Edward Snowden: The National Security Agency

In the summer of 2013, Edward Snowden became a household name when he showed the world a corrupt, horribly invasive program run by the National Security Agency, also known as the NSA. This debacle is known as one of the largest surveillance programs in all of history. The NSA invaded the privacy of every United States citizen with access to the internet, and even read through emails and discussions of people in other countries. Was Snowden justified in his release of reports he learned during his tenure at the NSA? How did Snowden go about exposing the government program, and was his way the proper way? What other issues or moral dilemmas have been caused by the use of the programs that Snowden exposed? These questions, in general, do not have …show more content…
It goes without question that the people should know about the reality of their privacy or lack thereof. If the people are not made aware of policies and lack of privacy given by the government, then the government can quickly corrode into an unruly dictatorship that rules oppressively over its people. North Korea is a great example of oppressive government. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is one of the most tyrannical governments in the 21st century, and its middle class citizens are commonly known for having some of the worst living conditions in the world. Governments should always be as transparent with citizens as possible, and vice versa, as a basic contradictory proof to the earlier example of North Korea. This symbiotic bond between the two groups, however, has been greatly harmed with the introduction of the Patriot Act and has been seen as a source of much growing …show more content…
However, being completely realistic, I can see how these types of programs are piggybacked off of laws like the Patriot Act that were formed due to the terror caused by 9/11. I do think these programs were based on good concepts, but, in modern society, these ideas cannot be expected to succeed. In real world applications, privacy versus security is always a very complicated issue because every person has a different opinion on what their privacy entails. Certain people will always argue that this is a free country, and the United States citizenry should have absolute privacy. At the same time, absolute privacy means both greater vulnerability to terror threats, and higher difficulty in the capture of criminals and terrorists. Finding the line between the two concepts and staying near that line in the future should be the nation’s goal. I believe it can be universally agreed upon, though, that no one organization should have access to every word that any person in the United States has ever said or