Edward Snowden endorsed Richard Stallman's warnings about proprietary software after Adobe Inc.'s new terms and conditions, which allow for user content review, sparked backlash from professional users.
Very few places that wouldn’t extradite Snowden instantly, even fewer that can’t be paid to do it. With Russia, Venezuela, and North Korea remaining his options, then Russia was the obvious choice. At least survival in Russia came with a price, had he stayed then the pay-to-play model for life wasn’t available.
He could have chosen to not collaborate with the russians and refused to act as their mouthpiece (For example, he was hardcore promoting the “russia is not going to invade” rhetoric before Feb 24; a key element of russia’s short term communication strategy at that point).
There are many people in russia (both well known dissidents and just average people) who refused to toe the government’s line or even in some cases took direct action against the regime.
Don’t you see the irony of Snowden focusing on “spying in the US”, while also choosing to work with the russian regime that has absolute control over local digital services and arrests people for social media posts and Twitch stream?
This might not a big deal for you, but on a purely theoretical level, you don’t see how this hypocrisy could be important for others?
He could have chosen to not collaborate with the russians
Yes, he could indeed. He could be the metaphorical guy with the bags standing in front of a line tanks. But why should he?
This might not a big deal for you, but on a purely theoretical level, you don’t see how this hypocrisy could be important for others?
If you insist on applying a purely theoretical analysis, on the actions of a very real person with very real concerns for his safety, then I think I’ve found the problem with this discussion. You can’t lift this problem to this level of abstract theoretical morality.
But to answer your question more clearly: no, I don’t see how this perceived hypocrisy could be important for others.
Do you sincerely believe, that Snowden should have stayed put and faced a firing squad for whistle blowing? Snowden is trying to survive, and if daddy Putin says “go on TV and say these lines”, then the sentence doesn’t have to end with “or else”. Snowden did what he had to do for his country, by telling the public about the surveillance, now he’s paying for it. Why should Snowden be fighting for the Russian people as well?
Yes, he could indeed. He could be the metaphorical guy with the bags standing in front of a line tanks. But why should he?
He can make his choices. And we can evaluate them and label him as a hypocrite and mouthpiece of the russian security services.
If you insist on applying a purely theoretical analysis, on the actions of a very real person with very real concerns for his safety, then I think I’ve found the problem with this discussion. You can’t lift this problem to this level of abstract theoretical morality.
But to answer your question more clearly: no, I don’t see how this perceived hypocrisy could be important for others.
Do you sincerely believe, that Snowden should have stayed put and faced a firing squad for whistle blowing? Snowden is trying to survive, and if daddy Putin says “go on TV and say these lines”, then the sentence doesn’t have to end with “or else”. Snowden did what he had to do for his country, by telling the public about the surveillance, now he’s paying for it. Why should Snowden be fighting for the Russian people as well?
Cut the bullshit with “very real concerns” and all that jazz. It is not convincing. No one is asking him to fight for the russian people. What I am saying is it is legitimate to criticize him and highlight his collaboration with the russians.
Well let me tell you as someone living in Ukraine (and was born in Donbas with my hometown being occupied in 2014 and relatives having to leave everything because of the russian occupation); you’re just playing dumb. You full well know that there are real consequences from Snowden’s collaboration with the russians.
I brought up “theory” to try and engage with you. To highlight the possibility that there are other perspectives and your thinking might be parochial.
Trying to survive is fair. But putting him on the pedestal and labelling him as “untouchable saviour who can do wrong” is not normal.
In 2013 we all still believed that Putin wasn’t the madman that he has turned out to be. I remember thinking that our biggest threats were right wing terrorists, Iranian nukes, and maybe North Korea. Sure we had seen what happened to Abkhazia and South Ossetia in 2008, but I don’t think anybody in the NATO countries saw that as the test it turned out to be. My point being that when Snowden flew to Russia in 2013, intent on seeking asylum, it may not have been his first choice, but it was as crazy an idea as it would be today…
With that said, I’d like to relate to some your post:
What I am saying is it is legitimate to criticize him and highlight his collaboration with the russians.
Sure, it’s legitimate to criticize anything. But without taking all the circumstances into account, the critique loses relevance. At least for me it does, and that’s what I’m arguing.
Well let me tell you as someone living in Ukraine (and was born in Donbas with my hometown being occupied in 2014 and relatives having to leave everything because of the russian occupation);
This is on a completely unrelated note. I’d like to apologize to you and every other Ukrainian, for the incompetence of my country’s politicians. We promised you +100 leopard 1 tanks, but due to the ineptitude of our politicians, their investments, and the resulting organization, we haven’t been able to deliver a single working tank. Whenever our politicians “donate” equipment it is blown out of proportions by our media. But when it comes to delivering useful kit, it fails over and over again. Rest assured that our present government is not going to be reelected. Their replacement will not be competent either though. Anyway, I wish we would do more than ship you our outdated equipment like it was some sort of humanitarian mission. It’s not a humanitarian mission, it’s fucking war and half assing war is stupid… Slava Ukraini! And death to Russian orks.
You full well know that there are real consequences from Snowden’s collaboration with the russians.
And we’re back in the discussion at hand :) the only consequences I can think of, that comes from Snowden collaboration is the propaganda tool he is now, and the intelligence he had to offer 11 years ago. Disregard him to mitigate the propaganda consequences.
I hope that whatever intel Snowden gave the Russians, it was limited. I think that a person with Snowden’s background would be able to encrypt the information he traveled with properly.
I’d like to know if I’ve missed something here. I really don’t mean to troll you. If you believe that I’m misinformed, please inform me.
Trying to survive is fair. But putting him on the pedestal and labelling him as “untouchable saviour who can do wrong” is not normal.
I don’t think that I’m putting Snowden on a pedestal. All I’m saying is that, like everyone else in Russia, who have a public profile, Snowden knows that he can either toe the party line, or plunge to his death from a basement window. What we really need to do, is to realize that anything coming from the mouths of anybody in Russia, is the result of a proverbial gun to their heads and should be treated thusly.
Thank you for the kind words and support for Ukraine. It genuinely means a lot to me. We are having this back and forth and banter, but this a real point that means a lot.
I believe he was going to LATAM and he couldn’t continue while transiting through russia. But that’s beside the point. For me personally, I question his motives wrt revealing data on US surveillance following his collaboration with the russians. All local digital services (mobile phones, ISP, social media, streaming) are under the direct supervision their security services. It’s basically like the USSR. You can literally get 5 years in jail for social media post, sure this really become more common after 2022. But even back in 2012, they were well on their with establishing a digital surveillance regime.
Sure, it’s legitimate to criticize anything. But without taking all the circumstances into account, the critique loses relevance. At least for me it does, and that’s what I’m arguing.
Why is his collaborating with the russians not a fair circumstance to take in account? If he is being forced to work with them, then shouldn’t we disregard what he says as being suspect? Aren’t there better spokespersons for the FOSS/digital privacy movement that can be promoted instead?
And we’re back in the discussion at hand :) the only consequences I can think of, that comes from Snowden collaboration is the propaganda tool he is now, and the intelligence he had to offer 11 years ago. Disregard him to mitigate the propaganda consequences.
He is almost certainly trying to leverage his fame and influence to promote russian security services goals; i.e. try to sow discord in the US. Their approach is multi-dimensional; for example in europe they were involved with green organizations in order to counteract the possibility of a rise in shale gas production in Europe. That’s why it’s best to not give any attention to Snowden; he is a russian tool. I would even speculate that he has internalized a lot of their goals (he is a russian citizen after all).
I don’t think that I’m putting Snowden on a pedestal. All I’m saying is that, like everyone else in Russia, who have a public profile, Snowden knows that he can either toe the party line, or plunge to his death from a basement window. What we really need to do, is to realize that anything coming from the mouths of anybody in Russia, is the result of a proverbial gun to their heads and should be treated thusly.
While this is true, people most definitely put Snowden on the pedestal and do not critically approach his statements.
I believe he was going to LATAM and he couldn’t continue while transiting through russia.
That’s what I recall, too. That he was going to Latin America from Hong Kong through Sheremetyevo. But then on the Wikipedia page it said that Russian authorities have claimed that Snowden applied for asylum before departing Hong Kong. But again, probably propaganda.
Why is his collaborating with the russians not a fair circumstance to take in account? If he is being forced to work with them, then shouldn’t we disregard what he says as being suspect? Aren’t there better spokespersons for the FOSS/digital privacy movement that can be promoted instead?
Disregarding any statements that originates within Russia’s sphere of influence should be default. But on account of what Snowden did more than 10 years ago, he’s still given a voice in tech media.
He is almost certainly trying to leverage his fame and influence to promote russian security services goals; i.e. try to sow discord in the US.
I agree that Snowden’s fame is being leveraged, but I don’t think that it’s necessarily done on Snowden’s initiative. As you said it yourself, Snowden is a tool in the Russian propaganda toolkit.
for example in europe they were involved with green organizations in order to counteract the possibility of a rise in shale gas production in Europe.
Yeah, a Russian woman, who had received 45k EUR from the SVR run Pravfond, was just arrested in Denmark. She had run a legal counseling service for Russians in Denmark and ran for municipal elections for the socialist communists. I wonder how many people Russia has planted to run these low intensity operations around the world.
I would even speculate that he has internalized a lot of their goals (he is a russian citizen after all).
He definitely could have internalized the Russian state’s goals. But I don’t think that him being a Russian citizen should be an indication. That’s probably more of a middle finger from Putin in the direction of the US. Sorta like “Congratulations, that application for citizenship you didn’t fill out, has been approved. Go say your lines little puppet”
Very few places that wouldn’t extradite Snowden instantly, even fewer that can’t be paid to do it. With Russia, Venezuela, and North Korea remaining his options, then Russia was the obvious choice. At least survival in Russia came with a price, had he stayed then the pay-to-play model for life wasn’t available.
He could have chosen to not collaborate with the russians and refused to act as their mouthpiece (For example, he was hardcore promoting the “russia is not going to invade” rhetoric before Feb 24; a key element of russia’s short term communication strategy at that point).
There are many people in russia (both well known dissidents and just average people) who refused to toe the government’s line or even in some cases took direct action against the regime.
Don’t you see the irony of Snowden focusing on “spying in the US”, while also choosing to work with the russian regime that has absolute control over local digital services and arrests people for social media posts and Twitch stream?
This might not a big deal for you, but on a purely theoretical level, you don’t see how this hypocrisy could be important for others?
Yes, he could indeed. He could be the metaphorical guy with the bags standing in front of a line tanks. But why should he?
If you insist on applying a purely theoretical analysis, on the actions of a very real person with very real concerns for his safety, then I think I’ve found the problem with this discussion. You can’t lift this problem to this level of abstract theoretical morality.
But to answer your question more clearly: no, I don’t see how this perceived hypocrisy could be important for others.
Do you sincerely believe, that Snowden should have stayed put and faced a firing squad for whistle blowing? Snowden is trying to survive, and if daddy Putin says “go on TV and say these lines”, then the sentence doesn’t have to end with “or else”. Snowden did what he had to do for his country, by telling the public about the surveillance, now he’s paying for it. Why should Snowden be fighting for the Russian people as well?
He can make his choices. And we can evaluate them and label him as a hypocrite and mouthpiece of the russian security services.
Cut the bullshit with “very real concerns” and all that jazz. It is not convincing. No one is asking him to fight for the russian people. What I am saying is it is legitimate to criticize him and highlight his collaboration with the russians.
Well let me tell you as someone living in Ukraine (and was born in Donbas with my hometown being occupied in 2014 and relatives having to leave everything because of the russian occupation); you’re just playing dumb. You full well know that there are real consequences from Snowden’s collaboration with the russians.
I brought up “theory” to try and engage with you. To highlight the possibility that there are other perspectives and your thinking might be parochial.
Trying to survive is fair. But putting him on the pedestal and labelling him as “untouchable saviour who can do wrong” is not normal.
In 2013 we all still believed that Putin wasn’t the madman that he has turned out to be. I remember thinking that our biggest threats were right wing terrorists, Iranian nukes, and maybe North Korea. Sure we had seen what happened to Abkhazia and South Ossetia in 2008, but I don’t think anybody in the NATO countries saw that as the test it turned out to be. My point being that when Snowden flew to Russia in 2013, intent on seeking asylum, it may not have been his first choice, but it was as crazy an idea as it would be today…
With that said, I’d like to relate to some your post:
Sure, it’s legitimate to criticize anything. But without taking all the circumstances into account, the critique loses relevance. At least for me it does, and that’s what I’m arguing.
This is on a completely unrelated note. I’d like to apologize to you and every other Ukrainian, for the incompetence of my country’s politicians. We promised you +100 leopard 1 tanks, but due to the ineptitude of our politicians, their investments, and the resulting organization, we haven’t been able to deliver a single working tank. Whenever our politicians “donate” equipment it is blown out of proportions by our media. But when it comes to delivering useful kit, it fails over and over again. Rest assured that our present government is not going to be reelected. Their replacement will not be competent either though. Anyway, I wish we would do more than ship you our outdated equipment like it was some sort of humanitarian mission. It’s not a humanitarian mission, it’s fucking war and half assing war is stupid… Slava Ukraini! And death to Russian orks.
And we’re back in the discussion at hand :) the only consequences I can think of, that comes from Snowden collaboration is the propaganda tool he is now, and the intelligence he had to offer 11 years ago. Disregard him to mitigate the propaganda consequences.
I hope that whatever intel Snowden gave the Russians, it was limited. I think that a person with Snowden’s background would be able to encrypt the information he traveled with properly.
I’d like to know if I’ve missed something here. I really don’t mean to troll you. If you believe that I’m misinformed, please inform me.
I don’t think that I’m putting Snowden on a pedestal. All I’m saying is that, like everyone else in Russia, who have a public profile, Snowden knows that he can either toe the party line, or plunge to his death from a basement window. What we really need to do, is to realize that anything coming from the mouths of anybody in Russia, is the result of a proverbial gun to their heads and should be treated thusly.
Thank you for the kind words and support for Ukraine. It genuinely means a lot to me. We are having this back and forth and banter, but this a real point that means a lot.
I believe he was going to LATAM and he couldn’t continue while transiting through russia. But that’s beside the point. For me personally, I question his motives wrt revealing data on US surveillance following his collaboration with the russians. All local digital services (mobile phones, ISP, social media, streaming) are under the direct supervision their security services. It’s basically like the USSR. You can literally get 5 years in jail for social media post, sure this really become more common after 2022. But even back in 2012, they were well on their with establishing a digital surveillance regime.
Why is his collaborating with the russians not a fair circumstance to take in account? If he is being forced to work with them, then shouldn’t we disregard what he says as being suspect? Aren’t there better spokespersons for the FOSS/digital privacy movement that can be promoted instead?
He is almost certainly trying to leverage his fame and influence to promote russian security services goals; i.e. try to sow discord in the US. Their approach is multi-dimensional; for example in europe they were involved with green organizations in order to counteract the possibility of a rise in shale gas production in Europe. That’s why it’s best to not give any attention to Snowden; he is a russian tool. I would even speculate that he has internalized a lot of their goals (he is a russian citizen after all).
While this is true, people most definitely put Snowden on the pedestal and do not critically approach his statements.
Sorry for letting you hang, I’ve been swamped.
That’s what I recall, too. That he was going to Latin America from Hong Kong through Sheremetyevo. But then on the Wikipedia page it said that Russian authorities have claimed that Snowden applied for asylum before departing Hong Kong. But again, probably propaganda.
Disregarding any statements that originates within Russia’s sphere of influence should be default. But on account of what Snowden did more than 10 years ago, he’s still given a voice in tech media.
I agree that Snowden’s fame is being leveraged, but I don’t think that it’s necessarily done on Snowden’s initiative. As you said it yourself, Snowden is a tool in the Russian propaganda toolkit.
Yeah, a Russian woman, who had received 45k EUR from the SVR run Pravfond, was just arrested in Denmark. She had run a legal counseling service for Russians in Denmark and ran for municipal elections for the socialist communists. I wonder how many people Russia has planted to run these low intensity operations around the world.
He definitely could have internalized the Russian state’s goals. But I don’t think that him being a Russian citizen should be an indication. That’s probably more of a middle finger from Putin in the direction of the US. Sorta like “Congratulations, that application for citizenship you didn’t fill out, has been approved. Go say your lines little puppet”