Part 13 (1/2)

Christian: Many efforts are being made to regulate the Internet, regulate content on the Internet, make service providers liable and use various means to check what people are doing on the Internet and punish them if they do things that the government doesn't like.

Henrik: And, of course, politicians have three official reasons for trying to limit the freedom on the Internet. It's file sharing, the war on terror and child p.o.r.nography. But often we come to suspect that there are many more reasons, for instance the interest of trying to keep things secret, to keep people out of the discussion. It could also be to limit the freedom of citizen journalism and stuff like that. Of course, they can't say it officially, because that would be disastrous. But we really have the impression that that's the case.

Christian: It's very much all part of the same trend. This morning I was at a seminar organized by the ALDE (Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe). The seminar was about Hungary, where they just introduced a new media law where everybody, including bloggers, must be registered before they're allowed to express themselves. Therefore, Hungarians will have a small administrative body appointed by the ruling party that can decide if somebody's saying things that they don't want to be said and give them unlimited fines for it. And, of course, that is not how it should be in a Western democracy or in any democracy for that matter. I think this is the underlying problem in society. The Internet and new information technology have opened up fantastic possibilities for democracy, for transparency, for citizen partic.i.p.ation in the democratic process, as well as fantastic opportunities for the spread of culture. All the culture of the world is just one click away. That's something fantastic. If politicians had invented it, they would be so proud of it. Now it sort of happened by itself and instead the politicians are trying to stop it. As with any change in society, the winners of the last century will either be the new losers, or will have to at least adapt their business to the established mode of governance. n.o.body wants to change, especially if you're the king of the hill, you want everything to remain exactly as it is. That's why conflicts are erupting everywhere. In the end, I know we will win, 'We' being the ones standing for openness, sharing, etc., because the technology makes that a historical necessity. I know full well how unpopular it makes you with more or less everybody if you talk about historical necessities. I'm sure that will happen, but whether it happens in five years or fifty will depend on political decisions.

Henrik: It's very interesting because in Parliament there have been issues about Iran, Cuba and other countries where the government muzzles the opposition. Iran and Cuba are just using the technology that we have here, because our governments have demanded the possibility of monitoring them.

Christian: I think that these double standards are very annoying, but very important. For example, take Swedish Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom, member of the Swedish Liberal party since the 1980s. When she was a member of this Parliament, she was very good at standing up for freedom of speech, freedom of whatever, etc. She was the first person to criticize China for censoring the Internet and blocking certain sites, etc. That's when she was a parliamentarian. Now she's a commissioner. One of the very first directives she proposed was for the introduction of censors.h.i.+p on the Internet and she's using child p.o.r.nography to break open the doors. It's very easy to criticize China for censoring the Internet, but once this alleged liberal person was in power, she tried to do the exact same thing. You see this in most Member States. A lot of parties are quite good as long as they are in opposition. It's not really a left/right issue. But then when they get into government, they want more control, less transparency. I think that is part of the way power corrupts. It's a very positive development for citizens to have access to a technology that can be used as a counterforce. It's even more positive that some people, like the WikiLeaks members, are taking advantage of that possibility. For this reason, all of us in the Pirate Party see WikiLeaks as real heroes.

elise: What is the link between the Pirate Party and the actions of Birgitta Jonsdottir in Iceland? And between Iceland and Sweden?

Christian: This IMMI thing is absolutely brilliant. If we could transform that into European modern media initiative, that would be really great. At least it's a very good thing that Iceland is setting a positive example. It's exactly what the Pirate Party would want to see happen. We feel that the openness of society is threatened. It's ironic because we have this marvelous technology that's opened up the possibility, but instead has led to political repression.

Exactly the same thing happened five hundred years ago with the printing press. Up until then, only scribes in monasteries could copy books. Gutenberg came along, it became much cheaper by the standards of those days and pretty much the first thing that happened was that various governments wanted to regulate it. The Church wanted to regulate the printing press so that heretics wouldn't be allowed to use it to spread things like Lutheranism or whatever they would consider even worse. The word 'copyright' first appeared in the U.K., under Henry the VII. I think it was one of his daughters who wanted to make sure that only their side and their political struggle got to print books. So they gave a monopoly to the London Company of station the guild for printers, and they got the copyright, the right to make copies on provision that they could only print the right kind of religious text.

When technology opens up a new possibility for ordinary citizens, you would expect the old establishment to try to do whatever they can to stop it and maintain its own privilege. We can expect them to fail completely in the long run, because we know what happened to the printing press. My hope is that we'll be able to make that same transition to the Internet society and the information society quicker and cheaper, especially in terms of lives. That is the goal of the Pirate Party: avoid a large number of heretics being sent to the gallows before society accepts the change.

elise: What are your daily activities like here?

Henrik: I bury Christian in papers and act as anything from political advisor to the guy who gets Christian his sandwiches when he is in a meeting. Christian also wants me to keep blogging, as I have one of the biggest political blogs in Sweden, if not the biggest.

Christian: I blog as well. I think it's a good indication on how helpful the new technology is, because the job of a parliamentarian, whether here in the European Parliament or in national parliament, doesn't really have any power. The power is on a national level with the government or at the European Commission level.

Henrik: Let's not forget the Council.

Christian: True, but I would say primarily with the Commission. But at least a parliamentarian has access to some power; is closer to it and can find out more about what's going on. For me, both on the European Union and national level the parliamentarian is the link between ordinary citizens and the ones actually in power. However, I think that a blog is very useful both ways. Henrik and I blog about things happening here. Some journalist might pick it up. There's no blog that can compete with mainstream media in terms of reach. Still, for people who are interested, the blogs have much more s.p.a.ce to devote to one single issue at a time. If you're very interested in something, you'll find more information on the blogs than in mainstream media. But on the other hand, when some proposal comes along, it comes as a white paper or green paper or whatever color paper from the commission, often very technical. It's always like that in politics: the devil is in the details... always. It can be very difficult to spot the nasty things, if you just read it. To be able to take that and put it on the blog and say 'This is what the commissioner is proposing. I'll report on this. Do you have any comments?' People who are interested or are specialized can give feedback. I find it extremely useful.

Henrik: It's very interesting because much of this work is actually intertwined with WikiLeaks. For instance, the SWIFT agreement about transferring information about European bank transactions to the terrorist hunters in the United States. Parliament was opposed, but national governments turned on parliamentarians and the Parliament had to approve the agreement or adjust its modifications. Afterward, we had found out, thanks to the 'Cablegate' telegrams, that the Swedish government was very much involved in the matter. Just like for ACTA, which might infringe the liberty on the Internet. This agreement was negotiated behind closed doors. In the end, the Parliament will have to say yes or no to it, but for a long time the only way to get information on these doc.u.ments was via WikiLeaks.

Christian: Even for me as a parliamentarian, I had to rely on leaks to obtain information. It's obviously an aspect of the European Union that I find completely unacceptable. But sttill, it's the reality of it all.

elise: What is the link between politics and what WikiLeaks, OpenLeaks, or other similar groups do? You think that they have a political agenda?

Henrik: They have political consequences. Many people say that a.s.sange is a Leftist or that he hates the U.S. or whatever. I don't think that's the case. I think he's just in it for the open information and transparency mission. That, of course, it will have its consequences. The video Collateral Murder was terrible for the United States PR-wise. And now 'Cablegate.' All of this has political consequences. But you can also see the openness ideology behind WikiLeaks. I would say it's more philosophical than political. It's some kind of purity when it comes to democracy. The other day I wrote on my blog and reminded people that the key to this story that we must always remember is that it's WikiLeaks that is providing the truth. It might be an inconvenient or embarra.s.sing truth, but it's WikiLeaks who is providing it. It's the politicians and their functionaries who are lying and trying to cover things up. It's extremely important to have that single thought in mind.

elise: Do you think that Julian a.s.sange is a 'Warrior of Truth'?

Henrik: Yes.

Christian: At the moment, of course, Americans consider him to be a Leftist. I don't believe that myself. For instance, if you take it from the green perspective, since we're in the Green Group, among the doc.u.ments they did publish, a lot of them were about an environmental scandal in the Ivory Coast where big companies had basically taken lots of really toxic stuff and just dumped it somewhere. From a green perspective, that leak, when it happened, would have been very popular politically, because it highlighted green issues. But WikiLeaks also published these 'Climate-Gate' e-mails that were a lot less popular within the Green Group. To me, that strongly indicates that Mr. a.s.sange himself is just in it for the truth. He doesn't pick sides, instead he shows everything and from all angles.

Henrik: A person with very strong integrity, I would say.

elise: Do you think he would make a good politician and get into politics?

Christian: No. No.

Henrik: No. No. No.

elise: Why not?

Christian: He's a good speaker. He has interesting political things to say. I don't think he'd be at all interested in the day-to-day compromising that they maintain in politics. I see him as an activist by heart, representing certain ideas. I don't think he'd enjoy being a politician.

Henrik: If he should have such a carreer, it would be as General Secretary of the UN with a responsibility to the Internet and open communications, etc. That might work, but the day-to-day work, it's like swimming in gelatin.

elise: So do you think that WikiLeaks and other movements like this must or should have an implication in a traditional way in politics or not? Is it possible?

Henrik: It'd have huge implications.

Christian: Yes, every single release has huge implications in that area. For instance, at the national level, we had one telegram detailing how the Swedish ministers went to the American Emba.s.sy, how they talked in detail about how Sweden should introduce certain laws to make the United States happy. It was in one of the cables. That is in itself very interesting political information. It confirmed what we in the Pirate Party had been saying, 'Look, the Swedish government, they're just a puppet on a string for the Americans.' When we said it before, we sounded pretty much like conspiracy theorists, at least to many people. But now it's confirmed in an official cable from the American Emba.s.sy, so of course that has implications. But hopefully, I think perhaps an even more interesting long-term effect would be that if politicians all over start to realize that they can't really keep anything secret, that could, hopefully in the long run, mean that they become honest out of necessity.

Henrik: But if they can't get away with it, they have to.

Christian: We're only at the beginning of the process.

elise: Let's talk about Julian a.s.sange. Where did you meet him?

Christian: I met him once in Brussels, in June 2010. He came to speak at a seminar organized by the progressive group. Afterwards, lots of people wanted to talk to him. I wanted to talk to him as well. We wanted to tell him that the Swedish Pirate Party was prepared to offer a.s.sistance to WikiLeaks, technical a.s.sistance with service, etc. I mentioned that very briefly, but then the journalist did an interview with the two of us. That was really all there was time for. He then went to Sweden and visited the Swedish Pirate Party. We helped him. I didn't meet him then, he met Rick Falkvinge, who was our party leader then, and Anna Troberg, who is our party leader now. They had dinner together. This was really mostly to confirm the fact that we, the Pirate Party, would a.s.sist with some bandwidth.

We're just one of many organizations and people a.s.sisting WikiLeaks in this way. This was primarily about the technical help we wanted to give. But, of course, yes, we do support WikiLeaks in every way. When people like you ask about WikiLeaks, I'm quite happy to say that I like it.

elise: What about a.s.sange?

Christian: You have to be really focused in order to become a global icon. And he probably was not at all particularly interested in all the social stuff that surrounds whatever project he's dealing with.

Henrik: You often see that in people who are very focused on a specific project, it doesn't have to be connected with the Internet, but often they do not have perfect social skills. To many people, that's a bit irritating. For me, working with Libertarians and Pirates, I'm quite used to that and have learned to appreciate even goofy people for what they do.

Christian: I supposed that I'd probably cross paths with him again. The Pirate Party's a political project, as Henrik said, the political arm of the Internet.

THE HEART OF THE CAVE.

I am responsible for everything except for my very responsibility.

Jean-Paul Sartre.

25.

FAMILY HERITAGE.

Julian a.s.sange hadn't met his biological father before he was twenty-five years of age, and since then, he's only met him a few times. John s.h.i.+pton was a student activist of the 1960s whom Christine a.s.sange fell in love with during an anti-Vietnam War demonstration in Sydney. Today, s.h.i.+pton is an architect who has been described by his son Julian as a rebel spirit with a high logical and dispa.s.sionate intellect. A close friend described him as 'a mirror s.h.i.+ning back at Julian.'

Paternity, maternity, and being in a relations.h.i.+p are values that Julian has experienced in a particular manner: an absent father, an artist/activist mother, a stepfather who treated him like an adult, constantly moving, a failed relations.h.i.+p after two years, a custody battle that lasted over five years and a lost son that was found again.