Hey, remember WikiLeaks?
Remember when our generation found hope in the form of  Julian Assange@@http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/julian-assange@@, a man who founded WikiLeaks and, like a superhero, embodied the concept of justice and was the front-runner in the fight against government corruption?
Remember when it all went downhill?
WikiLeaks is heading toward bankruptcy and has suspended operations. Assange is hiding out in England and fighting being sent to Sweden to face rape charges. The question of free speech on the internet remains unanswered.
But those who follow WikiLeaks, those who placed Assange on a pedestal next other freedom fighters in history, have learned a valuable lesson: Always remain skeptical. If it seems too good to be true, it is.
Assange used WikiLeaks to publish confidential digital documents from governments around the world, many from the United States, believing that governments should be held liable for their actions. When companies like PayPal, Visa and Bank of America blocked its customers from donating money to the nonprofit last December, WikiLeaks began to struggle.
According BetterBio founder Khadijah Britton, Assange brought about the downfall of WikiLeaks by going against the principles of the internet transparency movement, a move which may have been exacerbated by WikiLeak’s lack of funds.
“Watching the way that Assange has chosen to do things has been really difficult for a lot of us who were leaders in the activist movement for a long time,” Britton said. “The rape case is a convenient excuse for him to play the victim. It takes attention away from the real issues, which are how he uses the information, how he disseminates the information, who he trusts with the information and who will benefit.”
The ‘who’ is what has brought doubt to Assange’s campaign. While Assange claimed in a Forbes interview that he did not belong to “any one philosophical or economic camp,” @@http://www.studentfreepress.net/archives/5039@@ the people he works closely with speak volumes. Israel Shamir, a Siberian journalist with known anti-Semitic, propagandist views, was a major contributor to WikiLeaks.
Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a German technology activist@@http://siliconfilter.com/unleaked-former-wikileaks-spokesperson-destroys-over-3500-unpublished-documents/@@, worked with WikiLeaks from 2007 to Sept. 2010@@http://revolutiontruth.org/live/about.php@@, before choosing to leave and start a more efficient transparency company, OpenLeaks. In the book he wrote soon after leaving WikiLeaks, Domscheit-Berg
cites Assange’s lust for power and money and his recklessness with information as main reasons for his leaving.
After the book was published, Assange threatened legal action against Domscheit-Berg, showing the hypocrisy with which WikiLeaks is truly run.
“He does not do things democratically at all,” Britton said. “I see the value in what he did, but the process, the way he did it, I think is the reason for the downfall.”
The problem lies with Assange’s reluctance to allow self-transparency, as well as misplaced priorities. He expresses a strong desire for governments to act in a certain respectable and open manner, when he refuses to do it himself. In attempting to expose the corruption of those in power, Assange became like his targets.
“I think, originally, everybody in our generation supported WikiLeaks as a theory,” Britton said. “Now that people are learning that he’s not necessarily walking the walk, I think that it’s hard to get as excited to fundraise for him or work on the next round of leaks.
“I hope that this will lead to a certain level of skepticism and, not disenchantment, but disillusionment in becoming wrapped up in the narrative we’re provided with.”
A quote by 19th-century historian Lord Acton sums up the issue quite clearly: “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.“@@http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/lord-acton-political-power-corrupts/@@ Refrain from blind faith toward a single figurehead, but do not lose faith in a transparent system.
Wikileaks, as a theory, is a groundbreaking concept that can usher in a new system of reliable media and responsible governments. But in practice we’re still on our way toward a truly dependable and unmanipulated information outlet.