From Forbes‘ interview with Wikileaks editor Julian Assange:

Would you call yourself a free market proponent?

Absolutely. I have mixed attitudes towards capitalism, but I love
markets. Having lived and worked in many countries, I can see the
tremendous vibrancy in, say, the Malaysian telecom sector compared to
U.S. sector…

How do your leaks fit into that?

To put it simply, in order for there to be a market, there has to be information. A perfect market requires perfect information.

There’s the famous lemon example in the used car market. It’s hard
for buyers to tell lemons from good cars, and sellers can’t get a good
price, even when they have a good car.

By making it easier to see where the problems are inside of
companies, we identify the lemons. That means there’s a better market
for good companies. For a market to be free, people have to know who
they’re dealing with.

You’ve developed a reputation as anti-establishment and anti-institution.

Not at all. Creating a well-run establishment is a difficult thing
to do, and I’ve been in countries where institutions are in a state of
collapse, so I understand the difficulty of running a company.
Institutions don’t come from nowhere.

It’s not correct to put me in any one philosophical or economic
camp, because I’ve learned from many. But one is American
libertarianism, market libertarianism. So as far as markets are
concerned I’m a libertarian, but I have enough expertise in politics
and history to understand that a free market ends up as monopoly unless
you force them to be free.

WikiLeaks is designed to make capitalism more free and ethical.

But in the meantime, there could be a lot of pain from these scandals, obviously.

Pain for the guilty.

Nice, except for the claim that his “expertise in politics
and history to understand that a free market ends up as monopoly unless
you force them to be free.”  How would expertise in politics even be relevant, unless the lesson is that government creates monopolies on purpose?