On the other hand, there can be stuff one is not ready to say yet. Such as, say, when conferring with a partner on how to deal with the people on the other side of the negotiating table. I only just now remembered that one may sometimes want to allow that such privileged communication can exist. And I guess that's where governments can rightly say Wikileaking is, well... mean-spirited, I guess.
So lets talk principal-agent conflicts. In theory, we, the people, are the principals, and our governments are our agents. Naturally, they don't work just for us. We may have elected them to their positions, but now their positions are theirs, not, it would seem, ours. So....
Meh. I don't know. If we are to know what they're doing, someone has to tell us. Or we have to seek the information ourselves. Or do enough government work of our own to be entitled to know what they're up to. Or just let them do what they do.
But wikileaking lets everyone know. Not just the principals in one or two countries. Leaking secrets removes from the secret-holders some measure of power. Pragmatically it's better that our side have at least as much power as is needed to keep our side viable. Maybe even enough power to keep our side prosperous. But could eschewing the power of secrets and embracing the apparently crippling effect of openness in fact make us stronger? Strength in principle is one thing, and perhaps not a good thing if it entails weakness in practice. So....... has Julian ruined us all?