Exposing WikiLeaks

The Plot to Overthrow the U.S. Deep State

“An authoritarian conspiracy that cannot think efficiently, cannot act to preserve itself against the opponents it induces.”[1]

In a 2011 interview with former Executive Chairman of Google, Eric Schmidt, Julian Assange of WikiLeaks said that “populations basically don’t like wars and they have to be lied into it. That means we can be ‘truthed’ into peace. That is cause for great hope.”[2] It is hopeful thinking, indeed, but false. First of all, it isn’t true that people are only lied into wars. From time to time, we also embrace wars willingly. Secondly, the majority of people isn’t interested in the truth as long as they’re doing better than their neighbors.

But thirdly, and this is the crux, Assange’s thinking has fallen for the power fallacy, the false belief that the world is strictly ruled by top-down hierarchies of power. It denies that power often results from bottom-up competencies that are, in fact, beneficial to the world. Psychologist Jordan Peterson correctly pointed out that if a society were solely based on power, instead of on “the competence necessary to get important and difficult things done, it [would] be prone to collapse.”[3]

Sabotaging competency to fight power spells catastrophe.

Julian Assange’s Personal Beliefs

So, what exactly does the Australian hacker want? As stated, Julian Assange believes the world is ruled by hierarchies of power and that, therefore, average citizens such as you and I are the oppressed victims of powerful people. It is a stereotypical belief perpetuated by classical Marxists. Among them, we find thinkers such as Karl Popper, Noam Chomsky, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, and Herbert Marcuse. They are anarchists with a self-declared mission to destroy Western civilization.

But we don’t have to speculate. In November and December 2006, Assange wrote two fairly identical papers and published them on his website, “iq.org”. The first paper is titled State and Terrorist Conspiracies,[4] the second Conspiracy as Governance.[5] In the papers, Assange distills lessons learned from studying terrorist conspiracies. He then applies these lessons to combatting authoritarian governments.

Assange seems to suggest that national governments, too, are authoritarian conspiracies. He wants to sabotage all such governing regimes by cutting the communication links between their conspirators. In a blog post dated December 31st, 2006, (following a post titled The pending total annihilation of the U.S. regime in Somalia) he explains,

“The more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie. […] Hence in a world where leaking is easy, secretive or unjust systems are nonlinearly hit relative to open, just systems.”[6]

This summarizes the WikiLeaks mission statement. With WikiLeaks, Julian Assange hopes to collapse the despised hierarchies of power that rely on secret communication to operate. By making secrecy costlier, he believes a world where leaking is easy makes it harder for one group of people to conspire against another. (That’s not really true. More likely, leaking would escalate a cold war of technology and repression to outsmart the leakers; think “Seth Rich”.)

Assange’s motives are noble, in theory, but what exactly are these “open, just systems” he spoke of? This phrase echoes a belief in the Open Society. The global open society was first envisioned by the French mystic Henri Bergson, weaponized by the philosopher Karl Popper, and its development now funded by U.S. billionaire George Soros. WikiLeaks and its ideological co-conspirators believe that somehow, magically, better forms of government will emerge from the initial anarchy after all authoritarian regimes have been toppled.

I have serious doubts whether that is possible and whether Assange, like so many other gifted people, has submitted himself to intellectual tunnel vision. By sabotaging hierarchies of power, WikiLeaks also ends up sabotaging legitimate hierarchies of competence. That’s because power and competence so often happen to be linked qualities. Rather than establish a utopian global society free from authority, the radical Marxists may leave behind an ungovernable world.

Not unlike the over-socialized leftists described in Ted Kaczynski’s Unabomber Manifesto,[7] Assange solely preoccupies himself with the fight against authoritarianism. In his worldview, all authority is malign. His focus is on destroying authority, not on building a better world per se. On February 26th, 2007, he writes (with ‘X’ obviously referring to himself),

“X is an ‘average shy intellectual’ and in that is a sounding for characters of his type. This type is often of a noble heart, wilted by fear of conflict with authority. The power of their intellect and noble instincts may lead them to a courageous position, where they see the need to take up arms, but their instinctive fear of authority then motivates them to find rationalizations to avoid conflict.”[8]

Does he fancy himself a Messiah? Nonetheless, Julian’s courageous yet conflict-avoiding, Christ-like behavior has landed him in London’s Ecuadorian embassy without contact with the outside world. Let there be no doubt, though, that Julian Assange is a classical Marxist from the activist end of the spectrum.

A Century of Deception

My earlier warning that we must preserve hierarchies of competence by accepting some degree of authority should not be understood as an attempt to whitewash criminal conspiracies. Secret governments really do exist and they do lie to coax a people into war. We remember George W. Bush and the alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The weapons were claimed to be so powerful that Saddam Hussein could bomb U.S. soil,[9] just as Hitler had once pounded London’s neighborhoods with V2 missiles.

But it never happened. The fantastical weapons were never found. Then what was the purpose of such lies? A late 19th-century French thinker who wrote the classic on crowd psychology, La psychologie des foules by Gustave le Bon, gave the world the insight that “a hundred petty crimes or accidents will not strike the imagination of crowds in the least, whereas a single great crime or accident will profoundly impress them.”[10]

Ruling families around the world took heed. With this observation, Le Bon laid the basis for a century of deception. His lessons are still being applied to control the masses today.

German citizens of the early 1930s, for example, were nothing like the bloodthirsty savages depicted by postwar fiction. Thomas Sowell cites that Hitler had trouble pushing the Germans to war. The Führer had to “stage border incidents, using Germans in Polish uniforms to fire weapons and leaving concentration camp inmates dying as ‘casualties’ of the purported Polish attacks.”[11] Just one month after Hitler had been sworn in as Chancellor, the Nazi conspiracy staged the famous 1933 Reichstag fire. The Nazis pinned it on a lone-wolf Dutch terrorist, 24-year-old Marinus van der Lubbe, but they handily exploited the event as an excuse to consolidate power.

The ‘Reichstag fire’-method proved to be so effective in manipulating public opinion that conspiracies around the world would copy it. In 1946, members of the Zionist Irgun organization bombed the King David Hotel—the British headquarter in Palestine. Disguised as Arabs, they killed 91. As Le Bon had predicted, this great crime shifted the British public opinion. Britain had been fighting Jewish paramilitaries, successfully, but the media aftermath convinced Britons their government had gone too far, to the point of inflaming the Arabs instead.

The most famous of all Reichstag fires is still officially denied. Although fewer than half of respondents in the latest 2008 World Poll believed in the official story that Al Qaida had done it, one in five respondents thought the U.S. government and its Israeli ally are guilty of bringing down the Twin Towers on September 11th, 2001. On the attack’s ten-year anniversary, a group of scientists convened at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada. They proved that the Twin Towers had to have been pulled down by controlled explosives from within the building, contradicting the official government report.[12]

The conspirators behind the 9/11 attacks succeeded in altering the U.S. public perception of prolonged war in the Middle East, namely in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. (Coincidentally, these countries were the avowed enemies of two important U.S. allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Logic dictates that Iran is next.)

No one with a brain still believes a bunch of camel-riding desert nomads could stage a successful attack on New York City and the Pentagon without being detected and intercepted by the world’s most advanced army. Besides, if Bin Laden could attack the United States so easily, then why didn’t Russia and China, upon smelling the fear and weakness of a crippled animal, immediately gang up on the USA to finish the job? Well, they didn’t even try, because the United States was perfectly prepared to intercept them.

Under President Trump, Reichstag fires kept burning. Just several months after having taken his oath, the new President approved a U.S. airstrike on Syria in response to alleged chemical and gas attacks by the Assad regime.[13]

It would be foolish to think that a showman President had anything to do with staging a false-flag attack. It merely offered Trump an opportunity to deliver on his election promise, namely to “bomb the hell of out ISIS”.[14] The real U.S. conspirators are the same group of people who have been in charge of North American society since 1921, namely the several thousand members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

For twenty years between 1996 and 2016, every single POTUS had either been a member of the CFR or a family member of a member.[15] The CFR and its global media tentacles are indeed the U.S. ‘Deep State’. Assange is right to expose them.

Reichstag fires can burn in virtual dumpsters, too. During and after the Trump win, a frenzied, CFR-controlled media accused Putin and the Russians of hacking the U.S. elections. It turns out that the Democratic National Committee’s servers haven’t exactly been hacked at all,[16] but were more likely infiltrated by a disgruntled employee with direct access. Not the Russians, but a British company called Cambridge Analytica used stolen Facebook data to sway the 2016 election in Trump’s favor. Russians trolls had nothing to do with it.

And what to think of the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight 17 that crashed over Ukraine in 2014, close to the Russian border? It was another Reichstag fire, meant to coax Europeans into war against Russia. It failed for a reason few U.S. pundits understand. Ever since the black Obama took to the White House, especially rural and Eastern Europeans began seeing Putin as the leader of the West. Not everyone is prepared to swallow multiculturalism as hard as Americans do.

Ultimately, the Anglo-American attacks serve to sever Europe, especially Germany, from Russia. That’s because a Euro-Russian alliance could easily dethrone the United States as the world’s singular superpower for thousands of years to come. Luckily, Western European elites are so heavily invested in American capitalism that they will happily sell out their own peoples for profit.

Global Peace?

I can understand what Julian Assange is trying to do. But I question whether you can establish lasting global peace by sabotaging social hierarchies, even if only targeting the most powerful ones. Another reason why you can’t ‘truth’ people into peace is that you don’t really need a secret conspiracy to wage war. Religious fundamentalists, for example, don’t need to use secret communications to get their message across. They wage their war on the non-believers in plain sight. (That’s probably the reason why radical Marxists want to outlaw religion.)

More problematically, Assange’s thinking hinges on the false assumption that people never want war. That’s just not true. People will go to war for various reasons other than being coaxed into them by conspiracies. Natural catastrophes may naturally push people to war for their survival. Perceived historical humiliations may erupt in unpredictable conflict. Complex group dynamics may produce wars without a cause.

There are many reasons for war, but Assange has only tackled one of them. I believe lasting global peace simply isn’t a goal worth pursuing. It’s not realistic. It’s naïve. One can’t lock the world into an eternal state of pacifism without exposing mankind to the wolves and the bears. At some point, even the most over-socialized leftists must burst out of their safe spaces and experience real life.

War, like death, is an inevitable part of life, but to say wars are inevitable does not mean we must surrender to them. From a complex systems’ perspective, we should rather aim to minimize the number of war casualties, precisely by accommodating small-scale, regional conflict. Allowing regions to let off steam in contained wars may prevent a global catastrophe, assuming that’s a goal worth fighting for.

[1] Julian Assange, “State and Terrorist Conspiracies” (iq.org, November 10, 2006), 4, https://web.archive.org/web/20061114014042/http://iq.org/conspiracies.pdf.

[2] Julian Assange, When Google Met WikiLeaks (OR Books, 2014), chap. “Ellingham Hall, June 23, 2011: Censorship is always cause for celebration.”

[3] Jordan B. Peterson, 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos (Random House Canada, 2018), chap. “Rule 5: Do Not Let Your Children Do Anything That Makes You Dislike Them.”

[4] Assange, “State and Terrorist Conspiracies.”

[5] Julian Assange, “Conspiracy as Governance” (iq.org, December 3, 2006).

[6] Julian Assange, “The Non Linear Effects of Leaks on Unjust Systems of Governance,” iq.org, January 10, 2007, https://web.archive.org/web/20070110200827/http://iq.org:80/#Thenonlineareffectsofleaksonunjustsystemsofgovernance.

[7] Theodore Kaczynski, The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and Its Future (New York: Unabomber, 1996), paras. 9–37.

[8] Julian Assange, “Average Shy Intellectuals,” iq.org, August 24, 2007, https://web.archive.org/web/20070824010259/http://iq.org:80/.

[9] TheMiddleBlitz, Earth to Liberals: Robert Mueller Lied Us into the Iraq War!!, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNeqrTbkZmM.

[10] Gustave Le Bon, Psychologie Des Foules, 1895, chap. 3.

[11] Thomas Sowell, Black Rednecks and White Liberals, 1st ed. (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2005), 188.

[12] 9/11: Decade of Deception, Documentary, 2015, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6061892/.

[13] Michael D. Shear and Michael R. Gordon, “63 Hours: From Chemical Attack to Trump’s Strike in Syria,” The New York Times, April 7, 2017, sec. Politics, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/syria-strike-trump-timeline.html.

[14] Jenna Johnson, “Donald Trump Promises to ‘Bomb the Hell out of ISIS’ in New Radio Ad,” Washington Post, November 18, 2015, sec. Post Politics, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/18/donald-trump-promises-to-bomb-the-hell-out-of-isis-in-new-radio-ad/.

[15] Swiss Propaganda Research, “The American Empire and Its Media,” Swprs.Org (blog), August 16, 2017, https://swprs.org/the-american-empire-and-its-media/.

[16] George Parry, “Mr. Mueller: Was the DNC Server Actually Hacked by the Russians?,” The American Spectator, March 29, 2018, https://spectator.org/mr-mueller-was-the-dnc-server-actually-hacked-by-the-russians/.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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