Brave, Brave Snowden

Those of you who haven't been living under rocks should know who Edward Snowden is and what he has done recently.  To suffer banal repetition, I shall briefly explain the news.

Edward Snowden leaked documents to the Guardian newspaper which described in detail how Verizon and other like companies regularly pass private information about people's communications into the hands of the NSA, without public disclosure or sufficient justification.

Public Disclosure

The government's rote response to privacy invasion is that these things are done in the name of "national security."  They are also quick to claim that the loss of a few privileges keep us safer.

My issue with these arguments is that "national security" is an abstract umbrella for continued abuse of power.  Furthermore, the "keeping us safer" argument has no true justification, because there is no concrete object, person, or event from which we need to become safer.

History shows us that the ruling classes have always had to hide their activities from public scrutiny in order to get away with their bad deeds.  The government of the United States is no different.  Acts are kept secret when they are harmful.

This is the reason we need public disclosure on all of our government's activities.  Even the dimmest of primates understands the harmful nature of lies and secrets.  So, when the government claims it does things for its citizens' interests, we have a right to be told what those things are, and we have to be given the chance of examining these things to decide whether they are or are not for our benefit.

Leaks such as the one Snowden provided do the public a great service by opening our eyes to the bad things the government does when they pull the wool over our eyes.

Sufficient Justification

The only security provided with "national security" is for the government's benefit -- not ours.  A detective following a murder case may have to listen  in on phone calls and such, but they need to be very choosy in who they monitor.  Furthermore, they need to have some evidence of mischievousness before they can violate someone's privacy.

If they say they need to listen to everybody's phone calls, then they obviously have no idea who they are looking for and no evidence that everyone's private conversations would hold any viable clues.  So it goes for the government.  Why listen to everyone's phone calls unless you have no idea how to run a proper investigation?

So, when someone blows the whistle on secret, unjustifiable activities, we the public gain a better understanding of why we distrust our government so much.  And, like the bully in the play yard that they are, our government throws a fit when we discover their nefarious activities, throwing the blame on the one person who acted in the interests of the greater good -- the public welfare.

Sure, Snowden is scared.  Who the hell wouldn't be?  Regardless of his age, he obviously weighed the consequences against the benefits and found what he thought was the correct thing to do.

As it goes, it is also the same thing that I believe was the correct thing to do: tell us what is hidden from us.  We are the public.  We are the country.  We are the United States of America, not the very few individuals who call themselves the government, because those people in the government are also citizens and as such also have the right for this knowledge.  The secrecy and lies hurt all of us.

It is a brave individual who pulls back the wool just a tiny bit, and dares the system to pull it back down.