Paul Jorion is an anthropologist who blogs about economic and financial issues. In 2005, he was one of the first to predict the subprime crisis and subsequent recession. Today, in his new book, The Digital Civil War, he goes over the Wikileaks scandal and the political reactions that came with it. He shows a picture of extreme tension, a situation he describes as “pre-revolutionary.”
The event that really got my goat was Paypal and Mastercard’s refusal to transmit donations to Wikileaks. The rules of commerce went right out the window, it was unbelievable. It’s just not something you do, it’s against the law. That’s when it became obvious that there had been some kind of political intervention, that a decision had been made to sanction Wikileaks. With this event, we left the democratic ballpark. It was a serious, extremely important event. For me, it was a declaration of war.
My publisher wanted to title the book “The Digital Uprising.” I didn’t agree, because it’s not an insurrection, it’s not a movement that comes from the bottom to fight the powers that be. It’s the opposite, it’s a declaration of war that comes from the top, from the American government, against a grassroots movement. It’s extremely surprising. Barack Obama pledged to protect the rights of whistleblowers during his campaign, and he did the exact opposite. He declared war.
Evidence of a deep collusion between the U.S. government and private companies, to wage war against Wikileaks subsequently emerged. Journalists and columnists who previously supported the Assange’s website also joined it. It was then revealed that the U.S. government appealed to private security agencies to investigate Anonymous, a group of online activists who defended Wikileaks. Anonymous infiltrated one of these companies, HBGary, and revealed their ties with the U.S. government.
Once again, it’s not an insurrection, it’s anti-democratic measures taken by governments. A civil war was declared and the governments have already lost…. It seems obvious to me.
The American government proclaimed itself in favor of whistleblowers. But they’re only in favor when the whistle is blown on someone else. When it’s on them, that’s when it becomes problematic. I was invited on the set of Frédéric Taddéi’s Tonight or Never. Hubert Védrine was there and explained that governments cannot function while being 100% transparent, that there is always an outright reason for certain policies and ulterior motives. In fact, governments are having a tough time being transparent. Democracy is just smokescreen in the end.
With Anonymous – who attacked Visa, Mastercard, Paypal, and Amazon sites, who stopped hosting Wikileaks on their servers – we saw the formation of a new kind of resistance. The foundations of this new activism relies on isolated individuals, citizens who mobilize themselves for a certain straightforward cause, such as blocking a website. For the most part, these people don’t know one another. The system is in fact rather protective of those involved.
HBGary’s Aaron Barr announced: “We have found the leaders of Anonymous! We are going to get them, we know who they are.” But, that’s not true. No on knows who is part of this movement and there is certainly not a leader. Anonymous is a dispersed, even anarchical movement. It’s nearly impossible to win a war against a target that is so volatile. You could arrest someone who took part in an act, but that will just cause others, in different countries, to take their place, to mobilize and recruit others to commit the same acts.
The way the internet is organised is perfect for this new kind of resistance against the will of traditional powers. For these traditional powers, it’s undoubtedly a war already lost. They can implement all the Hadopis or other control measures that they want, they still won’t win the war…
Me? Well, they make me think of the Russian nihilists of the 19 century. They’re young people with ambitious ideas who aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty. They are motivated by indignation, they reject the decisions that they consider unjust.
The internet is democracy. There’s no hierarchy and everyone can express themselves.
Yes, I think that at a certain level there is also an unprecedented mix of genres between political and businesses decision-makers. Internet regulation just doesn’t work and it never will. The age of laws doesn’t coincide with the age of the internet. As soon as a law has been voted on and passes, it’s obsolete. The idea of wanting to stop the emergence of a free culture is totally vain. Today, as proof, we download our music for free.
As for the internet’s economic functioning, there are two essential elements: donations and no cost. If someone appreciates what you gave them for free – I think back to a few articles I published on my blog – then they give you a gift, in the form of a donation. And everybody is free to donate however much they want to. It’s the economic future of the internet, what the English are calling “crowdfunding.”
I think that this evokes two sociological groups. On one side, there is a portion of the population that is rather open, and on the other is a portion that is scared of the prospect of too much openness. It’s a pretty classic scheme. There’s always been a clash between people who are more oriented towards the future and innovation, and others who, on the contrary, are afraid of change. The latter, the conservatives, have some trouble improvising with innovations. That’s what we’re living today. We have those who promote a new world and on the other side those who defend the old world…
This situation always sparks tensions. Let’s take a historic example. When protestantism appeared in Europe, those who were interested in books and by what is new turned to this religion. It’s a good example because in this case, a civil war occurred.
Yes, I think that we are participating in the global birth of a counter-culture, and the internet is its organizing structure.
Well, I think that there could be very generalized episodes of war… The national powers will not be able to do much against the resistance on the internet, in my opinion. As soon as certain measures are taken to combat the internet in a country, there will always be the possibility to get around them.
—
Illustrations Flickr CC 
gaelx the cardinal de la ville, Wau Holland Foundation, Abode of Chaos
