WikiLeaks vs Enclosures


As we have all been probably reading the news regarding the new WikiLeaks revelations, I could not help making a short comment on it. Reading from the Guardian, Sunday November 28, 2010 ‘How 250 000 US embassy cables were leaked’, Bradley Manning, the now famous suspect behind this, justifies his action by saying: “Information should be free. It belongs in the public domain.”

It this not exactly what we have been learning during our classes? The new enclosures are trying to restrict or forbid our access not only to physical resources but to global non-tangible commons, like knowledge. I completely understand the complexity of the situation when thinking about world politics and diplomacy; maybe certain information should be kept private. It has been mentioned that this can put some people not only in uncomfortable position but also in danger which is, of course, not desirable. But on the other hand, is it so that governments can be allowed to access information to which common people should not have access to? Maybe this is not the right way to bring all this information into publicity, but still, there is just something about Manning’s words that make me want to agree with him.  Now, how about the rest of you?


3 Responses to “WikiLeaks vs Enclosures”

  1. junaidkhanmes Says:

    Information should be free when the information and the system or source from where it is emerging is fair and transparent. Such information could justify itself in case of any dispute and represents collective benefits of every one, it concerned. When we talk about international politics and diplomacy, it is usually based on self-interest of individuals or a country even if these interests are achieved through destruction of other. Any information emerging from such system will be unfair for someone and would result into dispute.
    Here I believe before defining information as a common and it should be transferred to everyone, first the system should be identified from where it is emerging and reality of information should be analysed. When all system is running unfair, exposure of information could be disastrous rather than constructive and will be further used for self-interest. Exposure of such information would result into creation of such information again that will be exposed in the future at some point on the name of ‘information should be free’.
    I think, first the efforts are required to bring the whole political and diplomatic system in order before exposing any problematic information.

  2. spessima Says:

    Well this is the so called freedom of speech the UN champions.The fundermental human freedom of Wikileaks is been trampled upon and there cannot be holistic development if certain facets of life are not discussed and discussed openly for the good of mankind.This is not a new phenomena.The global north is always put into operation its legal and military might to subdue and surpress the weak.Am personally not in favour of this reaction by the US and its allies.This is day light conspiracy and this can be considered as enclosures of the commons.The aim is to limit freedom of speech and expressions and above all to keep the universe under the northern lens.Is the elephant and forest at war.

  3. solidaarisuus Says:

    I thought I will add here a link for you, just in case some of you have not seen the Democracy Now news on 3 December, 2010 “Is WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange a Hero?” Maybe this will give you even more to think about.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: