P
PazzoGrande
Guest
The goal of the Wikileaks Diplomatic Cables leaks was to make governments and diplomats more transparent.
On one level, people will say that governments have the obligation to always be honest, open and transparent. Distrust breeds distrust. If one government distrusts another, the distrust will go both ways and could make things worse (that’s what happened with the Cold War). Furthermore, if the government distrusts its people enough to be honest with them, then the people will distrust their government too. The world turns into mafia gang mentality.
On another level however – which I agree with – it is a fantasy to say that everyone should be open and transparent. For example, say there is a false accusation against a priest. It is not wise for the Bishop to be open about it because when the accusation is proven to be false, the damage will already have been done toward his reputation.
Negativity attracts publicity and nobody will remember the vindication. Nobody remembers the Pius XII saved thousands of Jews and that when he died, Jewish leaders came out from around the world to praise his efforts for peace, and nobody remembers that Hitler was irritated because Pius XII got in the way, and that Pius prepared a resignation that would go into effect if Hitler kidnapped him; yet today, the only thing anyone remembers is that he was supposedly silent about the Holocaust and presume Hitler and Pius were buddies. Even as even as recently as a few years ago, it was discovered that he ordered that a convent shelter Jews to keep them away from the Nazis. Even when the correct information is out there, people will assume the stupidest negative things.
Knowing that people have this tendency, isn’t it wise to control the information that gets out?
Michael Jackson was twice found innocent of child molestation, but he gained the reputation of a pedophile anyway. It would have been easier and fairer to just keep it out of the press, at least until there is a guilty verdict, because people’s judgement will always sink into pessimism.
International affairs have a lot of nuance, and information should be managed carefully. There are enough problems when one individual is brutally honest about what he thinks of his friend; how much worse can it be when nations do that?
An interesting sidenote, Wikileaks documents from the Vatican actually made the Holy See appear quite positively. The Vatican didn’t interfere with internal political affairs and conducted itself very morally and professionally. There are a few quirks (a diplomat says that the seniormost people at the Vatican are technologically backward, so it’s no surprise they didn’t know about SSPX Bishop Williamson’s Holocaust denial because it didn’t occur to anyone to Google him). But it also revealed that when British sailors were held hostage, it turns out the Pope’s appeal ended up with them being released. It makes me even prouder to be a Catholic.
Anyway, the Wikileaks Diplomatic Cable leaks – moral or immoral? Is absolute openness and honesty the standard we should shoot for, and all these secrets complicate things? Or isn’t it better to keep human nature in mind and be scrupulous about what you reveal?
On one level, people will say that governments have the obligation to always be honest, open and transparent. Distrust breeds distrust. If one government distrusts another, the distrust will go both ways and could make things worse (that’s what happened with the Cold War). Furthermore, if the government distrusts its people enough to be honest with them, then the people will distrust their government too. The world turns into mafia gang mentality.
On another level however – which I agree with – it is a fantasy to say that everyone should be open and transparent. For example, say there is a false accusation against a priest. It is not wise for the Bishop to be open about it because when the accusation is proven to be false, the damage will already have been done toward his reputation.
Negativity attracts publicity and nobody will remember the vindication. Nobody remembers the Pius XII saved thousands of Jews and that when he died, Jewish leaders came out from around the world to praise his efforts for peace, and nobody remembers that Hitler was irritated because Pius XII got in the way, and that Pius prepared a resignation that would go into effect if Hitler kidnapped him; yet today, the only thing anyone remembers is that he was supposedly silent about the Holocaust and presume Hitler and Pius were buddies. Even as even as recently as a few years ago, it was discovered that he ordered that a convent shelter Jews to keep them away from the Nazis. Even when the correct information is out there, people will assume the stupidest negative things.
Knowing that people have this tendency, isn’t it wise to control the information that gets out?
Michael Jackson was twice found innocent of child molestation, but he gained the reputation of a pedophile anyway. It would have been easier and fairer to just keep it out of the press, at least until there is a guilty verdict, because people’s judgement will always sink into pessimism.
International affairs have a lot of nuance, and information should be managed carefully. There are enough problems when one individual is brutally honest about what he thinks of his friend; how much worse can it be when nations do that?
An interesting sidenote, Wikileaks documents from the Vatican actually made the Holy See appear quite positively. The Vatican didn’t interfere with internal political affairs and conducted itself very morally and professionally. There are a few quirks (a diplomat says that the seniormost people at the Vatican are technologically backward, so it’s no surprise they didn’t know about SSPX Bishop Williamson’s Holocaust denial because it didn’t occur to anyone to Google him). But it also revealed that when British sailors were held hostage, it turns out the Pope’s appeal ended up with them being released. It makes me even prouder to be a Catholic.
Anyway, the Wikileaks Diplomatic Cable leaks – moral or immoral? Is absolute openness and honesty the standard we should shoot for, and all these secrets complicate things? Or isn’t it better to keep human nature in mind and be scrupulous about what you reveal?