Who is Online
We have 31 guests and one member online
Translate to another language
A friend forwarded me an article by Elizabeth Farrelly in the Sydney Morning Herald on April 12. Read Here or click on the picture.
It appears that Assange's theories about petite and grand conspiracies are well founded; and illustrated by his own case.
'Conspiracy Theory' is a term often used synonymously with 'Fairy Tale' but in fact no assassination; major fraud; or other property theft; happens without a plan of some sort. And any secret plan that involves more than one person is a conspiracy. Thus a conspiracy is simply a plan to do something that is kept close within a limited group (the conspirators).
Assange theoretically extends this to any secret government business or secret business business.
Thus most commercial research into new technologies falls into this category; the plan does not have to be one to rob a bank; defraud investors or kill a prominent person.
Assange believes society and the economy would run better without the secrets that support conspiracy. This belief is theoretical, based on network theory, and is closely related to a belief in free markets. See my previous paper on this site.
In that I published a link to his Conspiracy paper but it was subsequently blocked. Here is a different link
Assange's campaign to remove all secrecy certainly seems to have made him a 'lightening rod' for those he wishes to expose.
Evidence is mounting of a series of conspiracies (plans that have not been made public) around handing Assange over to the US authorities; and some element of the Australian Government, seems to be complicit in at least one of these plots.
A double standard, referred to in the article, is obvious. All sorts of representations are made by our Diplomats on behalf of Australian criminals caught overseas but in this case no Australian law has been broken yet our Government seems to be doing the opposite.
The latest evidence is the placing of his lawyer on a no fly list: Find out more
In my own direct experience political parties are driven by backroom power-broking. Politicians are, almost by definition, conspirators. I am reminded of 'Yes Minister' particularly the 'Open Government' episode.
Such alliances and deals are much more influential than the donation of campaign funds; although the two may go together. This is ideal territory for covert foreign (and business/union) influence. This seems to be exposed here.
• is Assange right in believing that secrecy is anti-competitive and obfuscates and distorts the process of governance? (very likely);
• will removing it make the economy and governance run better? (less certain);
• is Assange an ideologue? (almost certainly);
• is he dangerous to society? (probably not);
• does he have some very dangerous enemies? (certainly)
Are these theoretical/philosophical issues important enough to 'die in a ditch' for: free (pure, open, competitive) markets; open Government?