Our Cherished Rights
We in democratic societies fight to keep our cherished rights. We feel that any move to restrict our rights, is a move against individual freedom, and is something that is not very good. Generally these cherished rights are necessary to our well-being. These rights protect us and mandate the way that our leaders must act and what constraints are upon those leaders.
A Flaw in our Democratic System
Yet our democratic societies are flawed. They are flawed because our democratic system creates leaders as a result of those individuals appearing more photogenic, or are more physically attractive, or are painted in certain way by their handlers, or their PR is more skilled, or they catch the public interest in some way.
Those of us in the electorate generally are quite ignorant of the policies or beliefs of those running for office. We think we know what a person stands for, but our knowledge is more based on what we read in the newspaper (which is always biased in one way or another), what we see in the media, or what their opponents say. Very few voters actually take the time to get to know the candidates, their policies, or their backgrounds, except for getting information through those other media sources, each of which has their own bias. Usually we are aware of a few major planks in their platform, and are ignorant of everything else.
The Savant – An Amazing Skill Usually Means a Deficiency in Other Skills
I think that most of us also realize that when a person has an abundance of talent or ability in one area or in one skill, generally that person has just a bit less ability in other skills. A person that has the best looks is usually not the smartest person in the class. A very social person is not always the most knowledgeable person, and so on. Almost like a savant, or autistic child, who can be a genius in math or some other subject, but has severe disabilities. I remember a movie called “An Intelligent Mind” that illustrates the point quite well.
So who do we elect?
We elect those that look the best, or speak the best, or have the best PR team. Precisely the people that usually (but not always) don’t have the administrative skills, or true leadership skills.
We tend to elect our leaders for precisely the wrong reasons.
And yet somehow we muddle through. How the system works is sometimes a mystery. Yet it does seem to work.
The Opinion of the Masses
There have been studies where a large group of people have been asked to voice their opinion on a matter of which they know little or nothing. It is usually found that the masses’ opinion is the right opinion, far more often than the knowledgeable expert’s opinion.
It is almost like the stock market in that somehow, in spite of all factors moving the market in different directions, the greed of the persons driving the market, and the general ignorance of those people investing and advising on the market, people have come to rely on the markets as an accurate barometer of the economy, and an accurate gauge of the future. Very astounding really.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
All of which brings us to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Our free society allows people to take actions that governments may feel are quite harmful to society, because our governments usually find it more difficult to tread on the rights of the individual.
Certainly the disclosure of so many confidential documents by WikiLeaks makes governing us much more difficult. If a human being cannot say what is on that person’s mind, without that opinion being published somewhere, every elected or appointed official must be super-human at all times. No-one can voice an opinion without it being “politically correct”. Might be a good thing, but there are three large problems.
The Human Range of Emotions and Feelings
Firstly, each of us is human and the more we force our government people to act without human emotions, the worse our government gets. They are people just like you and I, and humans are humans, with a tremendously diverse set of values, visions, and opinions. Forcing everyone into the same mold cannot be good for us in the long run. People cannot be forced to suppress their feelings and opinions because someone night criticize them in the future, or out of context. Government secrecy is unfortunate, but necessary.
Not All Governments are Democratic
Secondly, we expect our government to act in our interests when dealing with every other type of government around the world. To prevent a level playing field by disclosing only one side’s information, all done in the supposed interest of freedom of speech and information, is putting our democratic governments at a severe disadvantage when dealing with leaders of other societies who range from despots, to dictators, to one party rule, to everything else around the world. Something is very wrong when our standards can hurt our interests so very much. Disadvantaging our society does not aid in promoting freedom.
Political Correctness
Thirdly, political correctness tends to be a fleeting thing. If one looks back over any reasonable period of time, what was politically correct at one time, is not politically correct at another time. It all depends on what has caught public interest at any particular point in time. In my view, political correctness is a luxury that is secondary to the basic protection of our way of life.
So although I clearly see the validity of the arguments in support of Wikileaks, I feel Wikileaks was wrong in what it did.
