Well-Informed 2.0: Democracy 2.0 - Snowden

Discussion:

The definition of Democracy 2.0 that I found is that it’s the inevitable movement that will put control of society in the hands of itself. It’s a mechanism to decentralize leadership in our current system both legally and peacefully. Edward Snowden in his interview about being a whistle-blower was asked about why people should care about surveillance. He responded with, “Because even if you’re not doing anything wrong, you’re being watched and recorded…” and but yet we want to “decentralize” or redistribute power of leadership within our society. We want to be able to trust our government and have faith in the decisions that they’re making yet we have to watch our own backs because it seems like the government is waiting for us to mess up so they can catch us. Snowden leaked classified information about the National Security Agency (NSA) to the public in 2013 and is hypocritical for saying he doesn’t want to live in a society where the government will scrutinize anything that you do and attack you and derive suspicion which then they can paint anyone in the context of a wrongdoer. He is trying to cover his tracks for the wrongdoings of his actions and is actually putting society in danger and is now running because he knows he is wrong.

Position:

I first learned about Edward Snowden last semester in Jennifer Koehler’s Public Discourse and Relations class. At first, I thought he was a civil individual who was trying to protect us from the government but he released some really crucial information to certain journalist and has been on the run since 2013. I think society does need some sort of leader in their governmental system because without leadership comes corruption. Leaving society in charge of making ethical decisions would be nice if people were counted as trustworthy but most people do things ending with it benefiting in their favor. If the U.S. took the power away from President Obama, who would we rely on? Congress? It would be a constant clash between the Democrats and the Republicans with minimal progress ever being made because the two parties would struggle agreeing with each other. In that case, I do believe in having a political figure to lead our country. In my defense, I do think that some candidates try and become president but become corrupted in using their power for themselves instead of always focusing on what is best for everyone. In my opinion, that’s why I am afraid of having Donald Trump becoming our president. He might have good ideas but if he was elected, the question I’d be struggling with is how long would it be before he became corrupted and used his power for his own benefit over the people?