Spyke

What Snowden did was objectively good, and he did so at great personal cost, but you should be cautious about making any living person your hero. His politics seem to lean closer to libertarian nut-job than anything else, and it's very possible he will disappoint you in the future. Case in point, Glen Greenwald broke the Snowden leaks, and I considered him one of my heros for a time,.but these days he sounds more like Tucker Carlson than anyone else. The point is, admire heroic actions, but don't make people your heroes.

51

It's hard to say he's a hero, but, what he did was undoubtedly heroic.

47

Guy gave up his life to show Americans (and the world) the truth, and we as a society just ignored him.

94

conservatives have a wierd obssesion of him being a"traitor" guess exposing conservative hypocrisy is traitorous.

30

I think about where we'd be without him, and I think about where we are.

Oddly enough, it's the same place.

52
lemmy.zip

I consider him a true American patriot.

Nothing is more patriotic than wanting your country to do better.

Implementing drag net surveillance was a terrible decision, and exposing it was truly heroic.

Sadly, Snowden is now in the clutches of Russia who can and does use him as their pawn.

It is easy to say that this is where the EU should have stepped up and given him sanctuary, but that would have been less than ideal for him.

  1. Europe and the US have close ties with police and law enforcement, while no EU nation would hand their own citizens over to the US, they would absolutely hand over a US citizen to the US if requested.
  2. During the war on terror, Europe was complicit in plenty of illegal renditions of their own citizens to the CIA, they were then sent to illegal black sites and tortured, plenty of these persons have since been proven innocent.

Given the high profile of Snowden's leak, the US still want's him back, and back then even more so, had Snowden gone to the EU, he most likely would have been extradited, kidnapped or even assassinated.

By staying in Russia that was a far lower risk to him.

146
0x0reply

while no EU nation would hand their own citizens over to the US

Europe was complicit in plenty of illegal renditions of their own citizens to the CIA

Make up your mind.

3

He’s at lower risk from the US, but speaking out about Russia would probably be riskier. It’s an unfortunate situation for him to be stuck in Russia and not some other safe country.

I think the Swiss should have offered him assistance in an embassy or Vietnam or somewhere other than Putin’s Russia (which we knew was bad even back then).

Really though, Obama should have pardoned him.

10
pucker4676reply
lemmy.ml

"The west should have protected him from the west."

12
stoyreply
lemmy.zip

Eh, the EU makes a big deal of freedom, and has stood up to the US in the past, but here there are actual laws and regulations to follow, and if we stop extraditing US citizens to the US, the US would stop extraditing our citizens to us.

11
pucker4676reply
lemmy.ml

Countries in the EU are still occupying Africa. Settler shitheads.

-8
stoyreply
lemmy.zip

It appears that I am out of the loop on this...

9

That article made me vigorously expel air from my nose.

What's the #1 way that France still controls its former African colonies?

"1. These countries must officially speak French"

Did you know England controls the United States? How? England makes the US speak English. I'm super serial! This isn't a laughing matter, so stop laughing at this matter.

11
stoyreply
lemmy.zip

Oh, I had no idea about this...

The colonial tax seems especially evil.

6

Luckily it seems entirely fabricated like many other claims on that post in Pulse Nigeria’s Food and Travel section

2

Hey, thanks for telling me, I know about tankies, as well as the instances they run, though I don't check every user to see where they come from.

I'll tag him accordingly.

2

That countries in the EU are controlling countries in Africa. What else is there you could've said that's not true?

-1
pucker4676reply
lemmy.ml

I don't generally dwell on the libshits like yourself, some will never learn the art of thinking critically, but I would like to point out that the best way to control the population is to divide it. You're either a fed or unknowingly lending them a hand.

-1

The irony of calling someone a "lib-shit", over what is, in the grande scheme of things, a minor quibble, in the literal same sentence they talk about how people are dividing the population intentionally to control them.

Lmfao, you're the one dividing the population you unselfreflective dipshit. Grow up.

-2

Unironically true. Wish we lived in the timeline where war crimes mattered and those war criminal bastards were rotting in prison. Now because the USA let their own war crimes slide, it's made autonomous killing systems permissible and civilian casualty rates nearly completely ignored as the horrible precedent of today and on. I hate warfare with a passion

1

EU states have handed over their own citizens to the US, if these people have hurt us citizens enough. There is a nice episode of the darknet diaries that just came out

3
mander.xyz

Nothing is more patriotic than wanting your country to do better.

Is being patriotic and wanting your first world country to do better something heroic?

1

Well that highly depends in what you deem good. If wantig to do better is stopping the support of any goverment that suppresses its people and/or invades other countrys and you put your life in the line for that goal, i think thats very heroic.

5
M137reply
lemmy.today

before the transition* or before they transitioned* (not sure which one you meant to write)

And before SHE went to prison, I see no reason to say he other than being a anti-trans shit stain. The timing of the transition doesn't matter at all, a person who is transsexual should be called the gender they know they are independent on if someone is talking about before their public transition. A person is the gender they feel they are and should be called so for any time in their life unless they have specifically said that they want to be called their biological/sexual gender when others talk about them before their transition.

5
wiareply

Transgender is the preferred term fyi.

3

Damn right he is. He risked his safety and his life (and still does) to make sure we all know more about how the feds are spying on their own citizens.

He's a true hero of the American People, that one, make no mistake.

184

His demand to return to the US and give himself in was if he got a public (non military) trial.

The government's offer under Obama was that the only guarantee they would provide was that he wouldn't be subject to torture.

Even if he had negligible effect on state level surveillance, the documents he shared provided some insanely valuable perspective into the capability and power of nation states in the cybersecurity space.

Anything the NSA is or was doing can also be applied to other major countries like China or Russia, and the capability + compute power has only grown in size since.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowden_disclosures

EDIT: Also in true American foreign interest memery, the top two most heavily surveilled states are Iran and Pakistan.

30
europe.pub

I think he is a very sad man. He thought americans cared, he thought if americans knew they were getting fucked over they would do something. He thought american democracy is worth fighting for.

He was wrong.

63

What do you mean? All that information is available in the next data breach

5

Yes, at minimum a martyr.

Watching his disclosure real time while everyone around me ignored it was something else

42

He did a good thing. Don't know enough about the man to pass judgement.

And after all, the guy that killed Hitler (undoubtedly a good thing) was very much an asshole.

8
lemmy.world

I think he blew up his life to reveal something the general public probably should be aware of, but ultimately didn't care about.

Idk if it was heroic, but it certainly was interesting how he released the info slowly to get catch the government in numerous lies attempting to downplay the truth of the matter. One of the Obama administration's biggest blights.

107

the news quickly buried it and allowed propaganda to trash his name, usa surely dont want more shit to come out.

23
lemmy.world

Exactly. I think FEDS are in here now. One dude was saying he isn't a hero and a criminal, lol.

13
lemmy.world

What's the point of asking for opinions if this is what you think of opinions different than yours.

19
Venatorreply
lemmy.nz

it's called no stupid questions, not no stupid answers 😂

27

If people post online they have to have tough skin. Being hidden from the mob you can have the base digest your ideas to see if you have holes in your takes. Negitivity should be welcomed if productive.

-1

well the timeline we live in has pushed many to spaces where there is a common understanding of the nature of our state. Red flags and normie takes. We don't all agree on everything but more than not. Welcome to the fedi. Welcome to the fringes. Or the shad ball of deplorables.

1

An opinion based on falsities is not really an opinion, like a favourite color, or food and such.

-1
lemmy.ca

Anonymous_Leaker == SBD - Silent but deadly 🤣

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”

2
yermawreply
sh.itjust.works

A 2 day old account with that name immediately vague-threatening anyone who answers incorrectly to an opinion question?

The vibe is off

2

Nothing was threatening, that's slander. Perhaps, it was misunderstood. I was just giving tips on what not to do. How about a fresh start?

2
lemmy.ca

People should own their own shame they create based on their ability to compehend their actions.. It should motivate their change anything else is kinky. You should not accept shame like a nasty little gift. criminal, was ist das? well sheet I am a criminal too... who isn't? Straight Thuggin

2

I would argue that praising soldiers for their bravery and calling them heroes is a bootlicker thing to do.

5

Everybody, who puts morals or ethics in front of their own, personal gain, is by default a hero in today’s context. That’s the only weapon we have against authoritarian regimes, capitalism and oligarchy. A weapon, that can only be used once per capita. But don’t be fooled—we are all.

70
lemmy.world

Yes, 100 percent. The fact that he's in exile in Russia is because he cannot get a fair trial in the US. He was never a Russian asset, he's a whistleblower being unfairly persecuted

80
Fedizenreply
lemmy.world

If he was a russian asset he'd be president today

34

Bit of a nuanced take, a trimmed down copy-paste from another comment of mine prior. Tl;Dr: he's a product of the system that left the system.

Snowden was an individual that worked in the intelligence community in the mid-2000s. In this era, the American populace was so afraid of terrorism they signed away freedoms for national security. In this post 9/11 world, patriotism was a given, almost nationalistically, if you were American. It's fair to say that a highly nationalistic media and culture can influence the individual to embrace those mentalities more... even if it perverts your true best interest. Snowden likely viewed service to the NSA as patriotic, and in support of his fellow Americans. While he started off supporting it, he soon saw immorality, and decided to resist against them with what I see as an effective measure. I feel that for most whistleblowers, this logic applies. I wanna say "Good job, but still shame on you for taking the job to begin with," yet this system we're in can cause us to support things we otherwise wouldn't like.

Looking to modern issues: The manipulation of individuals, mass surveillance, leveraging of government by powerful. Critisizim of these was always there, but where it was pointed at and pursued sure felt a lot different after Snowden.

11

Yes, but...

He was a definite hero in releasing what he discovered. He blew the whistle on things that the government was doing that it had no right to do, and that people had a right to know about. He risked his life and freedom to do it, and is paying for that by having to live in exile in Russia.

The "but" is that at times he has speculated on things that he doesn't have any direct knowledge of.

For example, what he revealed in the PRISM leaks is that the US was tapping into submarine cables owned by companies like Google and getting the data that was going between various Google datacenters unencrypted.

That showed up in the PRISM leaks as this slide:

Snowden claimed that Google was cooperating with the NSA, when that slide shows what was really happening. The NSA learned how Google's architecture worked, found a vulnerability, and exploited it without Google's knowledge. Google reacted to the PRISM revelations by putting in a huge effort to encrypt data everywhere, in transit and at rest.

Until then they had thought that the data was safe. The places inside the Google network where the data was unencrypted were protected by significant physical security. They didn't think anybody could get in, at least not get in undetected. But, their threat model didn't include the US government treating them the way they'd treat an enemy country.

Google did "cooperate" with the US government, in that when it received a legal order for someone's data they complied with that legal order. They even set up systems to make that process seamless. Things like the FISA court were a bit of a joke, so it was really easy for the government to come up with a legal order that Google release the data. But, Google still did require that the government go through the motions of getting a court to sign off on the orders. I think that's why they were so surprised that the government didn't think that was enough and had tapped into their backbone traffic.

If you look at what actual full cooperation with the government looks like, look at the revelations of Mark Klein. He was also a heroic whistleblower. What he showed was that AT&T set aside a special room in one of their facilities where AT&T would copy all the Internet traffic hitting their network so that the NSA could sift through it as they wished. There was no need for a diagram of where AT&T added or removed encryption because AT&T was just handing it to them unencrypted.

So, yeah. He is a hero for what he did. But, he was irresponsible for mixing the things he knew for a fact with his own personal speculation on them, because some of his speculations were wrong.

36

Yes, he’s a hero And he shouldn’t be punished for calling out the he found. Hope he’s having a great day

61

I mean I have no idea what this guy's like, outside of what he's broadly known for, but I definately approve of what he did in regards of informing the greater public about the level of intrusion they are actively seeking to have into everybody's life.

8

100% I do. Him and nicholas are the biggest black spot on the obama administration and I hope the things that bring him the most shame. They are part of a small group of heroes of the millenia. Snowden being in russia because he brought to light what the governement was doing is one of the biggest indicators of our dystopia.

31
lemmy.world

There are a lot of comments here saying "it's tragic because no-one cared", but that is misleading as there is now a strong privacy movement.

I think, without Snowden blowing the whistle, anti-privacy laws would not face such stiff competition.

Yes we're all fighting a rearguard retreat, but without Snowden's sacrifice there would be no rearguard and there would be abject surrender rather than retreat, and we'd all live under eastern-style surveillance states without ever knowing.

36

I think, without Snowden blowing the whistle, anti-privacy laws would not face such stiff competition.

You think there's much opposition to laws and decisions that erode privacy? In the US in particular privacy has been eroding at an increasing rate year after year.

3

He could have been, but his actions and words since has made me feel he had ulterior motives from the start.

8
lemmy.ca

Finally we had a guy truthfully hollering that the sky was falling and, at the end of the day, no-one gave a shit.

39
feddit.nl

Wtf are you talking about. Mass roll outs of encryption only came thanks to him

18
matlagreply
sh.itjust.works

You're both correct. There was a lot of changes after him thanks to him. But majority of people still don't give a shit.

20
filcukreply
lemmy.zip

That is good if true, but mass spying still happens and is practically accepted as normal part lf our lives. In fact it's only getting more invasive by the day.

8

I don't think most people accept it exactly, they just don't see any option to confront it, and are struggling with their material needs while being inundated with propaganda from every possible avenue, so it's hard to be certain enough of anything to take action. Most people are afraid to fight against a system that could black bag them and drop them in the ocean if they wanted to. We have been told that we are under a complete panopticon and serious rebellion against it even if they don't arrest you can cost your job, which usually means healthcare and stable housing for people in the US. The state and the rich firmly have their boot on our face.

5

Online dragnet surveillance does happen. And, thanks to the Snowden revelations, we all now have tools to protect ourselves from it.

Using https on Facebook and using Signal for daily messages to your Mom are practically accepted as normal part of our lives.

3

Yes, and I wish him well. Be careful, if you're thinking of anything.

48

I always thought he was. I always knew too that he's never going to get a fair trial and that he had to do what was necessary to avoid being extradited.

He did a huge favor for the american masses, who were obliviously unaware as to how much of an extent that they were being spied on and how their privacy was exploited. Anybody who still calls him a traitor to this day, besides the government anyways, are those who truly cannot grasp or refuse the reality this man unveiled to them.

I do see people and people like Luigi as true patriots. They have done things, that no American has the guts to pull off. The American populace, just largely takes the constant raping of their rights by their government and fear them. It should be the other way around.

23
lemmy.world

Yeah, I wish he didn't end up in Russia, but it's understandable.

21
matlagreply
sh.itjust.works

There was pretty much nowhere else he would have been safe from being extradited to the US, if not immediately, then as a political bargain.

19

No, his behavior shall be average, not an exception. However we have to fight the repression that target him, like every other one that stand against repression

5
lemmy.world

He's a hero. Doesn't matter that it ended up being largely ignored by the public. He was motivated by doing good and sacrificed himself for it. That's the definition of a hero. A former coworker said "who's Edward Snowden?" when he came up. From that moment on, I judged her a moron, and that turned out to be a correct judgement.

27
feddit.nl

Lol wut. He wasn't ignored. Thanks to him, https is everywhere.

And we have a thousand more mainstream e2ee services.

1
TrickDacyreply
lemmy.world

I didn't say he had no impact. It's just that most people are idiots and are ignorant or apathetic to his cause.

1
feddit.nl

But those people all use https now, because the people who control the services they use redirected 80 to 443 for the sites they run.

It doesn't matter if people are ignorant or apathetic, because they all got a security upgrade by doing nothing. Thanks to Snowden.

2

It doesn't matter if people are ignorant or apathetic,

I don't understand. That's literally exactly what I wrote. I just didn't know about the https aspect, which.. acknowledged. My point stands, what he did was right regardless of the difference it made in the end.

1

Yep, he is for sure. Probably the reason I care for privacy more now.

What he did was something 99,999999% would be too afraid of.

17
discuss.tchncs.de

Permanent Record was the first book I ever read (apart from the ones in school and college), and I loved it. His story does inspire me.

In my eyes, he is!

33
lemmy.world

The Enemy Of The State movie from 1998 really woke me up in the past. You should watch it immediately.

12
mander.xyz

I remember seeing that film and thinking, “they wish they could do this.” They’ve tried pretty hard and somehow been more sinister about it.

7
mander.xyz

I mean, there were definitely cameras everywhere but they werent part of a system(closed circuit and they looked awful). Hell, they still look like shit most of the time.

Hackman had MFs zooming in on people’s faces 100 yards out from atm cameras and stuff.

Obviously, the state wants this but it’s not there yet. If it was, it’d feel extra bad how many murders and other heinous crimes they just give up on.

4
lemmy.world

I remember seeing that footage on 9/11 at the pentagon. It was like 1 frame per second.

2
sh.itjust.works

Isn't that the whole point of the AI push? To get us fully into that level of surveillance state, and to have it automated? Flock is doing its part but really they don't need cameras to track people anymore.

1

Sure but we were talking about 1998.

The real agency has certainly gotten closer to that dystopia than the film.

Wholeheartedly agree about not needing cameras.

1
piefed.social

As terrible as much of that movie is... It is a great movie overall and a recommended watch.

5

I still like the fact that he released so many documents that when the newspaper tried to open the file it broke Excel, so he had to come in and fix it.

3

mixed but yes. the govt made an example of him and from the popular standpoint he was serving the people. he also helped GDPR so thats factored in. currently the police state is still winning.

27
lemmy.world

I think what he did was heroic. I don't know for sure that his motives were pure, like I can't see into his soul, or know what his relationship with Russia was before doing it, but all in all I think what he revealed had to be revealed. The NSA were untethered by any sort of oversight or accountability to the public, and they proved beyond any doubt just how completely and totally an agency loses it's fucking mind when no one's watching. I doubt anything changed in that regard - they've probably just strafed into a different shadowy part of the landscape and are continuing with new/improved tools - but it at least taught us all that, yes, the government really is both capable and motivated to spy on every bowel movement and armpit sniff you perform, whether or not you're a suspect in a crime. The mere affirmation that this sort of thing really goes on is worth having.

29
bambooreply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

FWIW, his passport was revoked while on a layover in Russia from Hong Kong to Cuba for an intended final destination of Ecuador. This is what caused him to seek asylum in Russia because that was his only option. His involvement with wikileaks during this time is suspicious knowing what we know now, but it seems to me he either got stuck in Russia because of the US or because of Wikileaks, and he didn't knowingly have a relationship with Russia before getting stuck there.

30
tarreply
lemmy.zip

what is it that you think you know about WikiLeaks

4
sh.itjust.works

That they were/are pretty pro Russia and have uncritically disseminated Russian agitprop intended to destabilize the US.

3
tarreply
lemmy.zip

i don't think it's true that they're pro-russia, and if the agitprop was true, i don't see the problem with disseminating it.

2

As long as context is clearly explained and sources named I don't disagree. But they've been less than reliable about that in the past. If you repeat propaganda (even if it's more or less true) without explaining that it's propaganda by providing relevant context then you are a propagandist.

2

Fuck ya he is, the world needs more of him. Doing something for the greater good when greed and selfishness is not your primary motive 95% of the time makes you a hero in my book.

23

it is the structure... all people got a little devil in them... in some wierd way "leaders" are people unregulated and victums of their own vanity. This is hard to invision since they manage perception... it is litterly a gawd damn business manging image. We the plebs worship idols as the Teachers foster kids.

1

Without a doubt I think he was a hero. We should build a statue to him at the NSA or Dell HQ - maybe both.

24
lemmy.world

He did good. Would I have preferred he leaked the names and addresses of the people doing domestic surveillance? Sure. But he tried to take it to the press and then got the hell out of there.

The fact he wasn't pardoned also is very stupid. The easiest way to kill Snowden is to pardon him at this point. Its such an easy win win for politicians.

18
slrpnk.net

I think they mainly fear that if they pardoned him, it will create a knock on effect leading to even more whistleblowers. People who were on the fence about becoming whistleblowers would see that the repercussions aren't that severe anymore and hence might take that step.

7

Spending a decade in exile is not a precedent people will follow.

3
lemmy.today

actually killing him would cause a martyr effect streisand one too. more people will want to know more. before chelsea manning did the same thing, the news dropped it in like a week or 2, because they dont want people to know anymore.

5

I'm not sure that the US left could even ever be motivated enough by a martyr to do a goddamn thing.

3

Likely russia would do it. Why let him go back? His only purpose in russia is to remind russians that the US is a panopticon.

3

Absolutely. And those who say otherwise are the real criminals who violate our constitution, our countrymen, and our country. They must be destroyed for the traitors they are

19
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I got in trouble in school for putting free Kevin stuff on my binders, backpack, etc

Hero? From the stance of exposing things that should have been public knowledge, absolutely.

17
AlecSadlerreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Yeah sorry Kevin Mitnick. Always supported this type of stuff... I guess I was missing the bridge there.

11

What is it you think that Kevin Mitnick exposed that should have been public knowledge?

1

How could you get in trouble for that? Did you stand your ground and fight it?

2

A hero for sure and should get a presidential pardon instead of all the pedos and rapist!

10
lemmy.world

Absolutely. I might not agree with his opinions but leaks were clearly a net good for the humanity and incredibly hard thing to do.

11
fedia.io

Just stopping by to say hi to the glowies monitoring this thread. 👋

15

He is not a villain, he is not a simple human, what else could be

4

Anybody notice a stock "Now Playing" app has automatically downloaded on their Android without their knowledge at some point?

Because I definitely want my phone always listening just in case there's a song I don't know that can be identified by an app I'm not even aware of!

God I need a dumb phone.

5

He did the right thing after having mªde a career doing the wrong thing. He's not a hero by any standard that hasn't been bastardized by american culture. Just a guy wo finally did something non-harmful.

2

Hero isn't a title for life. His willingness to fuck his own life up to reveal NSA secrets to the world was heroic. Him staying in Russia with everything they've done more recently is decidedly less so.

We want to judge him by absolute categories like morals and convictions. And that's unfair because nobody is that pristinely moral all the time. I get that after his 007-like escape to Hong Kong, he would choose the easier way out now. If that means tacitly approving of Russia's illegal attack on their neighbor then so be it. I think his morals compelled him to release the surveillance secret to the world. And the experience has sufficiently dulled any moral urges. Combine that with a limited list of choices of where else to go. A true superhuman hero would not want to stay where he once sought asylum if that country was itself responsible for hundreds of thousands of people seeking asylum elsewhere. As I said, hero isn't a title for life.

10

I think that him staying in Russia is more because that if he get out he will be arrested and deported. The guy reveal an overreaching conspiracy by the US to spy on their allies and the allies choose the side of the US

66

There'd have been plenty of other countries that don't have extradition treaties with the USA.

I withhold judgement, but him going to Russia of all places (considering why he had to flee in the first place) never sat right with me.

Putin has used him to boast his image btw.

edit: I was just reminded that there were technical reasons for him initially staying in Russia. Maybe he really can't leave, IDK.

-4

As I recall he was heading somewhere else, but the US revoked his passport while he happened to be catching a connecting flight in Russia and so he ended up taking refuge there instead.

42
lemmy.world

He stayed in Russia because he is safe from US extradition. If the US was able to extradite him, they would assassinate him.

25
lemmy.ca

They wouldn’t assassinate him today. They’d just throw him in jail for life.

After all, they’re now doing in the open what he caught them doing in secret, and there have been no repercussions. So that means they no longer have a reason to shut him up, and they definitely don’t want to martyr him.

8

I see it both ways .... the capitalist class fights amoung themselves so a faction could try to seek revenge. Even with great power some still think in small ways. By him leaking and the pdfiles getting away with their crimes sins probably makes the public feel very small... which also has its effect. Him being alive reminds the public of their percieved powerlessness.

i Am gOnNa kILl tHaT gAwD DaMn fLy 0nE oF tHeSe dAys

1

If the US was able to extradite him, they wouldn't need to assassinate him. From the government pov, assassinations are for people you can't lock away forever.

6
Serinusreply
lemmy.world

As long as he doesn't do anything wrong in Russia, I'm not going to give him shit for taking refuge.

14

i totally agree with you that if he was in a position to actively oppose Russian imperialism and aggressions him not doing so does show his complicity in those crimes. but i’m not sure how much he is an actor in his life right now or he is being acted upon. i would imagine him living in a disgustingly claustrophobic golden cage with his family and their privileges and wellbeing being hung open him as if a Damocles Sword.

3
lemmy.world

I don't know. He reminds me more of Emma Goldman -- an idealist and an anarchist.

If anything the world has become a far harsher place than it was more than a decade ago, what with dictators doubling down in trying to put down dissent, as whatever he divulged didn't seem to stop those monsters, regardless of what flag they wrap around themselves.

6

There is a difference between reminiscence and comparison.

However both of them were reviled by what you call mainstream society and media, while the radicals consider them anti-establishment heroes.

1
lemmy.nz

'Hero' is a term of social worship for those that enact change.

Do I think he did a moral act that aligned with his principles, motivated by compassion for others? Did he forsee what it would cost him and do it anyway because he believed it was the right thing to do, no matter how hard? Yes, and yes.

But he'd only be a 'hero' if anybody actually cared enough to do anything about it, making him a symbol of social change that people would be grateful for him instigating.

Instead, he falls victim to the same traps as those who self-immolate outside buildings to make their point: a spectacle of sacrifice, exchanged for confused apathy from those he claimed to stand for.

That really sucks. He was trying to make a real difference. He had to flee his home forever, because of the cost of him trying to save it.

8
Gethreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I think you are being pedantic. If you went in risking your life to rescue a puppy from a burning house but the puppy doesn't make it because of the fumes or you jump on a robber but he kills and leaves with the money anyway, do you stop being a hero because you failed to enact change? That's ridiculous.

7
Manticorereply
lemmy.nz

I think the difference in your hypothetical is that people would care that he tried. But inventing a scenario to put words in the mouth of a stranger has no relevance to the reality I'm commenting on.

Think of me as you wish. I answered the question in good faith, and that's enough for me.

I don't personally believe in 'heroes' and 'villians'. I think it's a very rudimentary way to view the world, as if through the lens of a storybook. We have deeply corrupt and selfish people causing harm, we have considerate and compassionate people fighting for their principles. Most people are some measure of both.

Reducing people to Hero and Villain frequently excuses us any responsibility of self-reflection, as we can simply call ourselves 'Good' and justify unethical acts in the name of Goodness. It reduces the world down to in-group and out-group binaries, and then devastates us when we learn that a Hero has, as a fallible human, also done harmful things. It also denies Villians any opportunity to change for the better.

If you believe that Hero is an objective trait one can achieve, but that social approval is not how one achieves it, we have very different views on humanity and ethics.

1
Gethreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I wouldn't imagine that OP meant the question as Snowden being permanently labeled a hero for all of his life actions, nor should anyone ever be labeled as such. We are judging a specific action he took many years ago and also in a context of people generally labeling his action as good or bad since then. We are also not talking about comic book characters that are consistently one way or another through all of their actions. We can agree that a convicted felon can be heroic and a puppy loving doctor can do villainous shit as well depending on circumstance, opportunity and personal moral beliefs.

But for this specific action of exposing a terrible truth and essentially losing his way of life and being forced to live as a refugee, I don't think we should get into the pendatry of what a hero in theory is or if his action led to any actual change. Being suppressed by forces with way more weight than you doesn't eliminate whatever label your actions deserve.

2

Sure, it sounds like he has your approval, and the approval of people in the privacy movement, who would use the term Hero. I accept that.

As for what the word 'hero' means to you, and whether I value those same things, then the answer is yes:

Do I think he did a moral act that aligned with his principles, motivated by compassion for others? Did he forsee what it would cost him and do it anyway because he believed it was the right thing to do, no matter how hard? Yes, and yes.

...I just don't use the word 'hero' to describe this, which is what OP asked.

The word has become a simplified symbol to me, and if anything, feels less powerful than acknowledging the real sacrifice he made in the name of his principles.

Without acknowledging that nuance, 'Hero' apparently puts him in the same category as housefire-puppy-rescuers, and what he did was much more deliberate. He wasn't emotionally impulsive; he was fully cognisant of the risk he was taking and made the decision to do it anyway.

'Hero' is a word other people give you, in reverence. He may be a hero of the privacy movement, sure. But the audience at large that he was speaking for does not consider him a hero (and I don't use the term myself), thus for both I say no. I'm not from the US, so I'm not one of the people he sacrificed for; so I answered with his audience's response (or lack thereof) in mind.

'Do you think there are people who consider Snowden a hero' is not the question I was answering, because the answer to that would always be yes, of any public figure.

1

There does exist a strong privacy movement that replicates 99% of tech products that mainstream tech companies provide. I think part of the momentum can definitely be attributed to Snowden's revelations.

2
leminal.space

I struggle with it. I know he needs an international ally to protect him, but running to Russia and having nothing to say about their bullshit comes across sour to me. I'm thankful, at least, for the information he provided.

5

He applied for asylum in dozens of other countries, but all of their leaders received threatening direct phonecalls from then vice president Biden. Putin was the only one who didn't cave to American pressure, so Snowden had no choice but to stay in Russia

25
feddit.nl

He didn't run to Russia.

He had a layover in Russia to Latin America, and then the US canceled his passport.

The US trapped him in Russia.

17
Jaxreply
sh.itjust.works

That seems odd to me.

He was working in Hawaii so he takes a layover in Russia??

Something doesn't smell right, even with how weird layovers can be.

-3
piefed.social

do you know nothing of the incident. He was in asia for awhile and was trapped in russia because orgininally he did have a european destination but it became clear that was likely to get him extridated so it changed to south america. Granted the person you replying to calling it a layover to latin america was representing it kinda wierd so im thinking he may have limited recall on it. He was in hon kong for awhile.

5
Jaxreply
sh.itjust.works

Ah, I didn't realize those were the circumstances — I assumed it was from wherever he was working at the time (I thought it was Hawaii but I could be wrong).

1
piefed.social

yeah I have no idea where he was working or was before hong kong. pretty much when it hit the news it was even guesswork of where he was but I know he was working with a group that moved him from home to home of trusted people.

2

He was working in Hawaii, and went to Hong Kong to meet the Glenn Greenwald

1

He was in Hong Kong, selected because it wouldn't raise any flags and he could hide.

Then he got help from some lawyers in WikiLeaks that tried to get him asylum in Latin America, so he had to get a layover in a country without an extradition treaty. That flight took him to Russia, but the US prevented him from catching the next plane because they canceled his passport and trapped him there.

3

Snowden had applied for asylum in Ecuador, he went to Russia for connecting flights to Latin America.

He couldn't leave. Even the Bolivian presidential plane had to land in Austria after false rumors circulated that Snowden was aboard the aircraft.

12
zergtoshireply
lemmy.world

Where do you propose he should've gone instead?
Some protection from CIA/NSA should be available at that place.

10

...its been their game the whole time

The U.S. took his passport away as he was in transit, right when that happened (literally blame your own gov't for this, it wasn't his decision) he was getting a connecting flight in Russia. He's since stayed there.

Crazy that you...think that Russia, what, had control of the American gov't and got them to revoke his passport mid-flight? Is that what you're getting at?

4

Anyone who cared already had a good idea about what the NSA did. Go and read The Cuckoo's Egg, a book published in 1989 goes into what the NSA does. it was public knowledge in 1989 that the NSA was monitoring all phone calls and all internet traffic back in the days of modems.

Nobody cared back then and the NSA continues to do what it does and nobody cares now. Nobody actually cares about privacy and constantly willingly share pretty much all information about themselves that's possible to be to be put onto a computer.

Snowden essentially just revealed that the NSA exists to people that were ignorant of it. But while doing so he revealed other state secrets to adversaries.

When the EU makes laws that require companies to disclose they're tracking you, people are angry at the EU because the cookie popups are annoying. It's very clear people would rather be tracked without knowledge of it than have even a popup on their screen. All of the information these companies collect is bought and sold regularly.

It's trivial for the NSA to just buy all of your purchase history and all of your activities online because all of that is tracked by marketing companies and no one gives a shit. Suddenly you're upset if the government knows what everyone else knows? It's like putting your personal information on a billboard and getting angry if someone that works for the government happens to drive by and see that billboard.

The only thing of significance that Snowden did was share specific state secrets to adversaries. He currently lives in Russia and says whatever Putin demands that he says. He's just a Putin stooge now.

People like the narrative of this guy who blew the lid on something nobody knew before, but anyone who cared to know already knew the NSA monitors communications, it's kinda their whole thing. According to the narrative, the evil governments are after because he revealed the existence of the NSA. The truth is the existence of the NSA wasn't a secret it's just the ignorant didn't know about it. The whole point of the NSA is to monitor communications, and it was widely known the degree to which they did this. The budget of the NSA is something you can see in public records.

Not long after the Snowden story went from the limelight, everyone went back to not caring about the NSA. Nobody actually cares about privacy, they just pretend to be upset about it for a short time before there's some other story to pretend to be upset about.

3

Basically have ceased using mobile phones since he confirmed our "paranoid" suspicions. Boggles my mind how others can carry on. It's like they've been hypnotised out of understanding their duty to poke big baron in the eye.

3
piefed.social

He did not even have a final destination in mind. he kinda fled in a reactionary type of way. What he did was great but yeah he did not put enough thought into it.

1
piefed.social

yeah granted im making supposition but it kinda seem like he was planning on going somwhere after hong kong but I think he almost got trapped there and it was only the flight to russia that got him out and then the idea was he was going to go somewhere else but it all got shut down and he got stuck there.

1

yeah it was one of those wild times with news which unfortunately we see to much nowadays.

1

I would like to see the presidential parden used for him. I think Snowden had honorable intentions but went about releasing the information (to trusted journalists) in the wrong way. I think he should have gone to the OIG, i dont think he did, and after trying that gone to journalists. However, i cant really fault him, its hard to know what to do in the moment. I probably would not have released documents in his place.

2

hero is a useless word. it's what you call someone to avoid having to do anything concrete to thank them or help them

1
lemmy.world

Snowden should have flown to Ecuador first and then released what he knew.

1
prolereply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

Oh you mean he should have waited until he was in Ecuador before having Greenwald start the leaks...

Yeah, I'm not sure why he didn't do it that way. Maybe there's a reason, but I don't remember it.

3

Was the government trying to block The Guardian from publishing it maybe, and there was a time constraint for when they needed to put it out there before they were somehow successfully silenced about it forever? I honestly forget.

3

He was in too deep.. learned something crazy... lacked the sociopathy too keep a secret. Conflicted and flexed on he said fuck it... then became the friend of the bully next door. or he is a phcyop that hides a bigger secret. What if the whole ass world is just one big dragnet and we all are caught inbetween capitalist cartel families and their desires. As time progresses we will all see war as the meat grinder it is and abondon the idea of escape and embrace kinetic rebellion. I don't worship idols. No gods no masters. Yet he is more intersting than me. meh 😐️ Anonymous_Leaker == SBD

1
piefed.social

What he revealed was worthwhile.

How he did it was fucked.

What he’s done since …. Hasn’t helped his image.

1

Typical 'Americans' who are very gung-ho for their gov't and the nonsense it spouts get angry that Russia gave him a safe space to live. They love to bring up that he lives in Russia now, so I'm going to assume this is what they're (very ineffectively) trying to say

1

Snowden is a symptom of a larger surveillance problem. the actions he took were neither good nor bad.

allying himself with Russia only helped distract the American public from his actual intentions and allowed The State to discredit him further.

his actions also allowed other organizations like Wikileaks to gain positive attention which ultimately allowed Trump and his corrupt administration a foothold into circumventing American democracy.

in short, he was an unexpected but useful pawn in the journey to destroy the American hegemony which has directly benefited organized fascism.

-3

Nope, I think he's probably a Russian asset. IMO if you are willing to break the law because you believe strongly enough it's the right thing to do you should be willing to face the consequences. His message would be a lot stronger coming from a jail cell instead of an enemy state.

Every day he was in jail would drive further public outcry.

-7

No. He's just another dude like anybody else.

He lived a life of serving capitalism, empire, etc. That's how he got into his position. It's admirable and exceptional that he repented but that doesn't make him a hero, especially versus people who have spent their lives doing good all along.

-10

I think this, like most binary thinking commonly done on social media, would be a superficial analysis. Swipe left or right, those are your two choices., and not swiping at all equals swiping wrong. Age of Information my ass.

0

I'll take my downvotes. No, I don't think he is.

I think if he were, he'd have

  • limited his disclosure to the programs he had an actual issue with
  • at least attempted the normal whistleblower procedure through OGC
  • gathered his data by social engineering staff in specific projects and not anyone he could in his office

Personally, my profile of Snowden is someone who has a large ego and lashed out because he was a small fish in a large NSA pond. The "whistleblower" story was generated by propagandists to encourage copycats by digging through the massive disclosures and finding one or two uncomfortable things to latch on to. Snowden played along because he had to; he was now at the mercy of U.S. adversaries to give him safe harbor.

-8
mander.xyz

I think he's a monster, in the classical sense that is.

The Latin monstrum, had a broader meaning, encompassing any kind of warning from he gods (demonstrate has the same root). Rulers then, just as now, weren't very observant of subtle hints, so back then this often took the form of godzilla wrecking shit.

Take the story of Laomedon, the Trojan king. After having some very nice city walls built for him, he neglected the small matter of actually paying his workers. Unfortunately for him said workers happened to be gods, who have slightly more bargaining power than your average worker, with the eventual industrial action including a cetus, a kind of sea monster, sent by Poseidon.

Rather annoyed at having his shit wrecked by a sea monster, Laomedon enlisted Heracles to kill it. Which, of course, being a hero, Heracles did very heroically. Now Laomedon, being a complete fucking moron, failed to learn absolutely anything from this, and decided it was a good idea stiff Heracles out of payment for this task.

In response, Heracles raised an army, besieged Troy, and killed Laomedon and his sons. This bought the matter to a close.

-9
lemmy.ca

I should. There's just something about him. It's like he loves to hear himself talk. I just can't get past that.

It's like Julian Assange. I know there were serious accusations against Assange (that may have been fabricated) but even before those there was something that kept me from believing he was truly righteous.

Chelsea Manning though is a hero, imo.

-2
Maevereply
kbin.earth

We're all humans, though. What irritates one in another may be a quality that irritates us about ourselves, that we don't see.

5
lemmy.world

He had a ton to say. That is why he was so talkative. What was crazy is, during an interview, a fire alarm went off where he was and everybody was freaked out. It was supposedly maintenance. They had to unplug everything, even the simple hotel room phone, that could have been bugged.

3

To me, it was like he felt the world should be listening to him all along. He just happened to find something the world had an interest in hearing.

I know It might be unfair on my part. It just never sat right with me.

1
stoyreply
lemmy.zip

I agree with you on Assange, he became too involved in publishing scoops and bringing in large headlines that he got his head too far up his own arse.

I always wondered about why he stayed in the embassy and wasn't smuggled out from it in a diplomatic car and flown to Ecuador.

It wouldn't be the first time someone was smuggled out from a country using an embassy.

-1
Maevereply
kbin.earth

Iirc, the embassy was surrounded and watched by agents to arrest Assange, should be step out.

3
stoyreply
lemmy.zip

I mean, take him to the garage, put him in the boot of a diplomatic car, drive to the airport

1

I can tell you closely followed this story and thought of things trained professionals didn't.

-_-

5

He did good and did something heroic but the title of hero should be reserved to actual heroes that never chose once to side with scum. Before turning out as good this guy was serving in the US army

-10
Maevereply
kbin.earth

Anon has done heroic things and horrific things. Exposing scientologist embedment everywhere and their cruelty, for example. Again, USA shrugged.

2

Anon is a fucking joke. In fact, that's what they largely have become anymore. They're only serving their self-interests. Sure, they've done a handful of things that would otherwise be seen as good, but majority of the time, they've proven to just outright be assholes who operate arbitrarily but likely sides with their own interests.

0
lemmy.world

Almost but not quite. If he would've stayed here and faced the music then it's an unqualified yes, but his fleeing to Russia and hiding out there makes it no cigar to me.

I understand that he still was brave and gave up a lot to expose the information, but I think it may have had more impact, and would've been more heroic had he stayed here.

I could almost see an alternative history where he surrendered and then a whole political movement was born with him as the focal point.

Edit: Downvote all you like but my opinion remains the same.

-24
piefed.zip

He didn't flee to Russia - he was going somewhere else and got stuck in Moscow on a layover because the US revoked his passport.

That said, I don't like him staying there either, but maybe he really cannot leave.

I completely disagree about "facing the music" - it would have been a guaranteed and long prison sentence.

20

doesnt look hes safe if he travels to any country that would extradite him to the US. i assume russian friendly country is all he will go to.

2

his passport was revoked while in russia, russia(putin allowed him to stay) of course this serves a purpose as it provides propaganda against the west as well.

2

Hmm... Interesting essay question. I think for the year it happened, yes-ish. Had it been today, it would have been like whatevs, because everyone is giving away their privacy in exchange for some functionally. And so, as I think back on it, it didn't really mattered. I think this could've been debated either way.

-4
lemmy.world

Most of us here are more of a hero, because we had the backbone to never actually work for those fascist services to begin with.

-23
lemmy.world

"Most of us here are more of a hero" Did you risk your life too? Did you release knowledge of government wrong doings, or similar? I doubt most people here did. I assume he did have some knowledge of spying but not to that scale.

9
lemmy.world

You missed the point. To get that kind of knowledge, he first had to subscribe to the evil team. Which he did. It would be different if he had joined from the beginning with the motive to expose unlawful practices by the services. It is more heroic to not join team evil in the first place.

-15
lemmy.world

Have you not watched his documentary? He is actually a good dude. It was free on YouTube, you should.

12
lemmy.world

Guess what, I even read "No place to hide" by Glenn Greenwald / Ed Snowden. I never said Snowden is bad, but he was naive and quite fucking stupid to think he was working for "the good guys" initially. I am glad he had a change of heart and did what he did. Nevertheless it is more heroic to stay away from evil deeds than change your mind after partaking and then step away.

-4
technocritreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

It's wild how many people downvote this perspecive.

I imagine people can't understand the evil that snowden did before the leak, because we never confront the evil that we all do as victims of capitalism.

2

Yeah, there's a good chance this is part of the problem - by benefiting passively from a first world that exploits so many other countries and people in the world, we become complicit, and develop a cognitive dissonance regarding our share of responsibility for the evils of the world. Especially since obviously as a child you can't be guilty for the world you are born into, but it requires an act of emancipation to distance oneself from a system that you recognize as exploitative if not outright evil as you grow older. And it's impossible to completely remove ourselves from it, we can only ever try and fight smaller aspects of the unfairness.

Another part that I suspect here is that many people have a complete blind spot for the fact that in order to get into a position to leak such sensitive information, Snowden specifically had to be a helping puppet to the system for quite some time.

In that way, and with the knowledge I have about the case, Chelsea Manning is way more eligible to be considered a hero, because they got a hold of documents for which they did not need to willingly participate in any kind of evil - aside from joining the military which is at least a questionable decision for many (including myself) - especially when it comes to the military of some specific countries known for frequently attacking other countries to further their own ends.

2
Maevereply
kbin.earth

I'm going to disagree a little bit. Even if you work for a small private company, you're still complicit. Create or make some niche product and sell IRL/online, you're still complicit. Using the device I'm on, I'm complicit. The only way to not be any kind of complicit is to never be born. And we don't get a say. If we had survival skills, we may manage to stay offgrid, hunt, fish, steal for subsistence until we die or go to prison, then complicit again.

It's a matter of degrees, and I maintain we don't all at once sell our souls in one grand bargain, signed on our own blood. It's more of being, if you'll excuse the analogy, being born a sinner with the only absolution, especially for those without means, is to simply die. And survival instinct is strong.

2
lemmy.world

We don't disagree - I commented something very similar deeper down in this thread. have no idea how to link it here though on mobile - my apologies.

2

No worries, I saw it after. Thanks for your response.

2
piefed.zip

Government institution = fascist services. Nice. Remind me to not march beside you when we finally take down the oligarchs.

2
piefed.zip

Point taken. I guess I should completely amend my argument; my real point is that Snowden blew the whistle exactly on what makes the NSA so bad.

1

To the surprise of no one who had been reading the news, though. It was mostly putting some details to thinks we already knew about. Still, I commend he did do it, and I wish he could live a life less controlled by those in power - but I don't consider him a hero. More like a tragical figure.

1

I think he was… wrong-ish?

I think he didn’t see the forest through the trees.


He was scared of government abuse of surveillance, as he should be. He was scared of a North Korean style surveillance initially justified by fear of terrorists, basically.

But, IIRC, he didn’t fear corporate abuse enough.

He couldn’t imagine the consolidated attention trap the internet would turn into, but I think the signs were there. I guess he couldn’t imagine that all this would come out and people would choose to trade their privacy for instant convenience instead of fear of terrorists, the justification of the time..

Especially at the scale we do in corporate software today.

In other words, I think he should’ve been more worried about a post-truth corporate state than a censored, oldschool dictatorship, as the former seems to be what the US is barreling towards.

So maybe he was a hero. But, sadly, I think he grazed the mark on what to warn us about.

-3
lemmy.zip

Of course not. He's a criminal. What did leaking that data do to improve the lives of Americans? Now, how much more advanced did our foreign enemies become in attacking our intelligence? He was an extremist that made us more vulnerable to threats based on his own personal value system.

-59

It may seem like not much changed, but it was one of the motivating factors for the big push for TLS everywhere after it was revealed that PRISM was tapped into and mirroring unencrypted communications. Also Signal probably wouldn't be as popular as it now, with people still using unencrypted communications.

One of the NSA's missions is to protect all of the federal government's computer networks from cyber-terrorism. You could argue that in light of what Snowden revealed, the increased focus of security and encryption did more to protect all of the federal government's computer networks from cyber-terrorism than any other NSA initiative ever.

20
lemmy.zip

It's giving away our intelligence apparatus to every other nation. What do you mean how.

-40

Every other nation's intelligence services already know all of that stuff. All he did was reveal it to the American people. Intelligence classifications are meant to keep YOU from knowing

22
TootSweetreply
lemmy.world

Is there any particular piece of information that he revealed which could have been used by anyone really to... I dunno... bypass defenses or take advantage of people or whatever in some a way that could actually hurt people?

I dunno. Everything I've heard is that everything that he leaked that has been released was super innocuous militarily (not that the military is a bunch of knights in shining armor or anything) or national-defense-wise. It is (or at least should be) very embarrassing to the U.S. "intelligence apparatus". And it's clearly good reason to believe that Uncle Sam clearly doesn't have our (American's) best interests at heart. But what could possibly have even hypothetically been used to cause any harm?

(And, I don't know, maybe you know something I'm unaware of, but it really seemed like he went out of his way to avoid any harm to anything but the reputation of the intelligence industrial complex. And maybe a few presidents.)

20
pishadootreply
sh.itjust.works

He didn't sanitize names, addresses, or active locations of the individuals involved in the work he was exposing. He made each of them a direct target.

Most people who are critical of him from an educated place instead of one based on feels do so because of that. That wasn't necessary to get his point across, it was sloppy and reckless, and completely unnecessary. People who call him a terrorist usually are the ones who believe there's no way you could be so reckless and instead attribute it to malicious ulterior motives of trying to get people killed.

1

I'm sure it was no secret to these other countries that the US was spying on their own citizens.

10
BassTurdreply
lemmy.world

So you were fishing for confirmation rather than looking for opinions? Don't ask a polarizing question if you can't stomach the answers you don't agree with.

-7
lemmy.world

What, I can't respond? And no, I am just pointing out how ridiculous that comment actually is, lol.

16
BassTurdreply
lemmy.world

It wasn't my comment. And if it was, my point still stands. Don't ask questions if you don't want to hear opposing answers.

-10
lemmy.world

I meant "that" comment. What? am I not allowed to respond to it on my post? Get over yourself.

12
BassTurdreply
lemmy.world

You didn't just respond. You immediately went feral. Like I said, you weren't looking for responses, you were looking for confirmation of your views. When you didn't get it, you lashed out like a child.

You can respond however you want, but actions have reactions, and this is that.

-15

How is this feral? : "Alright, so you are for more spying on actual innocent Americans. Great…"

You don't know how I think, look at you assuming. I posted on here, of course I expected other views. And you acting all high and mighty like you know everything is disgusting.

13

Granted they could've responded a little better but as someone else said, your reaction is very out of proportion.

5