Bruce Sterling parses out Hillary Clinton’s latest talk on Internet freedom — a kind of balancing act between defending her government’s advocacy against Internet freedom in the case of Wikileaks, and for Internet freedom in the case of middle eastern despots. Bruce’s commentary is way more interesting than the speech, of course.
“Clinton tried to reconcile the US administration’s support for the internet as a motor for change in the Middle East, China and elsewhere with its fury over WikiLeaks. She said: “Liberty and security. Transparency and confidentiality. Freedom of expression and tolerance. There are times when these principles will raise tensions and pose challenges, but we do not have to choose among them. And we shouldn’t. Together they comprise the foundation of a free and open internet.”
(((Who the heck wrote that amazing paragraph?! I’d like to shake that guy’s hand! He’s found some incredible diplomatic rhetorical middle-ground between honesty and dishonesty. It’s like a marriage which is firmly founded on a “challenging tension” of chastity and adultery. And, well, to tell the truth, that’s been known to work out — somehow. I mean — what else can she possibly say? Think about it.)))
Secy of State Clinton espouses pure cognitive dissonance strategy
(Image: Sen. Hillary Clinton speaks, a Creative Commons Attribution (2.0) image from seiu’s photostream)