Las Vegas Sun

April 19, 2015

Currently: 71° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account


The solitary leaker and corrosive cynicism

From what we know so far, Edward Snowden appears to be the ultimate unmediated man. Though obviously terrifically bright, he could not successfully work his way through the institution of high school. Then he failed to navigate his way through community college.

According to The Washington Post, he has not been a regular presence around his mother’s house for years. When a neighbor in Hawaii tried to introduce himself, Snowden cut him off and made it clear he wanted no neighborly relationships. He went to work for Booz Allen Hamilton and the CIA, but he has separated himself from them, too.

Though thoughtful, morally engaged and deeply committed to his beliefs, he appears to be a product of one of the more unfortunate trends of the age: the atomization of society, the loosening of social bonds, the apparently growing share of young men in their 20s who are living technological existences in the fuzzy land between their childhood institutions and adult family commitments.

If you live a life unshaped by the mediating institutions of civil society, perhaps it makes sense to see the world a certain way: Life is not embedded in a series of gently gradated authoritative structures: family, neighborhood, religious group, state, nation and world. Instead, it’s just the solitary naked individual and the gigantic and menacing state.

This lens makes you more likely to share the distinct strands of libertarianism that are blossoming in this fragmenting age: the deep suspicion of authority, the strong belief that hierarchies and organizations are suspect, the fervent devotion to transparency, the assumption that individual preference should be supreme. You’re more likely to donate to the Ron Paul for president campaign, as Snowden did.

It’s logical, given this background and mindset, that Snowden would sacrifice his career to expose data mining procedures of the National Security Agency. Even if he has not been able to point to any specific abuses, he was bound to be horrified by the confidentiality endemic to military and intelligence activities. And, of course, he’s right that the procedures he’s unveiled could lend themselves to abuse in the future.

But Big Brother is not the only danger facing the country. Another is the rising tide of distrust, the corrosive spread of cynicism, the fraying of the social fabric and the rise of people who are so individualistic in their outlook that they have no real understanding of how to knit others together and look after the common good.

This is not a danger Snowden is addressing. In fact, he is making everything worse.

For society to function well, there have to be basic levels of trust and cooperation, a respect for institutions and deference to common procedures. By deciding to unilaterally leak secret NSA documents, Snowden has betrayed all of these things.

He betrayed honesty and integrity, the foundation of all cooperative activity. He made explicit and implicit oaths to respect the secrecy of the information with which he was entrusted. He betrayed his oaths.

He betrayed his friends. Anybody who worked with him will be suspect. Young people in positions like that will no longer be trusted with responsibility for fear that they will turn into another Snowden.

He betrayed his employers. Booz Allen and the CIA took a high-school dropout and offered him positions with lavish salaries. He is violating the honor codes of all those who enabled him to rise.

He betrayed the cause of open government. Every time there is a leak like this, the powers that be close the circle of trust a little tighter. They limit debate a little more.

He betrayed the privacy of us all. If federal security agencies can’t do vast data sweeps, they will inevitably revert to the older, more intrusive eavesdropping methods.

He betrayed the Constitution. The founders did not create the United States so that some solitary 29-year-old could make unilateral decisions about what should be exposed. Snowden self-indulgently short-circuited the democratic structures of accountability, putting his own preferences above everything else.

Snowden faced a moral dilemma. On the one hand, he had information about a program he thought was truly menacing. On the other hand, he had made certain commitments as a public servant, as a member of an organization, and a nation. Sometimes leakers have to leak. The information they possess is so grave that it demands they violate their oaths.

But before they do, you hope they will interrogate themselves closely and force themselves to confront various barriers of resistance. Is the information so grave that it’s worth betraying an oath, circumventing the established decision-making procedures, unilaterally exposing secrets that can never be reclassified?

Judging by his comments reported in the news media so far, Snowden was obsessed with the danger of data mining but completely oblivious to his betrayals and toward the damage he has done to social arrangements and the invisible bonds that hold them together.

David Brooks is a columnist for The New York Times.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 7 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. All I can say about this article is that I strongly disagree with virtually everything the writer says.
    It took courage for Mr. Snowden to do what he did and America will be a better place because of it.

    Donald W. Desaulniers

  2. This is truly one of the most ridiculous columns I have ever read. Condemn Snowden for not wanting to be neighborly. Imply that this issue is arising out of twenty-somethings' lack of social connections. Blame him for not trusting a government that routinely hides and lies. And somehow judge from comments reported in the media that he was oblivious to his betrayals. Unbelievable.

  3. It seems as though Mr. Brooks has not apprised himself very fully of story of Mr. Snowden. He seems to have spent a long time thinking about this. Initially he decided that information that he considered releasing had to do with people and would directly endanger people and that was wrong. He later saw the election of President Obama as something that would turn the tide of this activity and thus waited for that to happen. Upon realizing that things were getting worse, not better, he decided to make his revelations. It is not, as Mr. Brooks seems to portray it, someone who one day looked upon what was being done by our government and ran directly to leak the story. Edward Snowden's story is one that runs over several years and jobs as he hoped that the system would correct itself.

  4. There are very real enemies out there who are so evil they think that blowing up children to smithereens will get them 100 virgins.

    When we are about to get on a plane, or a train, or drink water; at the back of our mind we want our fears assuage by the thought that the government is doing EVERYTHING it can to keep us relatively safe. We tolerate the 'state' to 'police' everyone much like we tolerate them going through our very private luggage and sometime our very private person. We gave up a large chunk of our privacy when we allowed over 3,000 killed on 9/11, over 4,000 in Iraq, over 2,000 in Afghanistan, and many more across the world.

    Are we a 'police state?' Perhaps. The advent of technology has allowed us benefits beyond imagination. To use it to fight the evil lurking beneath our vulnerabilities is brilliant. What we must point our indignation upon is to question if there is someone 'policing' the 'police.' If anyone out there has ideas better than what we have, by all means contact the CIA.

    I personally would like to stop being paranoid every time I see a man with a huge backpack on a plane, on a train, and now even on a sidewalk.

  5. Wow. Guess this shows why and how Mr. Brooks makes a living writing. Would love to see him compare Mr. Snowden to the now-dead elementary school Perp--both clearly were bullied and neglected by family and community. That doesn't make it our responsibility or our fault but WHAT CAN A PERSON DO when they have limited resources, limited contacts with anyone rational and coherent? But both of these situations show that each of us COULD HAVE stepped in when someone bullied them, could have been there even after being rebuffed, been there for conversation or some interest in his thoughts, decisions WHEN HE WAS INTERESTED. I mean, do we expect a little child to wait for the opportune time to ask? Do we really expect an older child who had little to no nurturing to wait for the opportune time? Do we expect an adult, physically an adult, but with limited emotional/social adjustment to deal with every facet of his world and to CONTRIBUTE and never detract?????

  6. So Sadness, get over it. You can live in fear of your shadow OR YOU CAN contribute to our community.

  7. Donald in toto: I agree that it took courage but perhaps there was a much better way to..... I'm a Veteran with 14 years military and 35 years public service. I often disagreed and was unpopular with "management" since I asked/pointed out that internal controls were lacking, we were wasting tax revenue....but I was frequently (usually at other agencies) very popular with management because I was excessively effective. I figured out my job, my assignments and did them pronto and did them well, very well. I'm just explaining that perhaps you could read my posts above knowing that I understand a lot about Mr. Snowden. It appears Mr. Brooks does too.