Christian Rudolf Hamann
Berlin, psychology, evolution

Assange’s Liberation is only the First Step – Part 1

For defenders of freedom of information, the end of the nearly 14-year persecution of Julian Assange is a welcome victory – but not yet a breakthrough. While the WikiLeaks founder is spared another prison sentence, the plea of ​​guilt and acceptance of the legality of the 5-year sentence agreed in the deal serve to cement a dangerous shift in power in favor of the military and intelligence agencies throughout the West.

The mainstream media has long failed to educate citizens about this shift in power to the detriment of democratic nations. The law under which Julian Assange was threatened with up to 175 years in prison, the Espionage Act, dates back to the same war year, 1917, in which the Creel Committee, a censorship and propaganda agency, was created. Both unconstitutional initiatives stem from the emotionally charged atmosphere of war, in which cool thinking is numbed.

But while the Creel Committee was abolished in 1919, the Espionage Act, which provides for closed trials before special courts in cases of suspected treason, has remained in force to this day. The deal in the Assange case in June 2024 brings the long overdue abolition of this law one step closer. For far too long, the media and politicians have ignored the unconstitutional “rights” of the security apparatus to the detriment of the nation, which have enabled it to evade effective democratic control.

Undoubtedly, all planned and some ongoing actions of the security forces require secret handling. But the cases relevant to investigative journalism, including the activities of WikiLeaks, relate to operations that have long since been completed. In these, citizens must of course be fully aware of mismanagement, crimes and breaches of principles by their security institutions. Otherwise, it is impossible to learn from past mistakes.

Since a nation is the legitimate sovereign of the state, its right to truth has absolute priority. In contrast, a general claim to secrecy by the military and intelligence services is a lesser legal good. The routine declaration that even closed cases required ongoing secrecy for “reasons of national security” can be identified as a cheap excuse to evade responsibility for failures, counterproductive operations and crimes.

The primacy of the nation is not a luxury but a necessity for survival, because a lack of effective democratic control in the hierarchically structured military and intelligence services paves the way for dangerous developments. In their promotion system, superiors automatically prefer subordinates who have a similar mindset to themselves. This mechanism maintains a counter-selection; as in the hierarchies of medieval aristocratic rule, people with little empathy have a competitive advantage and are more likely to occupy the top positions. This leads to a decreasing sense of responsibility and the unchecked expansion of a narcissistic, militaristic mentality.

The extent of this danger is shown by the decades-long series of counterproductive actions by the security establishment, which were only brought to light by the work of whistleblowers such as Assange, Manning and Snowden. These include involvement in drug trafficking, torture and degrading treatment of civilians.1) In addition, there is repeated misinformation of its own citizens and politicians, such as during and before the Iraq wars.

With the Espionage Act behind them, the military and secret services are increasingly developing into a state within a state, in the USA and the UK even with their own jurisdiction. As early as 1961, Dwight D. Eisenhower had warned in clear terms about the growing power of the MIC, the military-industrial complex, which is made up of high-ranking figures from the military, politics and arms companies.

But all subsequent US presidents except John F. Kennedy have ignored this warning and continued down the path of self-destructive militarism that has expanded the power of the MIC while ruining the West’s reputation as a model of freedom and democracy. This outcome confirms the foresight of Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, who once said: “I hope our wisdom will grow with our power and teach us that the less we use our power, the greater our it will be.”

Even the disastrous withdrawal of the American military from Afghanistan in August 2021, during which the Taliban got their hands on over $80 billion worth of weapons, has not yet sufficiently opened the eyes of Western citizens. This mismanaged, humiliating action was only the culmination of counterproductive military activities by its security forces. These have served neither the spread of democracy nor Western security for decades, from Vietnam (1955-1975) to Afghanistan (2001-2021).

Instead, the sober summary is that the MIC has systematically ruined not only the reputation of liberal democracy but also that of its own military – namely, as being equally brutal and unsuccessful. The Second Iraq War (2003-2011) cost the lives of over half a million civilians and American taxpayers almost a trillion dollars. The result of this “liberation” of Iraq by the British-American “coalition of the willing” from over 40 states is a destroyed and poisoned country that is just as corrupt and inadequately democratic as before – only with more internal tensions, more terror and more poverty. The resulting loss of reputation of the USA and democracy was perceived as such worldwide – except in the West.

There, the uncritical mainstream media did not even register that in August 2021 the international security structure supported by the superpower USA and its allies collapsed and a profound political change is imminent – one way or another.

Without correction, the current course of escalating military violence will lead to the already propagated one-world state. The corresponding “constructive” initiatives are being taken by the UN and some NGOs such as the World Economic Forum. But the true balance of power is revealed by the question of who was able to give the MIC’s activities this counterproductive direction, which runs against the interests of democratic nations, for decades, while citizens and politicians are prevented from learning from this disaster.2)

Fortunately, an alternative non-violent development path is emerging. This primarily involves modernizing democratic control mechanisms and reforming the economy, namely from oligopoly rule to a fair market economy that is once again successful. Other necessary reform initiatives concern, among others, the administration (debureaucratization), the education system (replacing polarizing indoctrination with emancipation), the security apparatus (which must be freed from the tribalistic promotion system) and the justice system (which must be freed likewise and aditionally from the influence of politicians).




About the Author
Christian Rudolf Hamann was born in October 1949 in Berlin/ Germany. After having finished school in 1968, he studied Geography, Biology and Politics in Hannover and Mainz till 1973 and then worked as a secondary school teacher until his retirement. Since 2013, he lives alternately in Uruguay and Germany. Throughout his life, he has continued to study independently, especially in the fields of history, politics including sociology, economics and psychology. His credo is that democracy is not a finished model, but a living principle that must be improved in a historically never-ending process and strengthened against the grip of uncontrolled power - namely that of money. History presents itself as evolution (as a composite of biological, technical and socio-organisational evolution), while politics represents its current management. Therefore, especially socio-organisational evolution can only be steered back into stable channels and kept there permanently if political management respects the eternally valid rules of evolution. The simplest and most effective way for the necessary course correction is to detect the increasing violations of these principles.