#wikileaks party

[tsunderbae]

Interesting.

I've been on a research spree regarding the tragedy in Odessa... curious how after an hour or two of researching, the website I was getting most of my information from (the official Wikileaks Party website) suddenly shut down and denied any access to it.

This has been happening quite frequently.  Every time I go on any sort of research spree, my main source of information is blocked from my computer.

Funny, considering I don't do much other then share information.

[whowaits4everanyway]

Julian Assange calls out to volunteers for the 2013 senate elections.

[doesthatmeanwecanmakeout]

ATTENTION AUSSIES

VOTE [1] WIKILEAKS PARTY INTO THE SENATE

IM NOT USUALLY POLITICAL BUT SERIOUSLY

JULIAN ASSANGE IS AWESOME GO VOTE HIM INTO SENATE

FUCK LIBERAL

THIS HAS BEEN A MESSAGE FROM A PERSON WHO CANT VOTE BUT WANTS TO

[countessofthecourt]

Just voted, went under the line too

[axvoter]

Blatantly Partisan Party Review XXV: Wikileaks Party

Despite Julian Assange residing on the other side of the world in an Ecuadorean embassy, the Wikileaks Party is very real and Assange is the lead candidate on their Senate ticket in Victoria. The party had a promising start, and looked like it might attract a decent protest vote, but it has been quickly unravelling after Group Voting Tickets were released. At least this means some people are paying attention to preferences.

What do they offer the progressive voter?

As you can imagine, Wikileaks’ platform is built upon a commitment to transparency and accountability in government, with an emphasis on a free flow of information and protections for whistleblowers. Their policies, however, are more diverse than just that. They support radical change to media policy to inject greater diversity, they possess a commitment to Internet freedoms, and they object to any privatisation of the ABC and SBS. Their policy towards asylum seekers is also positive – they want to reverse the PNG solution, cap mandatory detention of boat arrivals at 45 days for health and security checks, and repeal the excision of Australia from its own migration zone. Wikileaks also accept the scientific evidence of anthropogenic climate change and the need to reduce emissions. They acknowledge that some of Australia’s coal deposits must be left undisturbed and endorse incentives for renewables.

What problematic policies do they have?

The Wikileaks Party website has a fairly narrow platform and does not comment on the economy. Assange, however, has professed to be a libertarian and admires Ron Paul and Rand Paul in the US. My past critique of libertarianism stands; Assange may not be quite as radical as the Liberal Democrats but his acknowledgement that markets need to be forced to be free to avoid monopoly is little comfort when he is espousing support for a doctrine as anathema to social democracy as libertarianism.

There are also serious personnel issues. I don’t just mean the rape allegations against Assange that awkwardly loom above his candidature – though I understand why that would dissuade some people from supporting Wikileaks. The party has quite simply unravelled of late, with some very damning resignation statements, e.g. here and here. The party may tout transparency and accountability, yet it has not operated in a very transparent or accountable fashion. You can make your own judgements from the statements, but to me they reveal a party that has been poorly organised, framed in a democratic manner but run in a way to subvert and avoid those processes. My ability to take the Wikileaks Party seriously and to believe a Wikileaks Senator would be a positive influence has markedly declined after this sorry saga.

Where are their preferences going in Victoria?

Victoria’s preferences have not attracted controversy, unlike New South Wales and Western Australia. Their Victorian preferences flow first to the likes of the Pirates and the Sex Party, though the Liberal Democrats are worrisomely high for anybody not a fan of their hardcore libertarianism. Of the major parties, the Greens are preferenced above the ALP and both above the Coalition; right down the bottom are most of the fundamentalist parties, climate sceptics, and outdoor recreation zealots.

Progressive voters in NSW and WA, however, should tread with caution. In NSW, Wikileaks have preferenced the Shooters and Fishers Party and the Nazis of Australia First above the Greens. Australia First is morally repugnant and the Shooters are genuinely concerning as tthey will be competing with the Greens and others for the final Senate seat. I imagine very few Wikileaks voters would prefer a Shooters and Fishers Senator to a Greens Senator, especially given the support the Greens have given to Wikileaks. Speaking of which, in WA preferences flow not to the Greens’ Scott Ludlam, a tireless supporter of Wikileaks, but to the Nationals and then to Ludlam. Wikileaks’ lead candidate in WA does not even appear apologetic. Ludlam has every right to feel betrayed. I would urge every Wikileaks voter in NSW and WA to vote below the line and allocate your own preferences to subvert the dodgy deals the party has made – deals that may not have been an “administrative error”, and even if they were, reflect poorly on the party. How can you mess up something as simple as submitting your preferences in the correct order to the AEC? If you can’t do that, why should you be trusted with even greater responsibilities?

Website: https://www.wikileaksparty.org.au/

[hypnictwitch]

Julian Assange lip-syncing to John Farnham's The Voice (WikiLeaks Party campaign ad, 2013) Oh yes. This happened.

[hotspotsnews]

Watch A Free Preview of the unreleased documentary "The Assange Agenda" Pay with a Tweet, a Like or a Linkedin share at http://hotspots.co/watch-a-free-preview-of-the-assange-agenda/