Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Freedom and Privileges for Individuals and Media, Part 3

Freedom and Privileges for Individuals and Media, Part 3

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The fourth estate, the media,  should be under examinaton by the state for the damage that has already been done to the state by their outrageous and embarrassing revelation of leaked cables. Newspapers like The Guardian which are registered outside the United States are out of the jurisdiction of  US law and let us give up the situation of actions by the US government against them. But what about a newspaper like the New York Times which is legally part of the United States fourth estate and henceforth falls under the jurisdiction of the US law?

Before we get into the question of the possible trial of the US media by the state, it has to be analyzed if the media as part of the fourth estate has misused the rights guaranteed as per the United Sates constitutional first amendment or has it not imposed enough self restraint in exposing the cables that can be a cause of potential impairment to the US diplomatic strategy and international interests. This may be a concern where the issue of warranted freedom vs. ethical responsibility plays a role. This author feels that the media has acted in full responsibility and its righteousness need not be pulled into a controversy.

In publicizing these cables the media has not just elicited a public furry, but has further elucidated many realities that, firstly in the high fy era of twenty first century there are limitations to confidentiality of data when it is in electronic form and is more vulnerable to hacking than of the days where information was in the form of manuscripts, secondly it has demonstrated to the world that diplomacy is nothing but hypocrisy, and diplomats bearing that in mind should not have dared to chat in such an indecorous language over the electronic medium in a way that they may speak out in the late night private, confidential or casual parties with or without the influence of few or more drinks and thirdly that attempts by the countries in deceiving each other, henceforth its own people and the entire international community in the name of diplomacy hardly succeeds in the days of our time.

All the foregoing verities shed light on the necessity, proximity, and inevitability for a new international diplomatic paradigm which has to be formulated, in fulfilling the needs of diplomatic art of our age and international peace of twenty first century. Thus, this cable gate conundrum has to seen as an intellectual prospect for the evolution of a future pragmatic school of diplomacy, accepting morals from the retrospection of the current diplomatic thought which is prototyped from the individual, social and national interests of past and present.

The prosecution of the US media for the publication of the cables seems to be far from a plausibility.  The first amendment of the United States constitution makes it almost impossible and  public fury over such an act would be problematic. All the nation states shall concede that, their establishments as institutions were in fact from the instinct thirst and immense desire of the human kind as just a mammal of the Paleolithic age to a social animal of neo modern era as we see it today to fulfill his own basic prerequisites and here man as the establisher definitely enjoys exclusive and distinctive considerations over the State as the established, in the issues concerning liberty and privileges and as far as the State is concerned, it becomes so obvious that it is the obligation of the State in protecting the merits and benefits that the man deserves in his pursuit of establishing the State.

Remember that any effort from the side of the State in diminishing the rights of its own people,  are against the law of the nature, against the will of those who have founded the state and against the axioms of intellect which have structured the State, and this will consequently lead to the collapse of the State as is evident in history from the examples of all the oppressive regimes from France of Louis XIVth, to the Russias of the Czars, to the USSR of the communists, admittedly the same people who wanted those imperial crowns to over thrown happened to be far more victims of those revolutions than those who were really over thrown, but here the law of the nature takes its own course, and it is highly unthinkable that the nature will amend its own laws as nation sates have been used to be.

Powered by

About Dileep Yogi

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/an roger nowosielski

    Is there any reason, editors, why my comment was deleted? It was neither a personal attack nor a critique of BC editorial policy.

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    Roger, as far as I can tell, yours is the one and only comment on this article prior to this one…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/an roger nowosielski

    Chris,

    My earlier comment, while lauding the author’s command of syntax, suggested he breaks his unduly complex sentences into smaller units and that he works more closely with his editor in this regard.

    If the alluded to comment was inadvertently deleted or simply didn’t post, then I do apologize.

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    Roger, that comment was posted to part two of this…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/an roger nowosielski

    Sorry, didn’t realize that. He’s surely cranking ‘em out.

  • The Craven Mevyn

    All the nation states shall concede that, their establishments as institutions were in fact from the instinct thirst and immense desire of the human kind as just a mammal of the Paleolithic age to a social animal of neo modern era as we see it today to fulfill his own basic prerequisites and here man as the establisher definitely enjoys exclusive and distinctive considerations over the State as the established, in the issues concerning liberty and privileges and as far as the State is concerned, it becomes so obvious that it is the obligation of the State in protecting the merits and benefits that the man deserves in his pursuit of establishing the State.

    a pleasant fantasy rather than an emerging paradigm and chock full of category errors

    while servants of The State might accept the primacy of Man, this certainly doesn’t apply to men