I think this argument has at least 2 sides. If people could leave their ego`s at the door, we might get somewhere. Remember... arrogance comes before a fall.
Enclosing info and parcelling it and selling it - for money or influence whilst repressing stuff that might impact on them or political outcomes they decide are not what the world needs. Those needs of course are assange's and a worldview that's relentlessly libertarian and market driven - and the market as freedom. Hence the enclosure and parcelling and sale of 'leaks'.
Would you call yourself a free market proponent?
Absolutely. I have mixed attitudes towards capitalism, but I love markets. Having lived and worked in many countries, I can see the tremendous vibrancy in, say, the Malaysian telecom sector compared to U.S. sector. In the U.S. everything is vertically integrated and sewn up, so you don’t have a free market. In Malaysia, you have a broad spectrum of players, and you can see the benefits for all as a result.
How do your leaks fit into that?
To put it simply, in order for there to be a market, there has to be information. A perfect market requires perfect information.
There's the famous lemon example in the used car market. It's hard for buyers to tell lemons from good cars, and sellers can't get a good price, even when they have a good car.
By making it easier to see where the problems are inside of companies, we identify the lemons. That means there's a better market for good companies. For a market to be free, people have to know who they're dealing with.
You've developed a reputation as anti-establishment and anti-institution.
Not at all. Creating a well-run establishment is a difficult thing to do, and I've been in countries where institutions are in a state of collapse, so I understand the difficulty of running a company. Institutions don't come from nowhere.
It's not correct to put me in any one philosophical or economic camp, because I've learned from many. But one is American libertarianism, market libertarianism. So as far as markets are concerned I'm a libertarian, but I have enough expertise in politics and history to understand that a free market ends up as monopoly unless you force them to be free.
WikiLeaks is designed to make capitalism more free and ethical.
He is talking about the actually ideal of capitalism ( which would be good ) as apposed to the current Industrial Feudalism which people label as Capitalism.
That is genuinely hilarious ! Why do you post in the political section NoXion?
Edit.
Sorry that was rude. I was just afraid of being dragged into another session where I have to repeat everything 5 times
Julian Assange is an anarchist. He is just being clever by not mentioning you would have to overthrow industrial Feudalism to establish actual Capitalism.
Actual capitalism would be a massive step forward. Anarchists generally agree on this.
Speaking of the rift between the majority of Republican lawmakers and the libertarians more closely aligned in ethos of the Pauls, Assange said, “It will be the driver that shifts the United States around.”
“It’s not going to come from the Democrats, it’s not going to come from Ralph Nader, it’s not going to come from the co-opted parts of the Republican Party,” Assange said. “The only hope as far as electoral politics… presently, is the libertarian section of the Republican Party.”
Prove what ? Ffs your like a fucking child !
You need to educate yourself. You are incredibly ignorant on all the subjects you post on in the political section. I'm not going to do it.
You need to educate yourself. You are incredibly ignorant on all the subjects you post on in the political section. I'm not going to do it.
Wikipedia article on Anarchism said:While opposition to the state is central,[11] anarchism specifically entails opposing authority or hierarchical organisation in the conduct of all human relations.[12][13][14] Anarchism is usually considered a far-left ideology[15][16] and much of anarchist economics and anarchist legal philosophy reflects anti-authoritarian interpretations of communism, collectivism, syndicalism, mutualism or participatory economics.[17]
That's an interesting way to concede defeat!your now ignored
your now ignored
Actual capitalism would be a massive step forward. Anarchists generally agree on this.
Now you're ignorantyour now ignored
billy nomates-bullshitterA bunch of anarchists here don't seem to agree with you at all. Unless you provide a counter-example, I think everyone reading this thread can safely assume that you are Billy Bullshitter.
Now you're ignorant
Ageism ill becomes youProve what ? Ffs your like a fucking child !
Yeh? And what do you think of the piece?Sorry ... did somebody say something?
Just saw this in a post from Sirena on the other thread:
GETTING JULIAN ASSANGE: THE UNTOLD STORY
Hippies are not anarchists. I know they usually claim to be but they aren't. And for this statement of yours to be true, you must mean hippies. If you mean anarchists then the whole thing is inside-out-upside-down wrong. Not even wrong, actually. Too wrong to even begin to argue with.
You said anarchistsIs Chomsky a hippy?
Ageism ill becomes you
I think you need to give up while you areIs Chomsky a hippy?
It's worked in your favour here. He's blown himself to bits.This is why I think the ignore function is absolutely shit.
Well I think that. Chomsky thinks that. Assange thinks that. That`s at least three