WikiLeaks Reignites Debate on a Transparent Tomorrow

WikiLeaks' data dump of diplomatic cables this week sparked a furious debate about transparency -- a key component of many idealized and vilified visions of the future. If you're on the idealized side, the lack of secrets means no one will do anything wrong because the whole world will see and either stop it or punish the offender. The 1984 side of the coin doesn't dispute that reality; it just points out how horrible it would be to have no privacy.

David Brooks picks up this thread in a column titled "The Fragile Community," saying "For someone with his [Assange] mind-set, the decision to expose secrets is easy. If the hidden world is suspect, then everything should be revealed." Continuing, "The quality of the [diplomatic] conversation is damaged by exposure, just as our relationships with our neighbors would be damaged if every private assessment were brought to the light of day. We’ve seen what happens when conversations deteriorate (look at the U.S. Congress), and it’s ugly. The WikiLeaks dump will probably damage the global conversation."

Jon Stewart takes a similar tack, arguing that just because he doesn't want TSA screeners to see his junk doesn't mean he's hiding something.

What's missing from the debate is the recognition of how old it is. For example, In 1949 Yevgeny Zamiatin's wrote a short story called "We" where a man from our future tries to describe his world to future generations. He thinks he's living in a utopia since starvation, jealousy and every cause for disagreement has been eliminated. He then explains that this magnificent achievement came when 98% of humanity was wiped out and the survivors created a society utterly subservient to transparency, mathematical calculations and timetables. The human race operates as a "single body with a million hands," eating, sleeping, working and doing every task at the same moment. Snip:

"I rushed to the house office, handed over to the controller on duty my pink ticket, and received a certificate permitting the use of curtains. This right exists in our State only for the sexual days. Normally we live surrounded by transparent walls which seem to be knitted of sparkling air; we live beneath the eyes of everyone, always bathed in light. We have nothing to conceal from one another; besides, this mode of living makes the difficult and exalted task of the Guardians much easier. Without it many bad things might happen. It is possible that the strange opaque dwellings of the ancients were responsible for their pitiful cellish psychology."

It's a fun read, but more importantly it illustrates how transparency is a logical vehicle for delivering on the ancient desires for a world free of conflict provided you accept the downside of giving up much of what we think it is to be human.

I wonder...if one day we do end up with a total transparency society, will future generations view the Wikileaks phenomenon as a stepping stone towards it, or an impediment? What do you think?