WikiLeaks and the Authority of Knowledge

Running head: WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE “WikiLeaks and the Authority of Knowledge” Andy Valeri Policy Futures in Education (Volume 10 Number 2) ISSN 1478-2103 Symposium Journals (U.K.) April 2012 Interdisciplinary Studies Graduate Program Media, Communication and Human Rights University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio Andy Valeri, P.O. Box 303 WBB, Dayton, OH 45409 Email – [email protected] 1 WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 2 Abstract This paper outlines how providing accessible transparency to information controlled by institutions of power and suppressed from public view, is both similar in purpose to as well as an essential component of, the pedagogical processes promoted by Paulo Freire, which are necessary for the establishment of a truly just and non-oppressive society. It asserts fundamental philosophical, instrumental, and ethical connections between organizations such as WikiLeaks, and Freire’s program of dialogic education towards undermining the foundations of societal-based ignorance, upon which the maintenance of structures of oppression are dependent. WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 3 WikiLeaks and the Authority of Knowledge It has been nearly half a century since the Brazilan educationalist Paulo Freire first revolutionized global awareness regarding the primary role that educational processes play in maintaining the systemic conditions of political or social injustice. The publication of his Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1968/1970) was highly influential in promoting a new form of critical pedagogy (Smith, 1997/2002). Its aim was to effectively empower the educationally (and thus politically) disenfranchised within a society, in order that they may meaningfully participate in confronting and eliminating the systemic conditions of oppression within that society. In the intervening decades since Freire first began his work amongst the impoverished communities of Brazil, the terrain of where and how education takes place has been qualitatively and quantitatively transformed. This has been due in no small measure to the explosion of accessible modern, mass mediated digital communication technologies. The tools available to education, the spaces within which it can take place, and the dialogic interactions now possible, are radically evolving due to these new technologies and the opportunities for expanding awareness through them. Within the arena of this ever-developing technological landscape have arisen new methods and approaches to developing effective critical pedagogy. Among these new methodologies are those based upon information transparency and accessibility, such as those pioneered by the organization WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks’ innovative model consists of making available original source material previously hidden from public view by institutions of power (WikiLeaks, n.d.). This model is currently being expanded upon by similar such organizations (Carlstrom, 2011), and it represents a vital contribution to the transformation of critical pedagogy in a world that is notably different from the one that Freire sought to WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 4 remedy. This process helps provide the information necessary for enabling people to more critically understand and educate themeselves as to the nature of the society in which they live, so as to then be able to more effectively change it. Whereas Freire’s model focuses primarily upon the dynamics of the teacher-student relationship, the WikiLeaks model addresses the relationship between governing authority and the citizen, on the behalf of whose interests that governing authority ostensibly claims to be exercising power. In the following pages, I will attempt to present a better understanding of the inherent relationship between critical pedagogy and information transparency. I will show how they are both similar in purpose, as well as essential components of each other, for establishing a truly just and non-oppressive society. We will see how Freire’s ideas regarding “critical consciousness” (Freire, 1974/2007, p. 14) are based upon the same premises as WikiLeaks’ model of “scientific journalism” (WikiLeaks, n.d.), with each sharing a fundamental philosophical affirmation in the importance of understanding the interconnectedness of social and political phenomenon. Both assert the idea of “education as a subversive force” (Shaull, 2000, p. 29), making them inherently revolutionary in nature, for which each have been made targets of reprisal and retribution by various agents of institutional power. This paper is about how the processes advanced by Freire and by WikiLeaks are ultimately about investing people with the capacity for taking agency over the conditions of their own lives and their societies, and that the success of each of these models is predicated upon an inherent trust in the people to wield that power. Paulo Freire’s Pedagogical Model For Critical Consciousness Paulo Freire ranks as one of the most influential thinkers on educational practices of the past century (Smith, 1997/2002). His work on the role that dialogic processes play in the development of critical thinking, particularly as a means towards true liberation from WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 5 conditions of social and political oppression, continue to influence many around the world. His Pedagogy of the Oppressed remains one of the most quoted texts on education, particularly among regions of the so-called “Third World” (Smith, 1997/2002). The Christian values which animated Freire’s perspectives on education and society (Joldersma, 1999) can be seen reflected within many of the tenets of Christian liberation theology, particularly as it has been practiced throughout the regions of Latin America (Hillar, 1993). The fundamental core of Freire’s perspective is rooted in critical pedagogy, which has traditionally referred to teaching and learning practices designed to raise people’s critical consciousness regarding the foundations for the oppressive social conditions under which they and/or others live (Critical Pedagogy on the Web, n.d.). This critical consciousness entails going beneath the surface of people’s unexamined understanding and received wisdom regarding situations and events, in which students must discern the meaning, root causes, social context, and personal consequences of any action, event, process, organization, policy, mass mediated messaging, or any other socio-political phenomena (Shor, 1992, p. 129). Freire came to understand that conditions of destitution and oppression were enabled by people’s ignorance, and that such ignorance was the direct result of a whole framework of economic, social, and political domination, in which the "very structure of their [the people’s] thought has been conditioned by the contradictions of the concrete, existential situation by which they were shaped” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 45). Existing within this framework is an educational system serving as one of the major instruments for maintaining this structure of domination, this “culture of silence” (Shaull, 2000, p. 30). “Rather than being encouraged and equipped to know and respond to the concrete realities of their world,” populations of oppressed and politically disenfranchised people “were kept ‘submerged’ in a WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 6 situation in which such critical awareness and response were practically impossible” (Shaull, 2000, p. 30). For Freire, pedagogy came to be intimately connected to social change, a process to challenge students “to critically engage with the world so they could act on it” (Giroux, 2010). Education and literacy became a means of learning about the world as a basis for intervening in it in order to change it; a way of thinking beyond the seeming inevitability of current conditions, and “imagining a future that would not merely reproduce the present” (Giroux, 2010). Freire asserted that “education is a political act” (Freire, 1998, p. 63), and that one of its fundamental tasks is to construct a world in which critique and reason work in conjunction with the values of freedom and equality, so as to to alter the conditions of which life is lived in order to create a more socially just world (Giroux, 2010). He pursued education as itself being the practice of freedom, as opposed to its being a practice of domination (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 81). For it is only by the means of praxis – the ability to reflect and act upon the world in order to transform it – that people can emerge from under the oppressive force of domination and effectively turn upon it (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 51). Paolo Freire saw the vital need for reconnecting things and events with the totality of that which engendered them, thus revealing their greater meaning and significance (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 71). It is the WikiLeaks model for information transparency and accessibility that serves as a modern tool for fulfilling this need. The WikiLeaks Model For Information Transparency WikiLeaks is a relatively new organization, one engaged in the development of innovative processes for the publishing of suppressed information of public relevance, representing a cutting-edge application of that invention of the American military, the internet. The controversies surrounding its work are demonstrative of the potential WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 7 educational power inherent in that invention, particularly when it is combined with the capabilities of rapid information sharing via peer-to-peer social networking technologies which have been enabled by the world wide web. WikiLeaks asserts that it is an organization committed to the pursuit of justice through the publication of “material that is of diplomatic, political, ethical, and/or historical significance which has not been previously published, and is under active suppression attempt” (ForaTV, 2010). They believe that meaningful representative democracy can only exist when the citizenry know the true plans and behaviors of their governments, and that the most resilient forms of open government are those where the publication and revelation of information are protected (WikiLeaks, n.d.). Transparency leads to better, more thorough scrutiny, and “better scrutiny leads to reduced corruption and stronger democracies in all of society’s institutions, including those of government, corporations, and other civically important organizations” (WikiLeaks, n.d.). It takes the possession of a reasonably accurate mental picture of reality in order for people to match that understanding of reality with their own needs, so as to allow for effective action to be taken in order to realistically fulfill those needs (Hatcher, 1990, p. 22). Such accessibility to information is essential to the functioning of a democratic society, for “a people who intend to govern themselves…must have the power that knowledge will bring, because knowledge will always rule ignorance” (ForaTV, 2010). Key underlying principles embedded in the WikiLeaks model are derived from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (WikiLeaks, n.d.). Of particular importance are those elaborated on within Article 19 of the Declaration, which proclaims that everyone has the right to freedom of expression and to hold opinions without interference, and to receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers (UDHR, WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 8 Article 19). The WikiLeaks model fundamentally affirms the understanding that information is power, and that for a society to be legitimately based upon democratic principles in which the people are to be the ultimate sovereign, that power of information must be accessible to the people. Criticisms regarding these processes for publishing “leaked” secret material (Jones, 2010), and accusations as to the “harms” caused by the publication of such material, are extensive (Youssef, 2010). WilkiLeaks contends, however, that these criticisms fail to take into account the negative unintended consequences of failing to publish the material, and that such critiques overlook all those who are emancipated by a climate of free speech. Such a climate serves as a motivating force for governments and corporations to act justly, with the threat of exposure to public scrutiny encouraging otherwise unaccountable and secretive institutions to consider the ethical implications of their actions (WikiLeaks, n.d.). The WikiLeaks model also serves as a counter to hypocritical manipulations of information by those within institutions of power, who use it to further their own power in ways that undermine the foundations of democratic governance. In such instances, officials wield control over a particular piece of information’s status of confidentiality, in which its disclosure “has little to do with the public's need (or right) to know and everything to do with the official's need to tell” (Jaffer, 2011). Such use of “secrecy powers as a manipulative tool to propagandize the citizenry” (Greenwald, October 10, 2011), is exemplifed by the leaking of information from an official source regarding the Bush administration’s top secret program to detect unusual radioactivity in the nation’s mosques as a way to deflect criticism of its warrentless wiretapping program. The double standard regarding concern about the security of classified information is highlighted by the fact that in this and in numerous other cases, the government will display a near-obsession with punishing those responsible for the WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 9 unauthorized leaks - such as the Bush adminstration’s publicly threatening The New York Times with criminal prosecution over the NSA wiretapping leak - while simultaneously displaying “no interest in learning the identity of those who leaked their heroic efforts to detect radiation at mosques” (Greenwald, October 10, 2011). The WikiLeaks model provides people with access to the information necessary for understanding the deeper contexts and connections between seemingly unrelated phenomenon, particularly in regard to the recognition that injustice somewhere affects justice everywhere. This is amply demonstrated by the rule of Kenyan dictator Daniel arap Moi and his eventual fall from power, brought about in no small part due to WikiLeaks’ release of secret documents revealing the extent of his corruption (Warman, 2010). Moi’s money laundering of nearly $3 billion dollars of assets was certainly about corruption in Kenya. But it was also about the Swiss banks who serviced that corruption, the London companies that invested it, the properties in New York and Australia that were bought with it, and the Kenyan currency that it debased, making it more expensive for every Kenyan to buy things from petrol to rice. It is also about a Kenyan government left without the adequate funds necessary for investing in a nation-wide program of malaria treatment, thus eventually costing the lives of thousands of Kenyan people. So as WikiLeaks’ co-founder and director Julian Assange points out, “the whole world is connected economically when you're dealing with serious crimes, or serious abuses" (ForaTV, 2010). Paulo Freire and WikiLeaks – The Critical Consciousness of Scientific Journalism A primary aspect to the WikiLeaks model is the publication of original source material alongside the news stories that emanate from them. This enables readers to critically analyze the story for themselves within the context of the original source material, in order to more clearly “see evidence of the truth” (WikiLeaks, n.d.). This form of “scientific journalism” WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 10 (Scola, 2010) helps rectify the inherent imbalance of power created within standard journalism, in which readers are unable to verify the truth of what they are being told (Scola, 2010). This ability to archive and access such source material is a model which can be applied to information which is used in all manner of journalistic and pedagogical endeavors, material “which has traditionally remained largely invisible to the audience of their conduits” (Skully, 2011). This scientific-like approach can be seen to represent journalism and the processes of pedagogical inquiry in their most pure and democratic form. It provides a key component to creating what Freire called “critically transitive consciousness” (Freire, 1974/2007, p. 14), which is characterized “by the testing of one’s ‘findings’ and openness to revision; by the attempt to avoid distortion when perceiving problems and to avoid preconceived notions when analyzing them” (Freire, 1974/2007, p. 14). Critical transitivity is characteristic of authentic democratic regimes, and corresponds to restlessly interrogative and dialogical life (Freire, 1974/2007, p. 14) The direct link between those who have the knowledge and those who wield the power was understood centuries ago by the English scientist and philosopher Francis Bacon. He, like WikiLeaks today and Paulo Freire in his time, called for the rejection of inherited theories and methods of pursuing inquiry, and was a champion for the implementation of new scientific practices (Bacon, 1620). Today, the WikiLeaks model champions the implementation of new “scientific” practices for a better way of learning and educating ourselves, by making information available that is relevant to our civic and cultural lives. Just as any scientific assertion needs to be based upon empirical evidence to be considered valid, the fundamental premise of the WikiLeaks model asserts that the deliberative processes of democracy should be rooted upon a foundation of similar standards of WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 11 empirically valid evidence (WikiLeaks, n.d.). For as there exists the practice of “pseudoscience,” violating the ethical code of legitimate science and contaminating its respect and standing in society, there exists the practice of “pseudo-democracy,” which violates the principles of legitimate democratic governance and perilously compromises its ability to command lawful authority. Promoting governing policies based upon consciously incomplete or illegitimate information, in order to secure the camouflage of democratic sanction for them, can be seen in the same light as advancing scientific findings founded upon unverifiable or illegitimate information. As the model for a new critical pedagogy first proposed by Freire quickly spread throughout the world, so has the WikiLeaks model become a template for many new and increasingly mission-specific organizations (Brunton, 2011). Included among these are such enterprises as the WikiLeaks spin-off OpenLeaks, the Russian organization RosPil (focused on the rooting out of government corruption), ThaiLeaks (featuring Thai-related material on WikiLeaks), BrusselsLeaks (focusing on the EU), PriateLeaks (a Czech version of WikiLeaks), TuniLeaks (publishing Tunisia-specific materials from the WikiLeaks cable releases), which played an inspired role in the Tunisian revolutionary uprising at the end of 2010. Today there are even direct-to-journalist channels for leaks, such Al Jazeera’s “Transparency Unit,” which was responsible for publishing The Palestine Papers (Brunton, 2011), detailing previously unknown levels of complicity by representatives of the Palestinian Authority in accommodating Israeli efforts to continue their expansionist plans over Palestinian territory (Carlstrom, 2011). Revolution and Resistance “To affirm people’s need for freedom, yet to do nothing tangible to make this affirmation a reality, is a farce” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 50). This declaration by Paulo Freire parallels the WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 12 central, constitutional philosophy of the WikiLeaks model, which contends that to affirm the people’s need for accurate information in order to make possible their meaningful involvement in the decisions of democratic governance, but to not provide that information or the education necessary to engage in the critical thought required to effectively comprehend it and act upon it, is a farce. As James Madison, author of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, and one of the principle founders of the original American republic declared: A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives (The James Madison Project, 1998). It is not surprising to find that WikiLeaks takes a good portion of its philosophical direction and “its heart from the American Revolution” (ForaTV, 2010), as their choice in publishing has been aimed in some degree “to spread the philosophy of James Madison to the rest of the world,” for “if people are to govern themselves, they must have the power that knowledge will bring, because knowledge will always rule ignorance” (ForaTV, 2010). It is in this that the work of WikiLeaks, as well as that of Paulo Freire’s model of “education as a subversive force” (Shaull, 2000, p. 29), are inherently radical in nature. This is if we are to understand “radical” to mean thinking forcefully and originally about the possibility of changing existing institutions and attempting to put those ideas into effect (Foner, 1976/2005, p. xxxiv). And like all truly revolutionary initiatives, they have been aggressively opposed by those who control the institutions of the existing structures of power. WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 13 In both the cases of Paulo Freire and that of WikiLeaks, there has been a history of being hounded, threatened, and persecuted by state authority. Freire was arrested, imprisoned, and exiled from Brazil by the military junta for his “subversive method” (Gerhardt, 1993, p. 444). His works were banned in areas throughout the world, forbidden to be read under threat of cruel punishment and even imprisonment (Shaull, 2000, p. 12). WikiLeaks has been hounded by state and corporate power around the world, from the governments of China to Iran to that of the United States. They have seemingly become enemy number one among such diverse institutions as the Church of Scientology, Bank Julius Bear, the Pentagon, and now Bank of America (WikiLeaks, n.d.). Its computer servers have been shut down (Arthur & Halliday, 2010), mechanisms for its fundraising impeded (The New York Times, December 25, 2010), and efforts to intimidate and discredit its employees and public supporters pursued with vigor (Greenwald, February 11, 2011). There have even been university officials leveling threats towards their students regarding potentially adverse consequences to their future career potential if they should pursue discussing, posting, or disseminating information gleaned from material released by WikiLeaks (Tanzer, 2010). Whereas Freire was accused by the Brazilian junta of fomenting “Bolshevik” revolution and being “a traitor to Christ and the Brazilian people” (Scatamburlo-D'Annibale, Suoranta, Jaramillo & McLaren, 2006), WikiLeaks’ director Julian Assange has been similarly defamed as a “high-tech terrorist” by such figures as the Vice President of the United States (Naureckas, 2011), and the work of his organization vilified as an act of “information terrorism” (D’Aprile, 2010). Various political figures in the U.S. and Canada have appealed for Assange’s extrajudicial detention (Greenwald, October 29, 2010), and some have even openly called for his assassination (NowPublic Staff, 2010). WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 14 Freire observed that agents of oppression “react almost instinctively against any experiment in education which stimulates the critical faculties and is not content with a partial view of reality but always seeks out the ties which link one point to another and one problem to another” (Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 73-74). Similarly, WikiLeaks was “almost instinctively” and universally attacked (Assange, 2010) as being “irresponsible” (Dunt, 2010), and an agent of “anarchy” (Ketcham, 2011) for embarking upon its new “experiment in education.” This effort has been focused on expanding what has been to date only “a partial view of reality” among the broad population of citizenry, seeking to create more a effective understanding of the ties which link one aspect of power to the effects of another. WikiLeaks, like Freire before them, is not interested in pursuing any specific sectarian agenda or politically partisan stance, as the wide diversity in the subjects and the sourcing of the information they have published would affirm. Rather, their related efforts have at their heart been about challenging structures of power which rely on oppressive systems of control, maintained primordially through the enforcement of ignorance. This ignorance has to be perpetually imposed upon a large enough segment of the population, so as to be able to prevent it from organizing a credible threat to the dominant group’s continued maintainance of that power. The WikiLeaks model is about providing authentic information in order to allow citizens to crtically assess the validity of power’s claim to legitimacy. For Freire, the true goal of education was not to “win the people over” to one’s side, but to truly liberate and be liberated with them from an oppressive situation (Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 94-95). This is accomplished through a knowing dialogue with people regarding the truth of both their objective situation and their awareness of that situation - in which there is attained a lucid understanding regarding the truth of the world in which and with which they exist (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 95). Freire was a critic of oppression, regardless of whether it WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 15 emanated from the left or the right (Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 37-39). Even the so-called “revolutionary” government of Cuba, though having brought Freire to Cuba, declined to implement his ideas because it felt that it had no further use for them since the revolution had already been won (Temple, 2005). Pedagogical programs for encouraging critical thought among the people does not seem to appeal to those in power as particularly useful endeavors to be pursued. Knowledge Is The Means – Justice Is The Goal Paulo Freire’s pedagogical model for developing critical consciousness, and WikiLeaks model for information transparency, though utilizing separate techniques, are both striving to attain the same goal…justice. For Freire, dialogue wasn’t the goal. Justice was the goal, dialogue the means to obtain it. Similarly with WikiLeaks, transparency isn’t the goal, it’s the means. WikiLeaks’ spokesman Julian Assange has often stated that “It is not our goal to achieve a more transparent society; it’s our goal to achieve a more just society” (Time, 2010). WikiLeaks helps make this possible by offering a new method for opening a space “for ordinary citizens to enter into discourse as an active agent to transform the monologue of authority into dialogue” (Hayase, 2010). It is, in Henry Giroux’s words regarding the work of Paulo Freire, about “taking citizens beyond the world they know in order to expand it… For pedagogy always presupposes some notion of a more equal and just future” (Giroux, 2010). Critical pedagogy is designed to move students toward a “critical perception of the world,” a more “correct perception of the world,” a “comprehension of total reality” (Shaull, 2000, pp. 19-20). This is exactly what WikiLeaks endeavors to do, through expanding access to the necessary knowledge for obtaining a more “correct perception of the world” and of “total reality.” This reality is not a static entity (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 92), and is one whose WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 16 nature must be accurately discerned by those participating in it, in order that they may effectively direct it along the path of the long “arc of justice” (King, Jr., 1968). The WikiLeaks model mirrors Freire’s belief in a substantive democracy, as well as “his deep and abiding faith in the ability of people to resist the weight of oppressive institutions and ideologies” (Giroux, 2010). It is a faith rooted in people’s inborn talent to be able to reason (Gerhardt, 1993, p. 443), and having trust in these talents “is an indispensible precondition for revolutionary change” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 60). WikiLeaks asserts that information’s legitimacy is not based upon the position of the authority that delivers it, but upon the deliberative processes within society (WikiLeaks, n.d.), where valid understanding of that information is crafted by the participation of those involved with it. No truth can be adequately understood without accounting for the perspectives of those who are affected by it, and particularly of those who suffer under it. (Judaken & Geddes, 2007). Trusting people with information relevant to their circumstances is essential to enabling them to make decisions regarding those circumstances, for “it is necessary to trust in the oppressed and in their ability to reason. Whoever lacks this trust will fail to initiate (or will abandon) dialogue, reflection, and communication” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 66). The WikiLeaks model fundamentally challenges the legitimacy of power equations, by directly challenging the communication line of conspired self-interests as a vital means of sustaining that power (Hayase, 2010). It reinforces Freire’s vision for overcoming previous forms of paternalistic relationships of power by people educating themselves through the mediation of the world (Shaull, 2000, p. 32). The ability of this education to effect actual change in the existing equations of unjust distributions of power in a society, is dependent upon people’s ability to transcend their own limited perspective of that reality. They must enter it critically by unveiling it for what it WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 17 truly is, for they must be “able to perceive reality and understand it in order to transform it” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 53). Only then can one become an agent of rational change within it. This is important in that it acknowledges that there is no ability for transformative action without the ability to access the information which reveals the true composition of that reality - the information that affects it, that details it, that creates it, that manipulates it. As the philosopher Carlos Steel lucidly declared: “Only those who know the causes of things will prevail” (Steel, 1989, p. 69). For to confront power is to essentially confront those who control information. The “leak” then becomes a catharsis for opening power that is closed to accountability (Hayase, 2010), for “as long as the oppressed remain unaware of the causes of their condition, they fatalistically ‘accept’ their exploitation” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 64). Opening government becomes an answer to injustice, as opposed to being an act causing it (WikiLeaks, n.d.). If a dictum of Freire’s was “I work, and working I transform the world” (Shaull, 2000, p. 33), WikiLeaks’ could be understood to be one of “I reveal, and by revealing I transform the world.” Banking Education, Banking Journalism, and Problem-Posing Solutions The WikiLeaks model represents a new form of praxis, one of and for a critical pedagogy which is enabled through the processes of information accessibility and transparency. As Paulo Freire recognized how education could be transformed from an instrument of oppression to one of liberation, so too can information be transformed in a similar way. Just as Freire endeavored to change the educational paradigm from one of a top-down, centralized transmission of knowledge, which he termed the “banking method” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 73), WikiLeaks has initiated a new paradigm for a more decentralized, peer-to-peer form of information access and sharing. This paradigm also exemplifies how the digital revolution in technology can provide further democratization of the public space WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 18 by “breaking down traditional social barriers of status, class, power, wealth and geography – replacing them with an ethos of collaboration and transparency” (Brooke, 2010). This breaking down of barriers between class and power, and their replacement by an ethos of cooperation and solidarity, was an important component of Freire’s critical educational model. His "see-judge-act" student-centered methods were designed to lead to critical consciousness, “that is, an awareness of the necessity to constantly unveil appearances designed to protect injustice,” and serve “as a foundation for action toward equality and democracy” (Gibson, n.d.). It was intended to be an antidote to the banking education model, which imposes a passive role upon people, designed to adapt them to the world as it is and to the “fragmented view of reality deposited in them” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 73). It functions as an instrument of a type of anschluss, facilitating the integration of people into the logic of the present system in order to bring about conformity to it (Shaull, p. 34). In it, the teacher confuses the “authority of knowledge” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 73), with his or her own professional authority, which they place in “opposition to the freedom of the students” (Freire,1970/2000, p. 73). The WikiLeaks model counters the effects of this “banking education” by providing people the means to better create a cohesive picture out of that “fragmented view of reality,” which is used to keep people themselves fragmented and incapable of pursuing an educated, organized, and effective response towards addressing and effectively changing the structures of oppression within which they exist. It also challenges the sectarian ideologues of all persuasions who look at history and at knowledge as something to be “given” to people to be received, not something to be created by them to be lived (Shaull, p. 39). Freire championed a pedagogy that works with, not for, those who are oppressed and disenfranchised within the WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 19 system (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 48), just as WikiLeaks analogously champions an information system that works with, not for people. Though the two models operate in different arenas - one education, the other our media system, particularly as it relates to the role of journalism - they both recognize that there is nothing neutral about the practice of either them. Whereas Freire exposed the partisanship which existed amongst a process of education which claimed to be objective in its intention (Gibson, n.d.), the work of WikiLeaks has exposed biases manifesting within the practice of a journalism which presents itself as devoted to a fair-minded objectivity in its approach (Johnson, 2010). It should be made clear that by the use of the term “journalism, I am not referring to the practice of journalism as exemplified by figures like George Seldes or Edward R. Murrow; the type of which Amy Goodman has described as representing the interests of the broad populace, striving to improve their situation by exposing injustices and wrong doing (Sood, 2006). The brand of authentic journalism they represent serves as the process for delivering what Richard Reeves once defined as real news, which he astutely observed as being the information you need to keep your freedoms (Moyers & Winship, 2011). The WikiLeaks model challenges what journalism has predominately become - a subsidiary arm of government and corporate interests (which are becoming increasingly indistinguishable from each other), going from being “the Fourth Estate to being for the state” (Sood, 2006). The process has become more of a “Fourth Estate sale”, where many of its practitioners seem quite willing to engage in the “trading of truth for access” (Sood, 2006). Much as “journalists” work for Chinese state media today, or wrote for Pravda during the days of Communist rule in the Soviet Union, today’s journalists in the west can often be found uncritically parroting the official line of state and corporate power (Greenwald, December WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 20 28, 2010), serving power rather than challenging it. (Analysis of this phenomenon is grounds for further discourse beyond the scope of this paper). It is within this media environment that the WikiLeaks model has arrived, challenging journalism in much the same that Freire’s “problem-posing” model of critical pedagogy (Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 82-85) did to education. The WikiLeaks model challenges journalism’s reliance on “official” and “authorized” sources of information for failing to effectively encourage people to critically consider reality, since extensive portions of information regarding that reality are purposely kept from the realm of public consciousness. This form of “banking journalism” operates much in the manner of how Freire described the banking model of education, one designed to adapt the majority to the “purposes which the dominant minority prescribe for them” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 76). It is a model well suited to the purposes of oppression, for the maintenance of power is dependent upon “how well people fit the world” dominant power has created, “and how little they question it” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 76). For example, it is this kind of uncritical acceptance of what is presented by power through the media that leads to people fighting and dying in Iraq because, it is proclaimed, a homicidal dictator is poised to attack with weapons of mass destruction. The existence of disturbing amounts of information contradicting this assertion, showing that administration officials knew that the case against Iraq was “thin,” and that “Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran” (The Downing Street Memo(s), n.d.), is not allowed into the public discourse, as this would interfere with the plans and interests of the dominant contingent of ruling power. It is this same influential force which is used to breathlessly exhort to the citizenry, that literally trillions of dollars of public money needs to be provided to private banking interests in order WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 21 to preserve the very foundation of the nation’s economic integrity. It is insisted that this must be done, regardless of the overwhelming evidence as to the complicity of these same financial institutions in creating the crisis in the first place, and the documented evidence of their lack of interest or intention in addressing the systemic causes for the dangerous instability (Taibbi, 2011). This is a banking method being utilized, both in education and journalism, as a method of domination (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 79), one which effectively consigns the individual to the role of a “spectator, not re-creator” of the world in which they live (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 75). The antidote to this “banking” process is the “problem-posing” method (Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 79-81). Like the WikiLeaks model of advancing justice through informational transparency, Freire’s problem-posing method of education “involves a constant unveiling of reality” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 81). This represents their mutually shared perspective that education should not be about delivering “narratives” concerning reality, but about expanding the people’s capacity for a critical cognitive understanding of that reality, and developing methods for organizing effective responses to that reality in order to transform it (Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 80-81). The WikiLeaks model serves to provide access to information which is necessary for deepening the people’s “consciousness of their situation” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 85), emphasizing Freire’s point that it is essential for people to be critically objective about their reality in order to change it (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 85). Problem-posing education confronts traditional banking education’s attempts to mythicize reality, “to conceal certain facts which explain the way human beings exist in the world” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 83). Whereas the banking form resists dialogue, problemposing education regards dialogue as indispensible to the act of cognition which unveils WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 22 reality (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 83). It does this through a number of didactic educational resources, which are utilized for generating a deeper critical consciousness. One such technique includes reading and discussion of various media sources. This is done in order to develop what Freire considered to be an indispensible capability for a person; one that enables them to critically analyze the contents of information being published, and to be able to effectively discern the reasons and motives behind why different sources have such differing interpretations of the same reported facts (Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 122-123). WikiLeaks provides a prime model for this process of content analysis. For example, by their providing the exact same set of informational data regarding the Iraq War, at the exact same time to three differing news organizations (Der Spiegel, The Guardian, and The New York Times), it presented the conditions for a more accurate study of media bias through analysis of how these different organizations presented the information. What information was included and excluded, what facts were emphasized or minimized, could be empirically studied (Johnson, 2010). The reasons, for instance, why The New York Time's published reports focusing seven times less attention on the civilian cost of the war than did The Guardian's (Johnson, 2010), become grounds for an exercise in real critical analysis within the didactic educational processes inherent to the problem-posing model. This exemplifies some of the value and importance of the work being done by organizations such as WikiLeaks, which are actively engaged in combatting the conditions of what Freire diagnosed as a process of “massification” (Freire, 1974/2007, pp. 29-36), providing people “the illusion of being educated,…of being able to understand and control their circumstances” (Temple, 2005). This process is a condition particularly prevalent within our modern mass media systems, to say nothing of being fundamentally enabled by them, as it all-too-often is in the business of informing while providing the illusion of being WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 23 informed. The WikiLeaks model serves as a counteragent within such a media system, for challenging oppressive systems of power today means challenging “their false perception of reality,” which they promote in order to maintain that control (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 86). By removing information from the exclusive domain of “the experts,” many of whom function in the service of the institutions which comprise the dominant system of power (Chomsky, 1997), the WikiLeaks model undermines the democratically negative effects of banking journalism. It is then that “[t]he world – no longer something to be described with deceptive words – becomes the object of that transforming action by men and which which results in their humanization” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 86). Conclusion In a society that envisions itself to be one validated by the principles of democratic governance, one in which the sovereignty of that governance is legitimized by the informed consent of the governed, the processes for informing that consent become fundamental to defining that legitimacy. The educational and informational models developed by Paulo Freire and the organization WikiLeaks respectively, are instrumental to the provision of the necessary critical discourse and the rational, realistic perspective needed for effectively enabling the democratic endeavor. The integrity of this process cannot be indefinitely maintained in the face of powerful pressures or inducements to restrict the availability, or manipulate or dilute the veracity, of the information necessary for a truly democratic pedagogy to take place. This is why Freire understood the fundamental theme of our human epoch to be one of domination, and thus why its opposite, liberation, is the primary object to be achieved (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 103). His is a program for addressing unjust power, and those who use that power to oppress and exploit those without it, in order to sustain their own benefits and WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 24 advantages they glean from having it. In today’s “information age,” that power lies primarily with those who exert control over that information and effective access to it. This information is used to engineer and chaperon the dialogic processes which take place within society, particularly those which are sustained upon and shaped by mass mediated networks of communication. These networks are primarily influenced by, if not outright controlled, by the dominant institutions within society, and are flooded with their monologues of assertions and informational distortions. These distortions are eminently responsible for the “fragmentations of reality” which undermine people’s ability to achieve the critical understanding of that reality necessary for changing it. The WikiLeaks model inspires a critical awareness of that reality, one that provides a more “total vision of [its] context,” in order to “achieve a clearer perception of the whole” (Freire, 1970/2000, p. 104) necessary for operative democratic change. The processes formulated by Paulo Freire and by WikiLeaks both occupy what Henry Giroux called “the often difficult space between existing politics and the as yet possible,” providing us the opening to approach politics as “inseparable from how we come to understand the world, power and the moral life we aspire to lead” (Giroux, 2010). These processes are ultimately about investing people with the opportunity and the ability to take agency over the conditions of their own lives, and that of the society in which they live. This agency represents the freedom to cultivate an ethically just society, one in which sovereign authority is sanctioned by a truly democratic consent that is ennobled by an authentically informed, and pedagogically cultivated knowledge. It is a society where knowledge isn’t the domain of authority, but the basis of it. WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 25 Bibliography Arthur, C. & Halliday, J. (2010, December 3). WikiLeaks fights to stay online after US company withdraws domain name. guardian.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-knocked-off-net-dnseverydns Assange, J. (2010, December 8). Don’t shoot the messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths. The Australian. Retrieved from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/indepth/wikileaks/dont-shoot-messenger-for-revealing-uncomfortable-truths/story-fn775xjq1225967241332 Bacon, F. (1620). Novum organum. Retrieved from the Hanover Historical Texts Project website: http://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/111bac2.html Banks and WikiLeaks. [Editorial]. (2010, December 25). The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26sun3.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss Brooke, H. (2010, November 29). WikiLeaks: The revolution has begun - and it will be digitised. guardian.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/29/the-revolution-will-be-digitised Brunton, F. (2011, April 4). After WikiLeaks, us. The New Everyday. Retrieved from http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/tne/pieces/after-wikileaks-us Carlstrom, G. (2011, January 23). Introducing the Palestine papers. Al Jazeera. Retrieved from http://english.aljazeera.net/palestinepapers/2011/01/201112214310263628.html Chomsky, N. (1997, June). What makes mainstream media mainstream; From a talk at Z Media Institute. Media Lens. Retrieved from http://www.medialens.org/articles/the_articles/articles_2001/nc_Studying_the_Media.htm WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 26 D’Aprile, S. (2010, December 5). Gingrich: Leaks show Obama administration 'shallow,' 'amateurish.’ TheHill.com. Retrieved from http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefingroom/news/132037-gingrich-blames-obama-on-wikileaks-labels-assange-a-terrorist Dunt, I. (2010, November 29). Comment: The hypocrisy of the media attack on WikiLeaks. Politics.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.politics.co.uk/comment/culture-media-andSport/comment-the-hypocrisy-of-the-media-attack-on-wikileaks-$21385948.htm The Downing Street Memo(s). Retrieved March 10, 2011 from http://downingstreetmemo.com/ Foner, E. (2005). Tom Paine and revolutionary America (Updated ed.). New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1976). ForaTV. (2010, December 30). Julian Assange: Why WikiLeaks is taking on the Pentagon. Retrieved January 10, 2011 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbFvSCsMF3s Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary. ed.) (Myra B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum. (Original work published 1968, English translation 1970). Freire, P. (1998). Teachers as cultural workers - Letters to those who dare teach. (Donoldo Macedo, Dale Koike, & Alexandre Oliveira, Trans.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press Freire, P. (2007). Education for critical consciousness. (Myra B. Ramos, Trans.). London: Continuum. (Original work published 1974). Gerhardt, H-P. (1993). Paulo Freire (1921-97). Prospects: the quarterly review of comparative education (Paris, UNESCO: International Bureau of Education), XXIII(3-4), 439-458. Gibson, R. (n.d.). Paulo Freire and revolutionary pedagogy for social justice. Retrieved from http://richgibson.com/freirecriticaledu.htm WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 27 Giroux, H. (2010, November 23). Lessons to be learned from Paulo Freire as education is being taken over by the mega rich. Truthout. Retrieved from http://www.truth-out.org/ lessons-be-learned-from-paulo-freire-education-is-being-taken-over-mega-rich65363 Greenwald, G. (2010, October 29). The wretched mind of the American authoritarian. Salon.com. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/10/29/goldberg Greenwald, G. (2010, December 28). The merger of journalists and government officials. Salon.com. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/28/cnnn/index.html Greenwald, G. (2011, February 11). The leaked campaign to attack WikiLeaks and its supporters. Salon.com. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/02/11/campaigns/index.html Greenwald, G. (2011, October 10). The real danger from classified leaks. Salon.com. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/2011/10/10/the_real_danger_from_classified_leaks/singleton/ Hatcher, W. S. (1990). Logic and logos: Essays on science, religion and philosophy. Oxford: George Ronald. Hayase, N. (2010, December 6). WikiLeaks revelation: Prophetic diplomacy for the global age. A World Beyond Borders. Retrieved from http://aworldbeyondborders.com/2010/12/06/wikileaks-revelation-propheticdiplomacy-for-the-global-age/ Hillar, M. (1993). Liberation theology: Religious response to social problems. A survey. In M. Hillar & H. R. Leuchtag (Eds.) Humanism and Social Issues. Anthology of Essays (pp. 35-52). Houston, TX: American Humanist Association. WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 28 Jaffer, J. (2011, April 6). National security: When secrecy is a weapon. The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-jaffernationalsecurity-20110406,0,5838521.story Johnson, E. M. (2010, July 20). Analysis of civilian casualties in WikiLeaks Afghan file reveals media bias. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-michael-johnson/analysis-of-civiliancasu_b_660273.html Joldersma, C. (1999). The tension between justice and freedom in Paulo Freire’s faith-full pedagogy. Retrieved from the Calvin College website at http://www.calvin.edu/~cjolders/WHAM99paper.html Jones, S. (2010, October 26). Fox News: WikiLeaks should be declared 'enemy combatants'. guardian.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/26/wikileaksfox-iraq-war-logs Judaken, J. & Geddes, J. L. (2007). Black intellectuals in America: A conversation with Cornel West. The Hedgehog Review, Spring 2007, 84. Retrieved from http://www.iasc-culture.org/HHR_Archives/Intellectuals/9.1IWest.pdf Ketcham, C. (2011, March 22). No laws, no secrets: The anarchist creed of Julian Assange. Truthdig. Retrieved from http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/no_laws_no_secrets_the_anarchist_creed_of_ julian_assange_20110322/ King, Jr. M. L. (1968, March 31). Remaining awake through a great revolution. Speech presented at the National Cathedral, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from The Martin Luther King Jr. Research and Education Institute website: http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/ index.php/kingpapers/article/remaining_awake_through_a_great_revolution/ WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 29 Moyers, B. & Winship, M. (2011, March 18). NPR: The saga continues. Bill Moyers Journal. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/ blog/2011/03/bill_moyers_and_michael_winshi_1.html Naureckas, J. (2011, February). When journalism becomes ‘terrorism’: The dangerous sport of calling WikiLeaks names. Extra!. Retrieved from http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4247 NowPublic Staff (2010, December 1). Tom Flanagan: 'Julian Assange should be assassinated' (video). NowPublic.com. Retrieved from http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/tomflanagan-julian-assange-should-be-assassinated-video-2733731.html#ixzz1KT3I7RZS Scatamburlo-D'Annibale, V., Suoranta, J, Jaramillo, N., & McLaren, P. (2006). Farewell to the "bewildered herd": Paulo Freire's revolutionary dialogical communication in the age of corporate globalization. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, November 2006, 4(2). Retrieved from http://www.jceps.com/?pageID=article&articleID=65 Scola, N. (2010, June 2). Julian Assange’s vision of a ‘scientific journalism’. Tech President; Personal Democracy Forum. Retrieved from http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/julianassanges-vision-%E2%80%98scientific-journalism%E2%80%99 Shaull, R. (2000). Introduction. In P. Freire, Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.) (Myra B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum. Shor, I. (1992). Empowering Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Skully. (2011, March 8). WikiLeaks: A new modus of radical journalism. Smashing Skulls. Retrieved from http://skullyadams.com/2011/03/08/wikileaks-new-radical-journalism/ Smith, M. K. (1997/2002). Paulo Freire and informal education. The encyclopaedia of informal education. Retrieved April 26, 2011 from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/ et-freir.htm WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 30 Sood, S. (2006, April 14). Conversation with Amy Goodman. WireTap. Retrieved from http://www.wiretapmag.org/stories/34989/ Steel, C. (1989). Historische Inleiding tot de Wijsbergeerte. Leuven: Leuven University Press. Taibbi, M. (2011, February 16). Why isn’t Wall Street in jail? Rolling Stone. Retrieved from http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216 Tanzer, M. (2010, December 6). Columbia University retracts WikiLeaks warning. Village Voice. Retrieved from http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2010/12/columbia_retrac.phpVillage Voice Temple, C. (2005, June 24). Critical thinking and critical literacy. Critical Thinking International, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.criticalthinkinginternational.org/ component/content/article/7-resources/22-critical-literacy The James Madison Project (1998, October 5). The James Madison Project Begins Operations. Retrieved April 20, 2011 from http://www.jamesmadisonproject.org/press.php?press_id=18 Time. (2010, December 1). Time’s Julian Assange interview: Full transcript/audio. Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2034040-1,00.html Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA Res. 217A, UN GAOR, 3rd Sess., Pt. I, Resolutions at 71, UN Doc. A/810 (1948) (UDHR). Available at http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/3/ares3.htm Warman, M. (2010, February 1). WikiLeaks: Top 5 leaks. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7128244/WikiLeaks-Top-5-leaks.html What Is Critical Pedagogy? (n.d.). Critical Pedagogy on the Web. Retrieved April 22, 2011 from http://mingo.info-science.uiowa.edu/~stevens/critped/definitions.htm WIKILEAKS AND THE AUTHORITY OF KNOWLEDGE 31 What Is WikiLeaks? (n.d.) Retrieved April 18, 2011 from the WikiLeaks website: http://www.wikileaks.ch/About.html Youssef, N. A. (2010, November 28). No evidence that WikiLeaks releases have hurt anyone. McClatchy Newspapers. Retrieved from http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/11/28/v-print/1947638/no-evidence-that-wikileaksreleases.html