not one and the same.Sir Arthur Conan the Barbarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166583814159612270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-49853053101090840562010-12-29T10:58:27.474-08:002010-12-29T10:58:27.474-08:00So I don't really buy it.
Author of said arti...So I don't really buy it.<br /><br />Author of said article claims that "wikileaks has set back the cause of Democracy in Zimbabwe". But on the contrary, wikileaks has in fact increased transparency in Zimbabwe. So the anti-Mugabe party was talking with the state department, and it turns out they were encouraging the sanctions against Zimbabwe.<br /><br />Don't that party's Beckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15623702114152344862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-64691297236614377642010-12-28T21:50:37.756-08:002010-12-28T21:50:37.756-08:00Great link.
Yes, the difference between an author...Great link.<br /><br />Yes, the difference between an authoritarian conspiracy and small efforts to save the world are merely intent; the techniques are the same. In attacking one, Wikileaks also harms the other. If you haven't already, you read the Lanier piece linked in the article. He says it better than I, but Wikileaks is a binary technology, the real world runs on shades of gray and Michael BFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16757274897589421838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-213068511524352532010-12-28T20:52:00.349-08:002010-12-28T20:52:00.349-08:00Excellent essay, and thanks for that link ... sir ...Excellent essay, and thanks for that link ... sir arthur conan the barbarian. <br /><br />hmm... so the Zimbabwe thing is an example of a _good_ conspiracy, or at least a bad conspiracy for which the ends justify the means. Assange was successful in his mission to expose it, but did wrong in doing so. Interesting. Backwards.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05279969393617122722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-255765354647516808.post-25628311809054694082010-12-28T18:56:39.153-08:002010-12-28T18:56:39.153-08:00Of note:
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/...Of note:<br />http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/12/how-wikileaks-just-set-back-democracy-in-zimbabwe/68598/Sir Arthur Conan the Barbarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00166583814159612270noreply@blogger.com