To save readers some time, the honest answer to the question is that I don’t have many profound thoughts about the controversy surrounding Edward Snowden and snooping by the National Security Agency.
But since I’ve been asked by several people to pontificate on the matter, I won’t let trivial obstacles such as lack of knowledge or absence of expertise preclude me from giving a response. Heck, I’ve written about drone attacks, and terrorism policy, and my knowledge in those areas may be even less than the President’s understanding of the economy!
Normally, when I’m in the dark about some matter of public policy, I simply see what some of my Cato colleagues have said about an issue. But as you can see here, here, and here, those experts are split on the topic (brings to mind the joke about the politician who, when asked his position on some legislation, said “some of my friends are for the plan and some of my friends are opposed, and I always stick with my friends).
So I reckon I’ll just wing it with a couple of observations and a concluding thought about patriotism.
As I noted a couple of weeks ago, I want – at a minimum – there to be judicial oversight whenever the government spies on American citizens, but I also think some cost-benefit analysis is appropriate. Just because a court has the power to approve snooping, that doesn’t mean it’s a sensible use of law enforcement resources.
I confess I don’t know whether NSA snooping is a good use of time and energy, but I’m skeptical. Why? Because we don’t find much common sense in areas where I do know enough to run my mouth, such as money laundering laws and Transportation Security Administration rules. So why is NSA snooping any different?
It probably isn’t. As such, I side with other Americans in not wanting to give up my liberties simply because some politicians say our security is threatened.
That being said, I find myself irked by Mr. Snowden’s behavior. Some people believe he is a genuine patriot (in the proper sense of the word) motivated by libertarian principles, but the fact that he fled to Russia (perhaps en route to Cuba, Venezuela, or Ecuador) doesn’t reflect well on him.
For all its flaws, I rank the United States far above places such as Russia, China, and assorted Latin American thug regimes.
I understand that Snowden presumably wants to go someplace where he can’t be snatched by American officials, but he will cross the line and unambiguously become a traitor in my eyes if he gives sensitive material to unfriendly foreign governments.
And by sensitive, I don’t necessarily mean classified. I’m sure the federal government goes way overboard in labeling material as secret or classified. I’m talking about information that could compromise the security of the United States.
I’m guessing Edward Snowden has such information. If he shares it with hostile governments, he’s a bad person.
P.S. Here’s a humorous look at Obama-approved snooping.
P.P.S. If you think I’m being too hard on Snowden, you’ll probably beat my libertarian score on this comprehensive test.
[…] have gotten the most attention, and those bureaucrats are in the challenging position of trying to justify massive invasions of our privacy when they can’t show any evidence that this voyeurism has stopped a single terrorist […]
[…] have gotten the most attention, and those bureaucrats are in the challenging position of trying to justify massive invasions of our privacy when they can’t show any evidence that this voyeurism has stopped a single terrorist […]
[…] have gotten the most attention, and those bureaucrats are in the challenging position of trying to justify massive invasions of our privacy when they can’t show any evidence that this voyeurism has stopped a single terrorist […]
[…] June, in response to a question about indiscriminate spying by the National Security Agency, I made two simple points about the importance of judicial oversight and cost-benefit […]
Peter Van Buren: “We Have to Destroy Our Constitution to Save It”
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175792/tomgram%3A_peter_van_buren%2C_we_have_to_destroy_our_constitution_to_save_it/#more
American Jihad 2014
The New Fundamentalists
By Tom Engelhardt
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175789/tomgram%3A_engelhardt%2C_a_ripley%27s_believe_it_or_not_national_security_state/#more
[…] about all communications. The government, we are told, is merely trying to fight terrorism. Sounds okay in theory, but I’m not that sanguine for the simple reason that I don’t trust government. Indeed, all of […]
[…] about all communications. The government, we are told, is merely trying to fight terrorism. Sounds okay in theory, but I’m not that sanguine for the simple reason that I don’t trust government. Indeed, […]
[…] but not least, here are my thoughts on the NSA/Snowden controversy if you want some non-humorous […]
[…] but not least, here are my thoughts on the NSA/Snowden controversy if you want some non-humorous […]
[…] already written that we do have enemies and that I think it’s okay to spy on those enemies (though I want the government to get […]
To help in explaining what it is that the NSA is doing here is a useful analogy. In the past the police had to put a tail on whomever they wanted to track. This sort of dedicated action of covert surveillance provided us with privacy, because it was so resource intensive. What the NSA has done is to put a beat cop on every corner of every street of every intersection that is in our country. They record the exact time and direction of where everyone is going.
They (the beat cop example and the NSA) are just monitoring information in the public domain. You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide right? How benign is such monitoring? Honestly, I don’t particularly care what ends up of Snowden or what information is divulged or to whom. The exposure of undercover agents recording everything that we do in the online world is worth the price of divulged secrets.
Do you wan to live in such a police state where every action that you do is monitored and recorded for your ‘safety’?
the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper… chooses to respond to congressional inquiries in the “least untruthful manner” possible… Of the 6,556 electronic surveillance requests submitted to the secrete court in Obama’s first term in office… only one was denied… a new $2 billion NSA repository is being built in Utah and will be capable of holding vast amounts of data… [it will be up and running by the end of the year…] around 70% of the national intelligence budget reportedly goes to the private sector these days… and crony capitalism is alive and well… It doesn’t matter that terrorism is one of the lesser dangers Americans face in their daily lives… once fully operational and in place expect virtually all government agencies… over time… to have access to the data stored by the security state machinery… none of this is good news for freedom loving Americans who support constructional governance… no matter what his fate… we all owe Mr. Snowden a debt… for focusing attention on what is one of the most important issues of our time…
Mr. Snowden had best watch his back… the assassination of American citizens without due process of law is not without precedent under this administration…
@John has it right. Snowden is a true patriot. And given the government’s position on Assange, who isn’t even American, he’s very smart to leave the country.
Yet he may be coerced into giving “sensitive” material to unfriendly foreign governments by the US government’s proven very unfriendly record of persecuting other whistle-blowers. I hope not.
Had Snowden revealed the snooping on citizens and stayed here, it would have been very difficult for the government to put him on trial, given the outrage and significant public support.
As to the substance of the reveal, our enemies probably assumed that such was the case, since they deal regularly with a very different set of rules.
Snowden’s biggest concern shouldn’t be the US snatching him, but the Chinese cyber group, who wouldn’t have to give him back in one piece.
Snowden is a patriot. His acts of self preservation from the most powerful nation this world has known do not change that.
What do people want? Security or Freedom. There are risks with both.
Reblogged this on Cbcburke9's Blog.