Peter Thiel: "Politics is about interfering with other people's lives." Credit:Bloomberg The problem with this double standard goes deeper than Apple, encryption, regulation or a single technology. It goes to the very attitude of much of the tech world when it comes to standing up for democratic values. Silicon Valley's thinking in this area is shaped by techno-libertarianism, a faith in a utopia though technology and a disdain for the political and economic realities of actual governance. Many in the tech world like to see themselves as beyond the scope of our shared political reality. Take this quote by tech libertarian billionaire, PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel. "The great task for libertarians is to find an escape from politics in all its forms [...]".

Apple CEO Tim Cook: outspoken about US law. Credit:Bloomberg This point of view makes for difficulty in matters today such as fighting terrorism or even defending the integrity of the news environment of democracies. Increasingly, in this young century, the values of this tech community are clashing with the wider values of the political society that gave birth to them: liberal democracy. China and the US represent vastly different visions of government - online too. Chinese President Xi Jinping and ex-US President Barack Obama. Credit:Bloomberg And what's happening to democracies in the digital age? Liberal democracies – the ones that demand free elections, independent courts, and promote the rule of law – have been stunned by how the technology can be turned against them by authoritarian nations.

"With the benefit of hindsight, it is now apparent that the democracies long failed to realise that a new era of competition was underway between autocratic and democratic states," writes Christopher Walker of the National Endowment for Democracy. Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook: Initially incredulous that his platform influenced voters. Credit:AP Yet the attitude of a lot of thinking in the tech community remains adversarial to the governments which ultimately must protect them. PM Malcolm Turnbull said it himself in July. "There is a culture particularly in the United States, a very libertarian culture, which is quite anti-government in the tech sector." Edward Snowden finds a willing audience in the tech community.

In Russia's hands Snowden's cause has, in the West, helped drive a wedge between the tech community and the broader government, between the governments and the publics, and between the US and allies such as Australia. Unwittingly, the tech community has become a conduit for such division. As a former East German Stasi colonel explained in how to use information to attack an enemy: "A powerful adversary can only be defeated through […] a sophisticated, methodical, careful, and shrewd effort to exploit even the smallest 'cracks' between our enemies […] and within their elites." Snowden, for any initial righteousness in his cause, has become – whether he appreciates the fact or not – a part of the machine aimed at distorting opinion within the West. And the opinions of techno-libertarians seem to be a ripe target for exploitation.

If, as many of them believe, that "information wants to be free", then who are we to oppose the release of information clearly intended to manipulate Western opinion? The attitude helps to explain the muted criticism groups such as WikiLeaks, ShadowBrokers and Guccifer 2.0 got during the 2016 election from many in the tech community at the time. As NED's Walker recently wrote "authoritarian regimes have learned to use modern media to their advantage," and one of the ways they are doing it is by using "the opportunities offered by the new media environment to sow confusion and distrust." But with Silicon Valley, the distaste for government – legitimate or not – seems to be in the DNA. In a 1996 essay called "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", cyberlibertarian John Perry Barlow proclaimed "we have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one".

It's not always contempt for democratic politics, as much as the strange disconnect from the reality of them. In the aftermath of propaganda-dominated 2016 election, Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg described as "crazy", the notion the social media platform "influenced the election in any way". Political scientist Thomas Rid described Twitter as an "unwitting agent" of Russian propagandists for the company's unwillingness to provide statistics on the number of bot accounts used to amplify disinformation. The libertarian indifference to nation-state enables such corporate behaviour. Meanwhile, groups such as Electronic Frontier Foundation, The Centre for Democracy & Technology, and Digital Rights Watch in Australia have remained largely silent about the information pollution coursing over social media networks. (The EFF has criticised Apple's VPN decision).

It's ironic that the roots of Silicon Valley's culture date back to the US war effort to defend democracy during World War II. Scientists created the new discipline of cybernetics or the study of human interaction with machines – which spurred a lot of cross-discipline collaboration – forming the fertile ground for Silicon Valley's genius. Today however that genius has evolved into something that is increasing risks for Western democracy. Liberal democracies must be able to defend themselves online. Too much of the tech community dismisses, or even mocks, the fundamental political reality confronting the governments that guarantee and protect their rights. Loading