• WikiLeaks stands for democracy!

    Information is a rare privilege that we, as citizens of our nations, are meagerly receiving. WikiLeaks not only provides valuable information regarding our country's political and governmental affairs, but stands as a symbol for transparency between the ruler and the ruled. While many international bodies seem to believe that this website is a threat to national security and even so, a terrorist organization plotting to usurp or overthrow governments, the fact remains true that fear is muddling their minds. WikiLeaks breaks the fear barrier and courageously tackles the moral obstacle of secrecy.

  • Accountability for their actions

    We elect officials so that they can run the country. If they're not doing it properly, most people will know and they'll be out come the next election. But things like weapons deals with terrorists, war crimes and corruption - clearly these are more damaging than anything that Wikileaks can reveal. Those in power need to be held accountable for the actions they take part in behind the public's backs, which normally benefit themselves or others in power. If not Wikileaks, are we to rely on a government-regulated, often government-censored press? Democracy without truth is a failure on the people. Democracy is flawed, even without considering the facts given to us by Wikileaks. We vote for people who do nothing to solve the problems, or make them worse. That's another debate, though.

  • The dissemination of information is always good for democracy.

    The free and open availability of information is essential to ensure an informed and empowered electorate. Democratic systems depend on the participation of citizenry at large, not just a powerful elite, and without the availability of unencumbered sources of information, that participation is compromised by the threat of important information being controlled by the powerful. Some argue that national security and reasonable privacy are threatened by Wikileaks -- it is true that Wikileaks creates challenges for both. However, these challenges are not uniquely created by Wikileaks -- they are and always have been inherent in the concept of free speech.

  • Wikileaks is good for democracy

    A society where information is given to the people is a good one. People have a right to know exactly what their government is up to. If a government has something to hide, it should seriously concern the people. Wikileaks was a win for democracy and freedom. Bradley Manning should be applauded for his heroism.

  • Yes, Wikileaks is good for democracy.

    Yes, I believe that Wikileaks is good for democracy. Julian Assange, the founder and main contributor to Wikileaks, has been unfairly persecuted for releasing top-secret government documents and breaking several laws in the process. Wikileaks doesn't release these documents and information to defy the authority of the governments involved, but rather to promote transparency between governments and the people. Wikileaks is indeed good for democracy because a country's making everything transparent to its citizens goes a long way toward generating trust among them.

  • Keeps Them Honest

    WikiLeaks is good for democratic movements because it puts some measure of power back into people's hands. The information can be disseminated by ordinary citizens for them to decide whether or not the leaks are worthy of citizens' attention. Leaking sensitive documents may be illegal or in poor taste. However, it does allow for citizen review of government policies.

  • Helps control underground government organisations.

    Without the constant threat of actions being exposed the government becomes inherently undemocratic as all information within the government must not be held back from the public to cover up abuse by government officials and corporations, I don think all information being open to the public is good (personal privacy/ unannounced information) however if the information being held back ids so groundbreaking and shocking to the public, Should it be being held back?

  • They once were supporting truth and democracy.

    Since Julian's forced stay in the Ecuadorian Embassy he seems to be venting anger more than truth. His releasing campaign emails in the US led to influencing the election and gave support to the Russian cyber hacking operation. The release was a one sided slam.
    The information released by Wikileaks may also have had it's parallel in the GOP campaign...But no ugly information regarding the GOP was released. Julian has a bias and it has become evident.
    R Newton

  • Essential for democracy

    The truth is never bad. It may hurt, it may go against your interests, it may help your competitors, it may expose your dishonest interests, your greed, your falsehood, but in the end it will allow always better and fairer decisions in the view of the majority. Even if truth hurts you today, in the long wrong you will be far better off in a society based on truth than in one based on lies. We must fight liars and false believes that do not withstand a scientific and logical proof.

    If you fear the truth, you do it because you are liar. It exposes your lies. So wikileaks is an important tool to increase risks for liars and make their live harder. They must fear to be exposed one day. This minimizes the amount of lies.... If even the POTUS is a notorical liar, how should the broad society in the US not take a severe moral hit?

    You shouldn't lie because a religion tells you not to do it, you shouldn't because you understand how lies destroy faith which is so essential for an efficient society and economy and therefore a better future for all of us.

    Free press is vital. Deliver facts not opinions. Fake news are lies that undermine the press and make people ignorant. The goal is to destroy the free press by spreading so much fake news that the average Joe isn't able anymore to destinct between lies and the truth and becomes passive and questions the benefit of free press.

    Therefore free, intelligent people fight fake news and lies and protect the truth at all costs.

  • Know Our Government

    When and if the American get to elect their Government they will need to be informed.. I don't believe that other than a couple of periods would the American people approved our crimmal actions in Iran in 1953. As a whole I believe the American cracter is stronger than that.

  • Everyone is biased

    Its a group who will try to excercise control at some point. This platform for any dirt someone wants to leave in their mailbox is vetted, but there is no accountability for what is posted. People can deliver information to sway the public wihout ever being accountable for its content. And that is a bad thing, especially given the high volume of misinformation we already fight.

  • Someone else controlling what is leaked implies bias. So no it is not good for democracy.

    Who is choosing what to leak and when. Do you expect anyone to believe that there is nothing to leak on Trump. We haven't seen his taxes nor have we seen any leaks regarding all the entrepreneurs he failed to pay while he was claiming bankruptcy. Show us leaks on both candidates or shut up.

  • It puts it in danger

    One thing is exposing lies and corruption, but much of what wikileaks shows poses a danger to democratic countries and their operatives. Making secret CIA and DoD documents on, say, the locations and missions of counterterrorist or other strIke units, public, is not helping democracy. It is sabotaging the 'good' guys by giving their secret info to everyone who wants it, including terrorists and oppressive regimes. Bottom line is, WikiLeaks should only expose documents that show info that is ACTIVELY HURTING PUBLIC INTERESTS. Corruption, criminal activity from those in power, coverups—ok. Other stuff, not so much. As long as WikiLeaks doesn't see the distinction, it poses a threat to the spread and maintenance of democracy.

  • People will get hurt

    I believe that us American citizens should know what our country is doing but to what extent should we know? I believe that we American should only know things that couldn't hurt other people. Also we Americans should have privacy and safety so we do not get hurt like many others have.

  • Wikileaks is not good for democracy.

    Wilikeaks is a terrorist organization that is trying to cause discord in the world. Leaking sensitive information is not the way to solve issues. The fact that Snowden has sought asylum in Russia shows just now democratic Wikileaks is. You can't be civil right activist if you go running for help from the Kremlin.

  • Governments hate them

    For the most part Wikileaks is a great website. I love everything it stands for, but somethings that the government does should be capped a secret no matter what it is, to protect the country it stands behind. If you do throw out secrets to the world some of the secrets will just destroy the government in the process. So there is only so much you can give out before it will destroy the government and the people under it. You know in the the US you have the freedom of speech right but you can't just say "THERE'S A BOMB!!!!!" in public. As well as disturbing the peace in witch Wikileaks does (That's why the US doesn't really like Wikileaks. But every thing else that it does it just fine).

  • No, Wikileaks is not good for democracy.

    In the United States, there is a feeling that everyone has the right to know everything and anything they desire. There are certain issues that need to remain private or classified for the safety of those involved. Wikileaks does not seem to have any filters in place when it comes to the ability to grab headlines. This anything goes attitude releases information that is not for public consumption.

    While I agree that there is the possibility of covering up negative things and of hiding bad behavior, I don't believe that full access to any and all information is good for a country as a whole. When we elect officials to office, we should demand that they live up to the requirements of that office, including ethical and moral obligations. Outing those that are behaving poorly or breaking the law is acceptable but airing dirty laundry or classified secrets that could have consequences to the safety and wellbeing of others is not appropriate.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.