Dave Winer blogs today about WikiLeaks,  and I gravitate to Dave’s post formany reasons.  On many Jan. 1’s of recent years,  I tend to get reflective. Dave was one of those early bloggers (most likely THE earliest) that started a company that produced the first blogging software that I used (Radio Userland),  and he has also blogged articulatlely about what blogging is.

This year he is rightfully focused on the Wikileaks issue.

from Dave’s post:

As I explained in this morning’s podcast, the world of news might have been split in two this year. On one side are the people and organizations who want to use the information in the WikiLeaks cables. And on the other side, those who don’t. So far, the US government is on the Don’t side. CNN, for some mysterious reason, is there too. Some of the things Bill Keller at the NY Times has said indicate that he is on that side, while his organization is solidly on the other. The Guardian is kicking butt on the Do side. As is Spiegel, Le Monde, El Pais, and dozens of other news organizations digging in and reporting WikiLeaks-related stories every day of the week.

Fox News is starting to love WikiLeaks. And Iran is blocking it. Remind me, why is the US against it?

There really isn’t much gray there, not much ambivalence. Either you’re for em or you’re agin em.

Scripting News: Home Page

I have found this issue VERY interesting from a theological perspective.  Mostly in that I have yet to see anyone try to tackle the theological issues here.  It is an issue that many would say transcends theology;  that “secular” people can find in this a very moral issue* (ie. What the government(s) owe to us in terms of transparency).  And when they outright deceive us,  as the Bush administration did for years,  the light needs to be shown upon them,  and the “legalities” of such exposure should take a back  seat to the importance of the lies they expose. Sadly, such is not the case right now.  Let’s get onto calling some people to account for what has been revealed to have happened, shall we?

I am one who believes that the issue of governments actually being what they say they are is one where the church can and should confront the governments and hold them to account for such betrayals.  It’s not that I believe that the church is in the business of treating the government as if they (the government) are the solution,  but simply as a public trust that is supposedly committed to serving the people and therefore presumably dedicated to working for ALL (as opposed to monied interests).

* now this distinction between “secular” and “theological” is not quite as pure as it is often made out to be.  “The so-called “secular” folks operate with a “theology”, too.  There is a morality there,  and sadly, many of these folks display a much more balanced and nuanced and complex sense of morality than the people who make a point about “morality” (ie “The Moral Majority”, “ChristianValues” and “Tea Party”  etc.)  It is often these “moral” self-appointed arbitrars that are doing the complaining about the illegalities of WikiLeaks and “patriotism” that are seemingly oblivious to the apparent “moral” lapses exposed by the cables published by WiliLeaks.

Most importantly to me,  is the fact that Christians are called to a loyalty NOT to country, first and foremost,  but to “The Kingdom of God”,  which transcends national, tribal loyalties.  And even loyalty to country should include and encourage a mutual accountability;  IOW,  it is an act  of loyalty to confront the system that has betrayed the principles.  So,  for me,  there  is a “theology” that requires that we directly challenge the  operations of government.  Both for the sake of that higher “theology” and, ultimately,  for the sake of that loyalty to  the government to be and do what it says it is and does.

I call this “part 1” because there are multiple levels to this issue.  Loyalty issues to “higher principles” than nation are but one,  and “what national loyalty means” in a WikiLeaks age”  is another,  and there are still more.  I look forward to Jeff Jarvis’ book “Public Parts” which he had begun writing long before WikiLeaks,  and is now taking on  a much more apparent importance because of it.

(Update:  Part 2: On the theology in “principles” or “truth”