Edward Snowden Reconsidered
nybooks.com
Edward Snowden Reconsidered
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#2Unintelligible and endless. I don't know what's being "reconsidered" because this adds nothing other than an weird-ass attempt to associate Wikileaks, Snowden, Poitras and Greenwald with Putin and Russia, Nazism, and the Australian far-right(?!).
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#3Unintelligible and endless. I don't know what's being "reconsidered" because this adds nothing other than an weird-ass attempt to associate Wikileaks, Snowden, Poitras and Greenwald with Putin and Russia, Nazism, and the Australian far-right(?!).
Agree. Don't know why you're being downvoted. This is a dumb piece.
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#4Unintelligible and endless. I don't know what's being "reconsidered" because this adds nothing other than an weird-ass attempt to associate Wikileaks, Snowden, Poitras and Greenwald with Putin and Russia, Nazism, and the Australian far-right(?!).
The Australian far right, also known as the shooters and fishers party...
Yea I don't know if I can take someone serious who thinks a party focused on recreational hunting and gun rights is some fringe far right party.
Also the claim of "alignment" comes from preference runoffs, because wikileaks put them ahead of the greens. Seems like a lot of bias packed just in this one sentence.
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#5> An earlier version of this essay misstated the number of documents that Edward Snowden released; that number is not known. The figure of 1.7 million was an intelligence estimate given to Congress of files accessed by Snowden. An earlier version also misstated that the DuckDuckGo search engine allows partners to collect user data; it does not. The article has been updated.
So the author spent all this time writing this article couldn't even bother to confirm how many documents were leaked and seemed to be under the assumption that DDG is data mining it's users?
This article just feels like it was written by a 3 letter agency and dropped on someone's desk.
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#6> The question of whether or not Snowden was a Russian asset all along has been raised and debated. No evidence has been found that he was, just as no evidence has been found that he was a spy for China. ... We can’t know.
Wikipedia: Fear, uncertainty and doubt (often shortened to FUD) is a disinformation strategy...
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#7This is a pretty smart article. The author makes a solid attempt to explain one of the weirder things about Snowden, Assange, and Greenwald, and the other people in their orbit — why do people who care about transparency and revealing government wrongdoing appear to defend and/or support Putin?
I’m not entirely convinced by the explanation, but it’s the best one I’ve seen so far, and a lot of these people’s actions make more sense if the author is right about what motivates them.
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#8I can come up with no better summation of the damage Snowden has done to liberal democracies and the rule of law than his quote near the end: "...Politics will take us only so far and if history is any guide, they are the least reliable means of achieving effective change"
In other words Snowden's taught millions of young people he influences that working within the frameworks of politics and the law is pointless and can't create the lasting change they hope for.
This is not only incredibly childish and destructive - it's inaccurate. Politics and the rule of law have have provided protections for racial, sexual, religious minority populations in dozens of countries around the globe, have destroyed institutional slavery, and have created the largest sustained creation of broad-based wealth in human history. It's provided universal health care for millions of people across Europe and the Americas, defeated totalitarianism in two global conflicts, launched people into space, and created the technological revolution without which we wouldn't be having this debate today.
We're not perfect. Nobody claims we are. But politics and law are how we improve ourselves.
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#9I can come up with no better summation of the damage Snowden has done to liberal democracies and the rule of law than his quote near the end: "...Politics will take us only so far and if history is any guide, they are the least reliable means of achieving effective change" In other words Snowden's taught millions of young people he influences that working within the frameworks of politics and the law is pointless and…
When were there two global conflicts between "politics and the rule of law" on one side and "totalitarianism" on the other side?
Perhaps the strategies you're referring to under the term "politics and the rule of law" are more effective at promoting some goals than they are at other goals?
Re: Edward Snowden Reconsidered
#10I can come up with no better summation of the damage Snowden has done to liberal democracies and the rule of law than his quote near the end: "...Politics will take us only so far and if history is any guide, they are the least reliable means of achieving effective change" In other words Snowden's taught millions of young people he influences that working within the frameworks of politics and the law is pointless and…
This is like blaming the underground railroad for the civil war.