At the same time, he exposed behaviors that were clearly wrong in both government and industry, and spurred a number of people into actions that would not have been undertaken otherwise. For this he should be thanked. That doesn't erase everything.
At the same time, he exposed behaviors that were clearly wrong in both government and industry, and spurred a number of people into actions that would not have been undertaken otherwise. For this he should be thanked. That doesn't erase everything.
He was under great personal pressure as a result of the actions of the original criminal (US gov pursuing him and canceling passport etc), and had very limited time and resources of his own.
He could have dumped it all on the net, but instead handed it to big name highly resourced journalists, who were definitely aware of the seriousness of what they'd received.
There's two ways people try to discredit Snowden. The first is the government absolutist way, that no-one can wrong the government even to remedy its own far superior wrongs. The second is the backdoor version of the same: to say yes we get why he did it, but to impose a burden of performance that only a superman could attain in the reality of that situation, falling short of which: "he caused more harm than he prevented".
I'm not trying to balance actions against one another in some form of equation to see what the net good is. That doesn't make sense. It reminds me of Dave Chappelle's skit about trying to process rape allegations against Bill Crosby. He was a great comedian. And probably a rapist. Well, Snowden is similarly complicated.
He saw that he had to take a different path, even though it was one that was illegal. And I respect and honor him for being willing to make that choice.
Heck, Assange never stole anything, his crimes were journalism and publication.
Also, 10 years on, there hasn't been any direct evidence of any "damage" from the revelations and it's doubtful the document archive is of any present-day risk to anyone.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/08/no-regrets-s...
Here's how the US Constitution defines treason:
> Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Under no sane interpretation did Snowden do anything even remotely related to treason.