Last edited Thu Aug 22, 2013, 01:13 AM - Edit history (1)

Seven party members and volunteers have now quit, including four delegates of their National Council (the governing body).

And they did preference far-right parties in NSW as well, so it wasn't the "mistake" that Wikileaks are claiming. And it's now too late to undo the damage, because preference lodgments have now closed.

Of course, people can preference who they want to, but too many now won't vote for them at all.

They had a chance to make a strong statement, but they've blown it.

Link to the ABC website: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-22/assange-blames-party-teething-problems/4904366

And yes. The NSW fucked over the National Council (and fucked over the rest of the local councils, too).

It really is too bad that there were two districts that sought to undermine the party but there are a lot of people who still believe in the goals of the party and have worked for the past few years to make it a viable.

I loved this, from Assange:

"I made a decision two months ago to spend a lot of my time on dealing with the Edward Snowden asylum situation and trying to save the life of a young man (Bradley Manning).

"Now, the result is over-delegation, so I admit and I accept full responsibility for over-delegating functions to the Australian party while I tried to take care of those situations".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-22/assange-blames-party-teething-problems/4904366

I think he's quite right to fear the U.S. and what may happen to him if they ever get hold of him, but really – he is such a tosser.

He made a pragmatic decision but failed to take into account the outrage that would be felt by people who are motivated by idealism, not ego.

And in that, sadly, he's probably no different to any other politician.

Are you saying that his support of Manning (though I think it was actually Snowden that he was referring to) was ego driven?

But, "I've been trying to save the life of (Bradley Manning)". Sounds as Asssange was doing it all single-handed, and Manning's lawyers were just background extras.

I think Wikileaks was a good thing, and I do think Assange is right to fear the U.S., but his ego is enormous, and I think he'd be a pain in the bum to deal with.

have been very active in protecting him.

They have also been very active in support of Manning but in terms of 'saving' him from prosecution, that ship has long sailed.

"I made a decision two months ago to spend a lot of my time on dealing with the Edward Snowden asylum situation and trying to save the life of a young man (Bradley Manning)."

He wasn't talking about saving Manning from prosecution, but rather, the death penalty.

I don't believe he's had a lot to do personally with either recently, as it would be quite difficult for him from the Embassy. I don't doubt for a minute that he wishes they would both remain alive and well, but the work is really being done by others now.

From what I've been reading, it appears that someone within that party has worked to undermine it and has succeeded. I'm used to seeing illogical preferences (eg the Democrats in the ACT give their preferences to the Liberals rather than Labor), but the problem with the Wikileaks Party is that those preferences to extreme RW parties can't be undone now. I'm suspecting much of what vote they'd get would come from people who may normally vote for the Greens, and after the strong support the Greens gave to Wikileaks and Julian Assange, it's a massive slap in the face for them to be listed below those RW parties by Wikileaks.

I don't like the preferential system for the Senate, but I'm not sure what it should be replaced with. All I know is I'm voting for the Greens, and I want my preferences to go to Labor, so I guess I'll be painstakingly numbering every single box under the line on election day...