Government Transparency Vs National Security

Wikileaks is a not-for profit organisation that allows anonymous sources to send information to. This is information they feel should be in the public domain and is in the public’s best interest to be known. The organisation is a platform for whistleblowers to be heard and plays a very important role as an anti corruption tool and one that supports government transparency. The notion of government transparency versus national security is a fine line, as no one quite knows which is more important. 



Image source

A positive example of government transparency through the use of ICT’s is the US government’s creation of websites that allow people to view data related to expenditure, in order to promote government monitoring of spending. This gives everyday citizens a means to access such information and allows them to be more involved and informed about what is going on, making democracy work better.

Internet filtering however plays a major role in the success of a government’s transparency. If people do not have the ability to access information that they feel passionate about or that which is in their interests to know, how can people be making informed decisions? There are currently more than three-dozen nations, mostly in East Asia, North Africa, the Middle East, and central Africa that filter access to the Internet. China is an example of a country with strict limitations on Internet censorship; they prohibit access to many social networking sites like Facebook. This could then in turn be restricting Chinese citizen’s rights to discuss and debate issues. 



As defined by Jenkins this ‘collective meaning making’ that people are taking part in within popular culture is changing the way politics, law and education operates. Many people today do not just listen to the Channel 9 nightly news and take its word as gospel; they seek out alternative forms of media and want to look at the facts for themselves and discuss them with others. Wikileaks publishing the original source documents permits citizens to do this by witnessing exactly what the stories and articles are basing their information on. Along with citizen journalism this is increasingly becoming a way for people to look at things from a perspective that is not going to be constrained by mainstream media agendas or gatekeepers. Blogging is also an important social media tool that facilitates such unrestrained voices to be heard. The media may not be doing its job if it is not questioning government and facilitating this transparency to occur.

On the other hand however should the government and organisations have the right to some form of privacy and secrecy? If everyone was able to see all aspects of government documents this could be aiding terrorist or criminal activities to occur. Military plans and activities need to be kept a secret as this could put a country at risk if their enemies knew what they were planning. This could affect not only military personal but it could also impact their families back at home. Documentation of information relating to foreign policy negotiations also needs to be kept private, as the other countries shouldn’t know all the inner workings and motivations behind specific policies. Information that may be used in a damaging way by a specific person or group should also be kept secret, as this could have a detrimental effect on their lives. 

Image source

Are there extremists on our beaches or in our political parties?

When looking into extremist groups one initially relates the concept to predominantly American based groups like the Anti-Semitic neo-Nazi skinheads, the anti government extremists or the environmental and animal rights extremists. Ideas of terrorism and suicide bombers also spring to mind but what about the ‘local surfers’ who were involved in the 2005 Cronulla beach riots?

Image source  

The day the riots started local surfers who were largely of anglo-celtic decent displayed a recent rise in patriotism. This included wearing the Australian flag by wrapping it over their bodies, hanging it from balconies and cars and displaying temporary tattoos of the Southern Cross and the union jack. These acts of nationalism only worsened as they paired such actions with hate messages and abuse towards the Lebanese community, essentially claiming that they wanted their beach but by using various profanities and derogatory racial phases.

These surfers had resorted to violence and a racial stance that caused a great deal of embarrassment for many Australians.  The fact is that we are a multicultural nation and essentially are all immigrants, aside from the aboriginal community seemed to have been displaced in the minds of these young surfers.  

According to Gardener’s (1997) definition of extremism:

It is described as a dogmatic intolerance, expressed mildly or violently, and inclines toward an inflexible obedience to an accepted authority, shaped by a common ideology or sense of group unity. 

Based on this definition the surfers can definitely be seen as carrying out extremist’s acts as they were united by a common intolerance towards the Lebanese community and they engaged in violence towards their goal of trying to eradicate these people from their beaches.

Image of people in support of Austrlalia First party policies.
Image source 

It appears that on further investigation into Australia and its racial prejudice we have a registered federal political party that freely admit to wanting to ‘abolish multiculturalism’ known as the Australia First Party. The party was actually linked to the Cronulla riots and was found to be sending mobilization messages to members of the community. The party states that ‘the present government's policy on multi-culturalism is turning Australia into a nation of tribes and, if not stopped, will continue to erode social cohesion and fuel social tension.’ 

I do not agree with this statement I think the diverse range of cultures in Australia is something that makes our nation great. Visit inner city Melbourne and smell the aromas from the Yum Cha in China Town, to the vast amount of Italian homemade pasta and pizza restaurants and to the Spanish Tapas bars to name just a few. All of these cultures can come together and their cuisines be shared by one and all. The party’s policy on immigration also seems fairly warped ‘Our policy on immigration is "zero net" which means the number of immigrants we will allow in each year will equal the number of people permanently leaving Australia per year.’ With such a vast land that is undeveloped why can’t we help to provide for people who are born into less fortunate families and to remove them from areas under constant danger?

Whether this party can be labeled as an extremist group is difficult to decide? They do seem to have some fairly radical ideas and they do appear to want to get rid of multicultural communities, which could show ties to such example of neo-Nazis but they are not going as far as planning any terrorist attacks or creating such violence. They were involved in the Cronulla Riots to some degree but exactly how much influence the party has we will never really know, sending messages to gain attention isn’t the same as party members performing specific acts of violence. They do use the Internet to spread messages and try and recruit people to vote for them but not in the same way that extremist groups like Stormfront for example do to spread white extremist pride messages to incite such hate.