The Edward Snowden Affair (43 page)

The “Information Lockdown” response to privacy invasion was countered by Snowden’s nightmare. After reviewing the NSA’s capabilities, others willfully surrendered to Clapper and his coalition, claiming it was impossible to function in modern society without technology and any preventative measures were not only time-consuming, but ultimately futile. But a third group emerged, the antipode to those who dove deeper into the complexities of the IT world. It admired Information Lockdown’s integrity and agreed with the latter half of the Clapper’s Children philosophy. However, it criticized Clapper’s Children for giving up so easily and said those who were willing to wave the white flag before so much as stepping foot on the electronic battlefield, had sold their privacy for a handful of customized coupons. The third group’s ideology was simple. The NSA can’t surveil what isn’t there. They turned in their phones, cancelled their social networking accounts and only use email for business purposes. The Levinsons chose to leave nothing but an envelope’s metadata for the authorities to scan and record. The neo-Luddites argue there is little use in owning a cell phone if it has to be kept in the refrigerator and, unlike email, it is much harder to hide the fact a letter’s contents have been read. And perhaps this will be a prevailing model: the technological haves and have-nots. This is one of the inadvertent gains from the surveillance debacle. U.S. intelligence has offered society the opportunity to step away from the cold, automated, quasi-human interaction of electronic communication and return to a conversational dynamic which is more rewarding and genuine. If this becomes the diametrically opposed standard, though American intelligence used the technology found in Aldous Huxley’s
Brave New World
to achieve its Orwellian objective, privacy’s salvation might ironically lie in Huxley’s character of John Savage.

The underlying philosophical issue is whether liberty and security are mutually exclusive ideas. Some critics of Snowden state the surveillance debate is overreaction and only those who have something to hide need worry. Snowden’s supporters are quick to inquire whether these critics use account passwords other than “1234” and, if not, why they are concerned if a random person reads their email. Bill O’Reilly made a fine point by highlighting a history of surveilled information that had been used to undermine political or economic opposition. Other privacy advocates, such as the anonymous collective behind the encrypted email provider Riseup.net, argue surveillance is used as a weapon to induce conformity:

What surveillance really is, at its root, is a highly effective form of social control. The knowledge of always being watched changes our behavior and stifles dissent. The inability to associate secretly means there is no longer any possibility for free association. The inability to whisper means there is no longer any speech that is truly free of coercion, real or implied. Most profoundly, pervasive surveillance threatens to eliminate the most vital element of both democracy and social movements: the mental space for people to form dissenting and unpopular views.
⁷⁶

Many journalists utilize anonymous web browsers to evade detection when exposing human rights violations.
⁷⁷
The same programming is used by drug traffickers.
⁷⁸
So the question ultimately becomes whether an individual is willing to surrender the sale of knives because there is the potential the cutlery could be used as a murder weapon.
⁷⁹
But the analogy is a metaphorical Dutch door. It could symbolize the argument for surveillance or free speech; its value lies in representing the current political atmosphere. There is no gray area in which to reach a compromise, because those entrusted to protect the people have abused their power. The American populace is being forced to choose between liberty and safety. Freedom of speech and expression carries the inherent risk of personal danger at the expense of absolute security. Perfect safety eliminates freedom and privacy.

Sources

C
HAPTER
1

¹
     Greenwald, Glenn. “Edward Snowden: NSA whistleblower answers reader questions.”
The Guardian
. June 17, 2013.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/17/edward-snowden-nsa-files-whistleblower
.