3 ms·
It's not crazy to think that the USG might want to relieve Snowden of that role. The argument has been made that a crucial difference between Snowden and other
by jccc 11y ago
It's not crazy to think that the USG might want to relieve Snowden of that role.
The argument has been made that a crucial difference between Snowden and other recent whistleblowers is his relative freedom to participate in ongoing conversations and inspire potential future whistleblowers.
Is it crazy to think that the USG might want to relieve Snowden of that role?
- tptacek 11y agoNo, it isn't, but that's not the question this part of the thread is asking. Rather, it's asking "isn't Snowden harmless to the USG?"
- jccc 11y agoIn a discussion about the legitimacy of the government's pursuit of Snowden you point out that it has a very reasonable interest in parts (a) and (b). But if recent whistleblower prosecutions are a guide, it quite obviously has a strong interest in part (c) -- to scare the living daylights out of anyone in their ranks who might even think of crossing them through whistleblowing. You would agree that Snowden's ability to inspire future whistleblowers is a powerful way in which he isn't harmless to the USG? You might sincerely disagree with those who believe that this motive for getting him is at least as strong as the others. But this motive cuts into the legitimacy of the pursuit, and it should be part of your survey of the government's interests.
- tptacek 11y agoSee https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11028715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11028715.