

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The question of whether we want a real 'net is really the question of whether we want a real democracy."
That's what Douglas Rushkoff said on Saturday at the Personal Democracy Forum's conference on WikiLeaks. Real democracy comes with messy things we sometimes don't like--and one of those things is getting a boatload of attention.
"The question of whether we want a real 'net is really the question of whether we want a real democracy."
That's what Douglas Rushkoff said on Saturday at the Personal Democracy Forum's conference on WikiLeaks. Real democracy comes with messy things we sometimes don't like--and one of those things is getting a boatload of attention.
What seems to be becoming most provocative of all are distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on companies who've taken reprisals against Wikileaks. Dutch police just arrested a 16-year-old boy for taking part in pro-WikiLeaks cyber attacks against MasterCard and Visa. Tech writer and activist Deanna Zandt wrote of the PDF forum that there too, DDoS absorbed most of the crowd's attention. People might be afraid of giving a stamp of approval to DDoS as a political tool because it would make it okay for their political enemies to use it against them, Zandt suggests.
But while we debate freedom on the Internet and the possibility for fighting back on the Web, we often move away from the bigger point: the destabilization we should be concerned about is the destabilizing effect of US policy around the world, as revealed by the leaked cables. Covert wars in Yemen, Pakistan, the Middle East. Pro-corporate intervention to scuttle climate talks. . . it's not just MasterCard and Visa cutting off WikiLeaks' access to donations, it's the government and corporate intervention, unsupervised, into the freedoms and rights of people around the world.
It can be sexy to talk about digital direct action, but as Deanna wrote, tech activists and political activists, especially in the US, bring a tremendous amount of privilege to the table. We have the ability and freedom to take risks for the benefit of those who don't have those freedoms. While we're thinking about digital action, let's not forget the reason the WikiLeaks information is important in the first place: those people who aren't in the room to speak for themselves.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
"The question of whether we want a real 'net is really the question of whether we want a real democracy."
That's what Douglas Rushkoff said on Saturday at the Personal Democracy Forum's conference on WikiLeaks. Real democracy comes with messy things we sometimes don't like--and one of those things is getting a boatload of attention.
What seems to be becoming most provocative of all are distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on companies who've taken reprisals against Wikileaks. Dutch police just arrested a 16-year-old boy for taking part in pro-WikiLeaks cyber attacks against MasterCard and Visa. Tech writer and activist Deanna Zandt wrote of the PDF forum that there too, DDoS absorbed most of the crowd's attention. People might be afraid of giving a stamp of approval to DDoS as a political tool because it would make it okay for their political enemies to use it against them, Zandt suggests.
But while we debate freedom on the Internet and the possibility for fighting back on the Web, we often move away from the bigger point: the destabilization we should be concerned about is the destabilizing effect of US policy around the world, as revealed by the leaked cables. Covert wars in Yemen, Pakistan, the Middle East. Pro-corporate intervention to scuttle climate talks. . . it's not just MasterCard and Visa cutting off WikiLeaks' access to donations, it's the government and corporate intervention, unsupervised, into the freedoms and rights of people around the world.
It can be sexy to talk about digital direct action, but as Deanna wrote, tech activists and political activists, especially in the US, bring a tremendous amount of privilege to the table. We have the ability and freedom to take risks for the benefit of those who don't have those freedoms. While we're thinking about digital action, let's not forget the reason the WikiLeaks information is important in the first place: those people who aren't in the room to speak for themselves.
"The question of whether we want a real 'net is really the question of whether we want a real democracy."
That's what Douglas Rushkoff said on Saturday at the Personal Democracy Forum's conference on WikiLeaks. Real democracy comes with messy things we sometimes don't like--and one of those things is getting a boatload of attention.
What seems to be becoming most provocative of all are distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on companies who've taken reprisals against Wikileaks. Dutch police just arrested a 16-year-old boy for taking part in pro-WikiLeaks cyber attacks against MasterCard and Visa. Tech writer and activist Deanna Zandt wrote of the PDF forum that there too, DDoS absorbed most of the crowd's attention. People might be afraid of giving a stamp of approval to DDoS as a political tool because it would make it okay for their political enemies to use it against them, Zandt suggests.
But while we debate freedom on the Internet and the possibility for fighting back on the Web, we often move away from the bigger point: the destabilization we should be concerned about is the destabilizing effect of US policy around the world, as revealed by the leaked cables. Covert wars in Yemen, Pakistan, the Middle East. Pro-corporate intervention to scuttle climate talks. . . it's not just MasterCard and Visa cutting off WikiLeaks' access to donations, it's the government and corporate intervention, unsupervised, into the freedoms and rights of people around the world.
It can be sexy to talk about digital direct action, but as Deanna wrote, tech activists and political activists, especially in the US, bring a tremendous amount of privilege to the table. We have the ability and freedom to take risks for the benefit of those who don't have those freedoms. While we're thinking about digital action, let's not forget the reason the WikiLeaks information is important in the first place: those people who aren't in the room to speak for themselves.