Wikileaks Exposes Thinking that Brought Down Soviet Union

Taking a step back, Wikileaks raises a very interesting similarity between today's western political/corporate hierarchy and the state of affairs in the Soviet Union in the '60s.

The Soviet powers that be in the '50s had excellent technical know-how and could have theoretically built up a highly computerized infrastructure in the '60s to the '80s, as was the case in the west.

However, one of the major stumbling blocks to computerization for the Soviets appeared when they saw how general accessibility of computers would bring down the walls of secrecy and duplicity that were embedded in all aspects of Soviet society.

It may not be established that specific decisions were made to severely limit the role of computers in society, but it is obvious that managers, directors and leaders in all sectors of Soviet society would have run into the same problems as they contemplated computerization. The conflict between "expediting" information and "controlling" information was just too strong to overcome.

This dichotomy is well illustrated in the following table, showing the "ideal" goals of the Soviet economy and how those goals actually broke down in reality:

Idealized Ministry Goals                  

1. maximize and optimize production 

2. optimal, minimal levels of inventory
3. release labour
4. realistically evaluate capacity
5. maximize plan flexiblity
6. evaluate performance realistically
7. use computer to audit, control, etc.
8. improve data processing

Actual Manager Goals

1. fulfill the plan so next years' targets can be met

2. acquire as many supplies as possible

3. hoard labour

4. understate capacity

5. minimize changes in plan targets

6. overstate performance if necessary

7. avoid dangerous revelations to superiors, find out as much as possible about subordinates

8. improve data processing
 Chart by William McHenry and Seymour Goodman, borrowed from Left Behind: Computing in the USSR.
 
The difficulties of accommodating computerization in this system where maintaining the status quo was to the advantage of all the power brokers is obvious.
 
Therein the major reason for the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union. The leaders simply couldn't face up to all the lies that would be exposed - thereby authoring their own demise, as other nations began to implement computers and operate much more efficiently.

Now, back to 2010 and a political / corporate hierarchy suddenly being confronted with flat out transparency where no such thing was expected. Bring back memories of Brezhnev and the great stagnation? And what will be the end result?

Of course there is the "lash out" response we are currently seeing, led by such simplistic organizations as Paypal and Amazon. In fact, we may be witnessing the beginning of a new era here of accountability and transparency.

Ultimately, increased transparency and accountability should result in a more level playing field for all individuals to work, play and compete in.


Perhaps accepting this new level of accountability will be key in moving society to another level?

The question is: who plays the role of the USSR in this modern day scenario?

JSF F-35 Charade: U.S./Norway Tricked Sweden, SAAB

More fallout from the Wikileaks diplomatic cables.

This time it's the latest of a multitude of set-backs and embarrassments for the JSF F-35 fighter program.

"We must continue to act like an honourable and elegant competitor" -US Oslo Embassy

According to the cables, Norway and the U.S. were both involved in a charade of pretending that Norway had an interest in purchasing Swedish SAAB "Gripen" fighters, whereas in reality Norway had already agreed to purchase the F-35s in a backroom deal.


“We must continue to act like an honourable and elegant competitor,” read a cable from the US embassy in Oslo.

At the time of Norway's decision former SAAB executive Jan Nygren was angered:

"We are really surprised about how this was handled, what happened yesterday, and about the justification," Jan Nygren, who served as Saab’s deputy CEO until two years prior to the decision, told the TT news agency at the time.

Gripen is a better fit for the functional demands laid out in the documentation

"And besides, we are just a tad surprised to say the least that they so unabashedly chose to criticize the Gripen, despite the fact that all of us involved know that the Gripen is a better fit for the functional demands laid out in the documentation included in the proposal request."

Obviously , the Swedes and SAAB may be considered biased about the suitability of the Gripen fighter over the F-35. However, on the surface it would appear that the Gripen, if equipped with a US-made AESA radar system, is at least capable of being in the conversation.

Oh and, by the way, Sweden recently offered 24 new Gripen fighters to Romania for $1.3 billion, the same price as Romania had agreed to pay the U.S. for used F-16 fighters.

Turns out that for the cost of a Stephen Harper G20 shindig, Canada could equip itself with fighter jets that could certainly do the job, or a large part of it. Then the $16 Bil for Lockheed Martin could be called what it is - an imperial levy.

Assange Says Professional Journalists Have Better Incentive than Bloggers

Bloggers' Goal to "Position Themselves Amongst Their Peers" - Not to Expose the Truth

Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, says that he once thought bloggers and "people who write Wikipedia articles" would do the heavy lifting in the job of analyzing and diffusing Wikileaks material.

He says now, however, that they chose to partner with mainstream media outlets to analyze and release leaked files because, with some exceptions, bloggers' goal is "not to expose the truth."

"Rather, it is their goal to position themselves amongst their peers on whatever the issue of the day is. The most effective, the most economical way to do that, is simply to take the story that's going around, [which] has already created a marketable audience for itself, and say whether they're in favour of that interpretation or not."

Speaking in an interview with Time Magazine by Skype from an undisclosed location, Assange goes on to say that, while social networks do have a role in amplifying the stories, the career structure and funding of professional journalists gives them more incentive to be reliable partners.

Assange raises interesting issues. No doubt it is true that many bloggers write "their take" on whatever story is going around. However, it is also true that bloggers often connect dots that are ignored by the MSM.

In a sense, Assange himself is a blogger with a unique niche. Meanwhile, every single MSM outlet probably on the planet has felt obliged to have their own "fake" bloggers. Obviously there is more of a gradation from the blogger who "writes about their cat" to the senior reporters of the New York Times than Assange gives credit for. He does acknowledge that the blogosphere has become more of a "source" for Wikileaks.

The Wikileaks Era: Will it Be "Involuntary Transparency" or Total Lockdown of Communications?

"Wikileaks just made the world a more repressive place", explained former diplomat and current aid worker, Scott Gilmore, in a Globe and Mail article yesterday.

Gilmore's view is that the Wikileaks revelations could endanger the lives of whistleblowers and other sources in places where human rights are not respected.

There is every possibility that the consequences could be even more dire. With telecommunications and internet service providers already chomping at the bit to restrict and control internet access, the whole Wikileaks / security angle could provide an entree for a treacherous role reversal for the internet, where it would become virtually inaccessible for the general public, except for approved uses.

Does this seem to far-fetched to believe?

How about the recent aggressive push to reduce anonymity on the net that seems to have materialized out of nowhere?

It has been shown in spades that the U.S. government, and the Harper government, for that matter, and others, will overreact in huge disproportion to perceived threats.

Now apparently, Julian Assange told Forbes in an interview yesterday that Wikileaks now has the confidential communications of a large U.S. bank in its sights for a reveal in early 2011. And we can presume there is more to come.

As a Heather Brooke commentary in the Guardian stated,

The powerful have long spied on citizens (surveillance) as a means of control, now citizens are turning their collected eyes back upon the powerful (sousveillance).


We are at a pivotal moment where the visionaries at the vanguard of a global digital age are clashing with those who are desperate to control what we know.


In the end, though, the powerful are still powerful. It is very difficult to trust them to be willing to ride this storm out without going into communications curfew mode. When we hear the rantings of such supposedly responsible people as Sarah Palin and Tom Flanagan on this subject, it gives us some idea of the extreme trespasses that Wikileaks is perceived as committing.

It is difficult to imagine a less extreme response.

Let's hope that Julian Assange, or somebody, has prepared an alternate internet to serve in the event the one we have gets corrupted.