We lived through a moment in history this week: on 26 July, Julian Assange arrived in Australia as a free man. It’s not something I ever thought was a guarantee. In years to come when we reflect back on this moment, how will the the whole thing look? 

The 14-year Julian Assange backstory in less than 250 words:
In 2010, Assange published classified documents that showed evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq; field reports of U.S. military activity in the Iraq and Afghan wars; and unredacted diplomatic documents. In November of the same year, Swedish authorities issued a warrant for Assange’s arrest on suspicion of rape (and related charges). He was arrested in London for these charges, and released on bail. In 2012, when another leak revealed the U.S. was actively investigating Assange for potential espionage charges, he sought asylum in London's Ecuadorian Embassy – where he stayed for seven years. 

Ecuador withdrew its protection in 2019; Assange was then arrested by U.K. police for breaching his bail and sentenced to 50 weeks in Belmarsh prison. The Swedish authorities dropped their case, and the U.S. requested his extradition to face 18 federal espionage charges. After his sentence had been served, the U.K. kept Assange in prison while it decided whether or not to extradite him to the States (with heavy campaigning from both sides). 

Which brings us to now. In May 2024, the U.K High Court gave its final ruling that Assange would not be extradited to the U.S. By June, the U.S. authorities offered him a deal: plead guilty to one of the espionage charges, with the time served in Belmarsh to count towards his sentence therefore allowing an immediate release. 

Now what?

Over the past decade-plus of Assange being in some form of detention, he has been flattened into a symbol: of journalism; of free speech; of what it means to hold power to account. It’s been easy for most people to not only call for his deserved freedom, but generally support and celebrate him as a symbol of those things. The things he published on WikiLeaks were true, even if he and others broke laws to publish them (as many whistleblowers do). While imprisoned, we collectively envisaged Assange as a victim of serious political persecution. A flawed hero of truth.

Now that he is free, Assange has become immediately more real to people. The complete picture of who he is as a person is… challenging. The beliefs that motivated him to be an ‘ethical hacker’ and expose injustice are more anarchist than you might expect (at one point he identified as libertarian). Assange has never been particularly interested in protecting people who might be harmed by his leaks. He has knowingly amplified conspiracy theories. It’s widely believed that the decision to release Hilary Clinton’s emails during the 2016 Presidential election campaign was less about the public interest, and more because he hated Clinton and wanted the Republicans to win. He was paid to appear on Russian state TV, a move in direct opposition to his stated views on transparency and political freedom.

And then there is the forever unresolved sexual assault case in Sweden. Upon Assange’s release, one of the women tweeted: “I'm happy that he is out and hope he can fight for transparency and human rights, without molesting women.” Assange has been supported by fierce, admirable women in his crusade for freedom – especially his lawyer, Jennifer Robinson; his wife and former lawyer, Stella Assange. But there is an undeniable undertone of misogyny in his views…

Now that he’s free, the debate over whether we can consider Assange a ‘hero’ is back in a big way. Now that he’s free, Assange may choose to participate in public life and is very likely to do and say things that we won’t like. What does that mean for our support of him up to this point?

The lesson is: it means nothing. We shouldn’t get in the habit of making heroes for ourselves, expecting them to be perfect… and commencing a tear down when they fail those expectations. We shouldn’t make heroes full stop. Celebrities, activists, politicians, cultural figures… we can celebrate the good that people do, while holding them accountable for harm that they may cause. In reality one doesn’t cancel out the other. 

Assange deserved to be free. Supporting his fight against being extradited to the U.S. was the right thing to do. We don’t have to debate whether he’s a hero or a villain, the good guy or the bad guy. It doesn’t really matter. Now that he’s home, his actions will speak for themselves – just like yours and mine do.

– Crystal
Founder & Chief of Everything at Zee Feed
Follow me on Instagram or TikTok

Smart stuff on the Internet 💭

All the stuff I found on the web that made me think, smile, or have an ‘aha!’ moment. Spend your Sunday reading them – you'll be better off for it:

Charli XCX, Lorde, And The Trap Of The “Girl’s Girl” on Defector
"The problem with the girl’s girl is that even as the broader culture has moved in a more progressive direction, her female experience can only unfold within a narrow box of expression—she is sunny, and positive, and flourishing, and must be that way every time she is observed, which is all the time.”

The true losers of this presidential debate were the American people on The Guardian
“If you are too young to remember 2017-2021, this would not help you figure that out… Much has been said about the age of the candidates, but maybe it’s the corporate media whose senility is most dangerous to us.”

Colourless, elitist and unrealistic: The problem with minimalist capsule wardrobes on Fashion Journal
Lots I agree with here, and lots I don’t – super interesting piece for discussion! “Streamlining an existing wardrobe to the bare necessities that will suit all occasions and locations, is predicated on a certain cultural idea of elegance and femininity that, for most of us, is unachievable.“

If you found this email thought-provoking, will you share it with a friend? Sharing helps us grow 🌱 and makes you look really smart.