Anonymous 2.0 - Page 2
It boils down to "Are we Anonymous, or are we something else?" Because from a PR angle, it's difficult to paint an "activist" picture when you have elements who commit dangerous, callous and contentious acts using your name. Certainly, this will be a complicated and divisive decision to make, as no one person leads Anonymous. This will be a group decision.
Can the anti-Scientology Anonymous be known for their positive, almost altruistic efforts, while still retaining their identity and all aforementioned negative elements? Could it be Anonymous 2.0 or New Anonymous?
Anonymous can no more sanitize its amoral beginnings than the Church of Scientology can from its history of being a money-making scheme concocted by a pulp science fiction writer who may have suffered from paranoid dementia. The similarities are noteworthy, the paths divergent.
These two forces, Scientology and Anonymous, are simultaneously at odds, but moving forward in sync with one another in a high stakes game of cat and mouse, with the winner having proven itself the moral victor. It is epic. One will win and one will lose.
Whoever comes out on top will likely be the one who can control the internets. I'll leave you to decide whose winning that war.
Follow Technorati