Civil Disobedience By Edward Snowden

In other words civil disobedience indicates that the main objective of disobedience is to bring changes in the social or political order that would affect the freedom of citizens. Nonviolence is the right answer to moral issues and is crucial in politics for any government on our time the need for human mankind to overcome oppression avoiding violence without resorting to oppression with violence.

On June 6, 2013 the details of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance activities where given by Edward Snowden to the public; raising concerns of Americans about their privacy. Edward Snowden, a former employee of the NSA, gave the alarming details of surveillance programs in his interview on how the NSA accesses our emails, calls, internet activity, and anything else that is related to technology. In this system of surveillance the NSA can gather data from companies and tap the cables that are vital for moving around information from technological devices, they may also use their relationships with technology companies to get emails or information straight from U.S. servers. (Cawley, Kiss, Boyd, Ball) Nevertheless, the claim is

Civil disobedience is the refusal to conform to certain laws as a form of harmless political protest, while being aware of the consequences that could result because of it. Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society because actions are taken due to people letting their voice be heard. While some may argue that the main reasons of this are the five basic rights mentioned in the first amendment (freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition), this issue goes far beyond that. Without civil disobedience, many historical events might have not played such an important role as they did to the point that they changed America in numerous ways; not to mention the courageous people who still take part in protests today to claim the rights they should have.

America was founded on a principle of civil disobedience. With the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers set forth a powerful precedent. The Declaration said in part, that when institutions of government becomes destructive or abusive of unalienable rights, it is the right of the people to alter it or to abolish it. The history of our nation tells us that civil disobedience is a civic responsibility, and in the alleged words of Thomas Jefferson, “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism”. From the Boston Tea Party to the Stonewall Riots, the United States Constitution and advances in racial, social, and gender equality support the idea that peaceful resistance positively contributes to a freer society, and a more equitable America.

“The concept of righteous civil disobedience is incompatible with the concept of the American legal system.”

Everyone is familiar with the atrocity that occurred in New York on September 11, 2001. The hijacked planes, the towers crashing down, killing hundreds of civilians. Truth is, the attack left everyone in the county and around the world in an extreme state of shock. It was America after all, things like that were not supposed to happen within this country’s borders. Things like that only occurred in places thousands of miles away, places with unstable governments like Syria, and Iran. Fueled by extreme anger, and fear of another attack, many citizens demanded that their government improve its protection over its citizens. In response, the government presented the Patriot Act, a 342 page bill that gave federal officials more power to track and intercept communications, both for law enforcement and foreign intelligence gathering purposes. In 2013, Edward Snowden leaked information to the public that the government was spying and collecting hundreds of information from millions of Americans without the use of any warrants. This information was being shared throughout different departments such as the CIA, FBI and NSA. More than a decade has gone by and terrorism continues to be a threat to our society, Now everyone must ask themselves, to what extent should citizens allow its own government to increase its own power to protect them from terrorism? How many liberties are they willing to give up for for such protection?

Edward Snowden’s disclosures have brought to light many secret government actions that were previously unknown. One of the most controversial government programs that Snowden disclosed was how the National Security Agency (NSA) collected virtually every phone record for calls made in the United States between US citizens. It makes sense to monitor phone calls to or from callers located outside the United States, because non-US citizens don 't have the protection of the US Constitution and monitoring these calls also might be helpful in identifying foreigners who might be plotting terrorist attacks in the US. However, US citizens have 4th Amendment privacy rights under the Constitution, so it is much more of a problem when the US government collects bulk information about US citizens who do not pose an obvious danger to the country.

The NSA program, uncovered by the former CIA agent and former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, is called Prism. Snowden, while working for the NSA disclosed this information by leaking this classified information to a web site called The Guardian. The fact that the information was classified means that the NSA had no intention of telling the citizens of the USA about its ability to monitor and record this great amount of data. This program while legally not able to record the conversation in the of a phone call can detect and record the number who is making the call, the number being called, the duration of the call, and, if necessary, the cellular tower used to send the call. This is intruding upon a huge portion of what most people consider personal, private data. (The Guardian)

The integrity of one’s communications and privacy of online activities is the largest casualty of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance over digital lives. Years since September 11, 2009, the NSA’s mass surveillance has greatly expanded due to the heightened concern that new technology can be used by terrorists to plan and execute a terrorist attack. In today’s age of technology, there are easier ways of accessing information and communication as well as new ways of hacking and gathering personal information. The new surveillance programs and regulations are enabled by the Patriot Act and post 9/11 paranoia, but it has been over fourteen years since the incident. After whistleblower, Edward Snowden, it was revealed that the government’s mass surveillance went beyond what many considered acceptable. It can be predicted that unless the U.S Government reins in NSA mass surveillance, the

Ever since the American public was made aware of the United States government’s surveillance policies, it has been a hotly debated issue across the nation. In 2013, it was revealed that the NSA had, for some time, been collecting data on American citizens, in terms of everything from their Internet history to their phone records. When the story broke, it was a huge talking point, not only across the country, but also throughout the world. The man who introduced Americans to this idea was Edward Snowden.

Civil disobedience is a belief that is practiced in which the people disobey the law in a peaceful manner because it does not come to an agreement with their moral values. Over the years this idea of challenging the government has developed into a duty for the people. This concept is explained in the piece “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. They both express acts of passive resistance in which the impact is still felt in the modern world. Although, these ideologies were used in Thoreau and King’s time, they need to be updated to fit in today’s world.

Civil disobedience is one of the most peaceful ways to protest an unjust law in a free society and allows individuals to bring a law under public scrutiny. Free societies allow every citizen to make their opinion known and published, but if an important opinion is published in a smaller newspaper, it may not receive much attention or consideration. Civil disobedience is necessary because it brings attention to injustice by actively demonstrating oppression and mistreatment. The phrase "actions speak louder than words" is common, but not only do actions speak louder than words, but throughout history they have proven to be the only main way to push others in a society to action.

People make phone calls, and send emails all the time. These things are usually private and involve small groups of people. However, we have discovered that phone calls and emails are not as private as one may think. The government and the National Security Agency (NSA), have been spying on citizens and collecting data from the calls made and text messages and emails sent. Though they say they are doing this for our safety and to detect terrorists, the NSA has not caught many terrorists with the methods of surveillance they are using. NSA methods are ineffective and have not produced adequate results to justify their damage to civil liberties.

Civil disobedience, is often the last step that people take to bring attention to a topic or subject that they feel strongly about. Every day is full of unjust rulings that may not be to everyone’s liking. Many people fight for what they believe in even if the outcome is bleak. You are your own self and you will always have your opinion that may not match all other citizen’s. Civil disobedience has escalated to a majority of non- violent protesting, although there are some cases including violence. It is a form of rebelling against what they feel is unfair or unconstitutional. Showing civil disobedience is an act that you must be willing to accept the legal consequences, which may include incarceration.

While working for the NSA, Snowden became aware of their extensive trespasses against the privacy of U.S. and international citizens alike. Upon considering the extent of these trespasses, Snowden felt that it was his moral duty, as he stated, “to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them”. His provided information showed the use of Internet surveillance programs, and the evaluation of phone records in the form of “metadata”. Many argue that Snowden’s leaking of information has hindered our government’s ability to intercept terrorist plots, by informing the world of the NSA’s capabilities, and therefore allowing terrorist groups to plot attacks beyond the reach of U.S. surveillance. In light of this, Snowden’s leak has indeed made us more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, but does this justify the NSA’s chosen use of power? Since Snowden’s revelations, it has become evident that the NSA consistently uses their surveillance abilities to unjustified ends. One function of the NSA’s electronic data analysis is to find targets for the military’s Joint Special Operations Command to strike with lethal drone attacks. Many innocent civilians in middle-eastern countries have lost their lives as a result of this military sect’s reliance on the NSA’s data, rather than human correspondence. According to an anonymous former drone-operator, the victims of these attacks “might have been terrorists, or they could have been