Originally Posted by roachboy

well first off why should this material not be released internationally? secondly, in the context in which we live, releasing it nationally is releasing it internationally, yes?

i don't blame wikileaks for constructing a de facto consortium of news outlets in different countries to release through either. first, it multiplies the viewpoints that work with the material early on, which makes for a faster and more thorough-going exposure and interpretation. second, i think that one of the motivations behind wikileaks is a disgust with the degenerate political form that is the nation-state and the consequences of the often repellent role that united states plays in the present arrangements of nation-states, which is after all an effect of the post-world war 2 american empire, really---it's still deeply imprinted with it. the united states still acts like the hegemon, an entity outside of the rules that apply to everyone else. and as such it can and should (and ethically has to be) called on it. what better way to do it than to be complicit in hoisting the americans by their own petard? let their own words fuck them.

there's nothing anti-american about it. and there's nothing that endangers nationalsecurity. what there **is** is an undermining of the "sanctity" of raison d'etat--which is exactly the thinking that has resulted in the americans acting hegemon in the first place. so if you politically oppose the way the americans have handled their empire during the period of neoliberalism, it follows that you should oppose the existence of the rules that enable agents within the state (this in a sociological sense--actors) to think through the grid of raison d'etat.

plus, maximizing exposure maximizes the safety of the folk who are wikileaks. raising their profile makes it far more difficult for any "accidents" to happen. and if they did, there's a very considerable pre-existing network that would make the consequences of the action far far higher than they otherwise would be.