Thursday, March 17, 2016

Who is Anonymous Fighting For in Their War Against Donald Trump?

The hacker group Anonymous has declared "total war" on Donald Trump, urging hackers to expose personal information about him and his staff and to disable various websites associated with him including Trump.com, DonaldJTrump.com, CitizensForTrump.com, TrumpChicago.com, etc.

Even though #OpTrump mentions April 1st as its target date, the collective has already posted unverified personal information about the candidate and his staff, including social security numbers.  Trump was also previously targeted by Anonymous last December following his comments about banning Muslims from entering the country.

The reason for the "call-to-arms", as stated in the Anonymous YouTube video, is that “Your inconsistent and hateful campaign has not only shocked the United States of America, you have shocked the entire planet with your appalling actions and ideals".

This action shouldn't surprise anyone because this is basically what Anonymous does.  What's interesting is that this time, rather than go after targets affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan or ISIS, or even Mastercard or Visa, as they have done in the past, they're going after an American presidential candidate who's currently in the process of winning the nomination based on the popular vote.

You don't need to be a Trump supporter to take issue with the fact that, whereas in the past Anonymous has chosen institutional targets like multi-national corporations or terrorist organizations, here they are going after an individual who is being democratically elected.  Rather than being an agent of The People, as they like to perceive themselves, they are actually fighting against what The People are voting for (on the Republican side).

Is Anonymous exposing itself as ideologically liberal, or perhaps even outright partisan?  If they seek to fight and resist the valid results of democratic elections then Anonymous is now showing itself to be anti-democratic in addition to anti-capitalist and anti-free speech (at least, anti-any-speech-that-they-disagree-with).  If that's the case, can someone please explain who exactly they are fighting for?



  

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home