According To YouGov Poll, Snowden Support Declining Among Americans

eldavojohn writes "A recent poll from the YouGov consisting of one thousand responses shows that Snowden's support among Americans has shifted. Now, according to the poll, more Americans think he did the wrong thing rather than the right thing when asked: 'Based on what you've heard, do think Snowden's leak of top-secret information about government surveillance programs to the media was the right thing to do or the wrong thing to do?' The results and breakdown are available online (PDF). Without getting into racial or political breakdowns, the results now show that 38% say he did the wrong thing, 33% say he did the right thing and 29% remain undecided about the results of his actions. Instead of charging the populace into action Snowden may be facing apathy at best and public disapproval at worst."

Comments

hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

How about support for prosecuting James Clapper?

Re:hmmm

[MrNaz]

Whistleblower: The government is watching you. The wealthy elite are enslaving you. The politicians are oppressing you. These facts are obvious, and I have proof.
Public: Meh.

Re:hmmm

[the.emmef]

You summarized this well, in a way that even sheep should understand ;-)

Re:hmmm

[PopeRatzo]

First off, the Government is NOT watching you. They are watching for attacks. In fact, the reason why Boston got through is because they have a cleaner separation on what is allowed to be listened to. In a nut shell, it appears to be that if you have a connection with a known terrorists, only then will you be picked up. However, if you talk terrorism, then it will not be picked up.

Which is a good reason that the system is an unnecessary failure. It's like having the a strong password and then writing it on a post-it note that you stick to your monitor.

I'm pretty sure that "support for Snowden" and "acceptance of the police state" are two very separate things. One can think Snowden is a twerp while still thinking the government has exceeded its authority to a dangerous extent.

I realize that this does not fit the narrative that this press release and all the other breathless celebrity press releases about Snowden being a jerk to his ex-girlfriend are trying to advance, but it does appear that some Americans can walk and chew gum at the same time.

IOW, he is not seen as a whistleblower, but a traitor.

You took a big jump there, bucko. Remember, most of the coverage of Snowden has been about his personal life, his having dropped out of community college, etc. I'm not sure that a growing number of people see him as a traitor.

People may be ambiguous about Snowden, but make no mistake, people are not so ambiguous about having Fourth Amendment rights. They are not so ambiguous about privacy and definitely not ambiguous about a government that seriously needs to be whacked on the nose with a rolled up newspaper for crapping on the carpet.

Re:hmmm

[Opportunist]

That's the bad thing about it, if push comes to shove, the decent, honest and good people have the lowest survival chance. They're not as adapt at weaseling out and usually rather reluctant to climb over a mountain of corpses to save their ass.

Re:hmmm

[davydagger]

there is always some dumb hipster to get on facebook, or social media, or in some bar, and go:

"well the government finds my cute pictures of cats, my kinky texts to my gf, and my like of korean-mexican fusion, so what?"

To brag to the world he holds no controversial opinions, does no activism, thinks nothing more about fitting into his sister's jeans, foodie obsessions, and the latest pop culture trends and celebrities he worships. Of course the implication is that everyone else is doing bad things, and he's naturually better.

Its a sole reminder there is a social latter and dissent is a good excuse for competitors in climbing it to kick you down a notch for sticking up for your rights.

Re:hmmm

[ultranova]

actually it promises to subsidize the unproductive majority by stealing from the productive minority

I'm pretty sure most people work for a living, and it's a small minority - about 1%, in fact - that steals from said productive people to support their parasitic lifestyle. And that would be a minor annoyance by itself, except that's not enough for them - no, they play at being "businessmen" by recklessly endangering the livelihood of the productive majority for their economic poker games, and then start throwing insults at the very same people who's labour supports them.

From just the tax rates on income and property, to various rules, laws and regulations that government imposes upon business to buy votes (be it minimum wage, various laws that give employees special powers to sue employers for any perceived 'wrongdoing', any kind of entitlement to the employers and customers that end up being obligations upon the employers and producers).

Who are these mystical "producers", since they are apparently not the employees in your mind? And why are you upset that the working class and the owning class define their relationship through laws, given your own insistence on the importance of the rule of it? Does it simply burn you that some laws actually side with the serfs rather than the parasites on top?

ALL democracies are destined to failure, that is not an option, it's an inevitable consequence of the rule of mob.

All systems are destined to failure due to nothing lasting forever, it's the inevitable consequence of time passing in a reality where chaos theory holds. Your assertion is dramatic but meaningless.

That's why to keep working the system is supposed to set those types of feelings and desires aside and concentrate on constantly and vigilantly protecting the rule of law, equality before law, equality of opportunity by providing equal application of law, prevention of discrimination by the mob, by the government.

So how does that equality before the law work when both parties are responsible for paying for their lawyers and the other has thousands of times as much available cash? How does equality of opportunity work when taking any opportunity likely has investment and opportunity costs and one party can pay them and the other can't?

Re:hmmm

[kermidge]

shouldn't that be "baa"?

Re:hmmm

[Curunir_wolf]

Thanks for providing the view of the political class, which views all this as perfectly okay, and can't understand why anyone would be upset. After all, you have secretly decided that secretly keeping all this data is okay because there is a secret court that makes secret decisions and secret warrants and the people really need to just trust it all to be perfectly fine.

Of course there is abuse, just as Russ Tice has pointed out. That's easy because it's all in secret, and everybody is on the same team. You think if someone goes beyond the 7 days they are allowed to listen to calls without a warrant that anyone is going to raise a stink? The secret warrants are always granted anyway, and none of those guys are going to say anything about going beyond the secret rules. Hell, even when cops get caught on camera beating up citizens all the other cops circle the wagon and defend them and act like it was all perfectly okay - they were just "protecting the public". No wonder Snowden decided he had to get out of the country before he said anything. You deviate from being a team player in that environment and you're toast.

In the NSA game, there is NO scrutiny whatsoever. No citizen cell phones. No public court records. No accountability other than all the foxes pointing at all the other foxes going "No, no, we have rules and a system and we're all watching each other." Then a few hens go missing and SURPRISE! None of the foxes saw anything - must have been a terrorist that slipped through their oh-so-important net.

Those of us NOT part of your political class are pretty outraged, not just at what Snowden revealed (we pretty much knew it was happening), but the entire attitude of you and members of the political class entirely dismissing any complaints as unfounded, and telling people they need to just "trust" them. Clapper admitted to lying, and why isn't he in jail? Martha Stewart spent years in prison for less. Oh, but Martha isn't part of the club, is she? It's disgusting watching the entire federal apparatus lying and stealing and acting like it's all perfectly okay for them to do while they kill and imprison the people for lesser crimes, and damn Snowden for making them have to defend themselves.

And of course this is all backwards for a functional free society, which values personal privacy, but abhors government privacy. The US government is now advocating the opposite - that government should be doing all of these things in secret, and that the citizens should be okay with having no privacy at all. Transparency in government is the first requirement for a consensual governing. Without that, only tyranny can result.

Re:hmmm

[memnock]

Who or what are the government officials who want to prosecute Snowden protecting? Are they protecting the Constitution or themselves?

If the founders were so worried about the people's decisions, why did they bother mentioning things like "we the people" that emphasized a nation made up of free citizens?

I'm not sure who you are saying is being attacked when you say "productive class". Are you saying that only people who own business are productive? How do you explain Dept. of Labor reports that say something like 'productivity increased .3% in the last quarter' then? Workers had nothing to do with that? It's not just the owners of capital who are taxed. The workers are taxed too. And last I heard, corporate exec compensation was more than 100x what the average employee pay was. Doesn't sound like they are suffering to me

Re:hmmm

[VortexCortex]

Which is precisely why the government officials that are required to swear into the office are required to uphold and protect the CONSTITUTION.

NOT THE PEOPLE.

Not the government, not the white house, not the justice system but the LAW. The US Founders knew that relying on people making right choices is a terrible idea, democracy doesn't work at all, it quickly dissents into authoritarian nightmare.

Yeah, pretty much agree with this part, I mean, they wrote books on this very subject. Hell, they even wrote about the tyranny of a two party system. Kind of hard not to agree, IMO.

However, you lost me at the next part, when you started employing leaps of unfounded nonsensical logic.

[...] democracy doesn't work at all, it quickly dissents into authoritarian nightmare. because it promises too everything to everybody for nothing (actually it promises to subsidize the unproductive majority by stealing from the productive minority). Eventually you destroy what you tax and this includes all types of taxes.

So, you're saying that the MAJORITY is unproductive, and they're STEALING from the PRODUCTIVE MINORITY? What the fuck are you talking about fool? Tell me, how are those "minority" so fucking productive? Signing the articles of incorporation and moving 1's and 0's between two points isn't fucking productive you moron. Who is being productive here are the workers that allow the business to make money. Nowhere is this more evident than in small businesses. I know, I've owned small businesses, starting with next to ZERO dollars, doing all the work myself.

When I was the Majority of my labor, I was most productive. When I hired on some help, I managed contracts and filed taxes, did office work for half the time. I relied on my laborers to do the productive work. That desk work is necessary red-tape, but it's far from fucking productive. Wheeling and dealing clients to get more jobs is necessary, but you're a fucking idiot if you think it's more productive that the people doing the labor to fill those contracts.

From just the tax rates on income and property, to various rules, laws and regulations that government imposes upon business to buy votes (be it minimum wage, various laws that give employees special powers to sue employers for any perceived 'wrongdoing', any kind of entitlement to the employers and customers that end up being obligations upon the employers and producers).

This eventually ends up destroying the productive class of people and destroys incentives for people even trying to become productive, here is a good satirical overview of the problem.

Government handouts aren't the fucking problem. They're a small slice of the fuck-up pie. What about the trillions of dollars in war spending? What about the government sanctioned monopolies in telecom sectors? What about the rich businesses getting away with a "Double Irish" -- A legal form of tax evasion? What about paying high ranking members of companies in stock options to avoid taxes? That's all legal, but it's plain an simple bullshit, and shouldn't be legal by any rational stretch of the word.

At the end of the day the rich minority are to blame for the majority of the problems, not the gheto hoochie slummers. I've lived in a ghetto. This opinion piece you linked to is more sensationalist Kool-Aid made to appease the rich minority into thinking their continued exploitation of the majority is warranted. The majority of folks in the dregs of society are just trying to make ends meat. My next door neighbor operated a fork-lift in a 110 degree warehouse 10 hours a day, and could only afford the same shitty housing project apartment that such welfare mommas do. His fiancé's wall-mart job payed shit, they purposefully cut hours to c

Re:hmmm

[Curunir_wolf]

And Clapper actually spoke the truth, as it is understood things.

WHAT!?!?! LOL!!! They must be paying you a lot for "coding" if it prompts you to defend their actions with this kind of BS. Clapper has admitted to lying, about the best he has done is claim that he used the least untruthful statement he could come up with. Those of us not lawyers or politicians call that "lying."

You HAVE to be kidding me. You do not think that AQ or taliban is a threat to America? You do not think that 9/11 occurred? And the fact that the Chinese, Iranian, North Koreans, and even Russians (quasi issue here) are spying on us with a full court press is not an issue? Seriously? If you think that they are not a threat, then you have an issue with your logic. Or should I be asking, what nation you are from?

Al Queida? Really? There are plenty of "threats" to national security. As I said, protecting from those threats must not compromise the rule of law, and the rights of American citizens. This level of domestic spying does just that. And since it's not even effective enough to prevent things like the Boston Marathon bombing, there is no reason to violate people's rights for it. In fact, there is no justification for violating the Constitutional restrictions on the Federal government's authority, even for the claimed purpose of "protecting the American people."

And you claim that the constitution has been violated, yet, you provide ZERO proof of it. All you have is a bunch of accusations, with no proof.

Apparently, you haven't read it. There is ample evidence that the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment, and the Enumerated Powers in Article 1 have all been violated.

The Fourth Amendment obliges the government to demonstrate probable cause before conducting invasive surveillance. The government has made a mockery of that protection by relying on select Supreme Court cases, decided before the era of the public Internet and cellphones, to argue that citizens have no expectation of privacy in either phone metadata or in e-mails or other private electronic messages that it stores with third parties. This hairsplitting is inimical to privacy and contrary to what at least five justices ruled just last year in a case called United States v. Jones. One of the most conservative justices on the Court, Samuel A. Alito Jr., wrote that where even public information about individuals is monitored over the long term, at some point, government crosses a line and must comply with the protections of the Fourth Amendment. That principle is, if anything, even more true for Americans’ sensitive nonpublic information like phone metadata and social networking activity.

BTW, I asked how YOU would safeguard this, and yet, you come up with NOTHING? Why not?

Safeguard what? America? That's up to the Americans, not secret spy networks. You know what it really takes to prevent another 9/11? Do it once. That's it. As soon as word got out on 9/11 of planes being flown into buildings, the fourth plane could not be used the same way. The so-called "shoe bomber" was stopped by citizens on the plane. Same thing for the underwear bomber. Secret spying and TSA didn't do anything to stop that, the People did. You should trust them, not the liars, thieves, and elitist bullies in the Federal government.

Re:hmmm

[almechist]

Which is precisely why the government officials that are required to swear into the office are required to uphold and protect the CONSTITUTION.

NOT THE PEOPLE.

Not the government, not the white house, not the justice system but the LAW. The US Founders knew that relying on people making right choices is a terrible idea, democracy doesn't work at all, it quickly dissents into authoritarian nightmare because it promises too everything to everybody for nothing (actually it promises to subsidize the unproductive majority by stealing from the productive minority). Eventually you destroy what you tax and this includes all types of taxes.

From just the tax rates on income and property, to various rules, laws and regulations that government imposes upon business to buy votes (be it minimum wage, various laws that give employees special powers to sue employers for any perceived 'wrongdoing', any kind of entitlement to the employers and customers that end up being obligations upon the employers and producers).

This eventually ends up destroying the productive class of people and destroys incentives for people even trying to become productive, here is a good satirical overview of the problem.

Eventually the mob eats and chases away the part of the society that actually is productive and pays for all of this conspicuous consumption by the mob and then the society is doomed to failure because of the failing economy. So the principles are the same for anything else that concerns rule of law - equal justice under the law, privacy from government intrusion, transparency of government in the first place.

ALL democracies are destined to failure, that is not an option, it's an inevitable consequence of the rule of mob. That's why to keep working the system is supposed to set those types of feelings and desires aside and concentrate on constantly and vigilantly protecting the rule of law, equality before law, equality of opportunity by providing equal application of law, prevention of discrimination by the mob, by the government. Once those concepts are breached, the society is on the path to self destruction and unfortunately I have never found an example in history where the society actually stopped short of destroying itself this way once it became democratic, AFAIC history shows that the destruction is imminent.

So then, you apparently believe the USA is not a democracy and never has been, which seems to me to be a bit disingenuous. Democracy does not have to mean pure mob rule, it's a principle and guiding philosophy that can be implemented in various different ways, with varying degrees of power being given over to the populace. The US constitution and the system of government it created currently stand as the most enduring in history, so we must be doing something right. As for the notion that pure democracy must always self-destruct, history doesn't support that even if you are indeed referring strictly to mob rule. Historically there have been precious few examples of pure democracy to go by, but I would wager that in terms of longevity democracies fare no better or worse than any number of other forms of government. In fact I would go further, and say that a certain degree a democracy is absolutely necessary for a post-industrial society to be both successful and enduring. Your viewpoint seems to be that the majority of the people are just too stupid or too greedy to rule themselves successfully, but where's the proof? Even animals often act altruistically in social situations, why are you so sure humans can't do the same? Until you show me some research to back up your assertions that democracies must inevitably implode, I will choose to put my faith in democracy. True, the USA does seem to be headed down the tubes at the moment, but this seems to be happening precisely because we have become less democratic than we used to be, not more. Furthermore, your thesis that high taxes always destroy

Re:hmmm

[ultranova]

That's so great, you get your data from political slogans.

Where do you get yours? From the people who don't want to get their dainty hands dirty but claim the credit for the accomplishments of those who do, and then show contempt for them?

Come on, even Marx admitted that some poor people were a burden on society.

The grandparent talked about "unproductive majority" and "productive minority", and then went on to imply that the employees - the people who actually produce every single thing produced in this or any other country - are examples of the former. That is a lie, regardless of what Marx or anyone may or may not have "admitted".

Also, society can take burdens. It can support the needy poor, and it could easily support the idle rich. What it can't take is wolves who prey on others, and then try to blame their victims for the results. That's nothing more than the divine right of the kings revisited, and will end the same way as the last time.

Terrible news...

[Anonymous Coward]

From The Q&A Snowden had with readers of The Guardian:

Q: What would you say to others who are in a position to leak classified information that could improve public understanding of the intelligence apparatus of the USA and its effect on civil liberties?
A: This country is worth dying for.

Despite this latest poll, I still think Snowden was right. Future generations will hail him as the hero he is. And that's coming from a non-American...

Re:Terrible news...

[Mr. Freeman]

Everyone loves to talk a big game. "This country is worth dying for!" "We'll make America strong!" "We love our country!" are all common phrases that you'll hear at campaign rallies, but how many people are actually willing to step up? As it turns out, very few.

Hell, most people aren't even willing to see a 1% increase in their taxes in order to fix this nation's problems. Do you really think that anyone is going to risk their job or their life to do the same?

Re:Terrible news...

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

but how many people are actually willing to step up? As it turns out, very few.

Which is why guys like Snowden deserve an enormous amount of latitude. The relatively few among us who are willing to put their lives on the line for the causes we give lip-service too deserve our unwavering support.

Re:Terrible news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello, Bob. I'm going to call you Bob. You work for the CIA as part of an organised disinfo op. You might not even know that. You've been hired as a contractor for "information management" or "brand management" or whatever banal words they put on it this time. But even if you don't know, you know, because who the fuck else thinks anyone in their right mind would do something like this for the attention?

You are a tiny part of what is wrong with America. And I'm not even American. Ask your bosses, they know. That's part of the problem. When they say it's damaging your country's national security, they're talking bullshit, but when they say it's damaging your country's national interest, actually they're being accurate. You have the largest covert surveillance and propaganda machine in the world, one that puts Iran and China to shame: and you're part of it, sitting there, at that keyboard, typing what you've been told.

If you know something is wrong, the public have a moral right to know. Edward Snowden is braver than you. Bradley Manning is braver than you. Julian Assange is braver than you. Each of them no longer have their liberty in any normal way, but each of them have advanced humanity in an important way and done what they feel it right: but you, Bob? You're a fucking keyboard warrior fighting on the front lines of the opinions of the American people. Fuck you. Seriously, go fuck yourself.

Re:Terrible news...

[sl4shd0rk]

most people aren't even willing to see a 1% increase in their taxes in order to fix this nation's problems.

Tax increases won't fix the campaign corruption, erosion of rights, separation of church and state, nor establish a government who is working for the people. Stop beating that drum.

Re:Terrible news...

[mwvdlee]

The sad reality of this is that, apparently, telling on a misbehaving government is a risk to ones live.

The reason people dislike him is, IMHO, because he reminds them of their inability to act on their government.

Re:Terrible news...

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Very few people would support it, because very few people would believe that the tax money would actually go towards fixing that problem. The government will just spend it however they damn well please, as with anything else.

And even if the problem was fixed by the tax, they would keep the tax as permanent to spend elsewhere. Many taxes are declared "temporary" only to be made permanent later.

Maybe it's worth dying for the country, but it sure as hell ain't worth it dying for the politicians.

Re:Terrible news...

[228e2]

He was using a hypothetical (meaning stop being pedantic) that few people wouldnt give up a fraction of their pay in the actual case it would help, so giving up their entire pay and freedom would be out of the question.

Re:Terrible news...

[ethanms]

Hell, most people aren't even willing to see a 1% increase in their taxes in order to fix this nation's problems.

It's not that most people aren't willing to give another 1%, it's that we're so pissed off with how wasted and mismanaged the first 20-40% are being handled we can't bare to just heap more on and have it be wasted yet again.

I'm in the US, when I add up my federal and state income taxes, property tax, sales tax, meal tax, fuel tax, excise tax, as well as all the other little misc. taxes and fees mandated by the government it ends up about 40% of my gross income.

The government will ALWAYS want just one more percent...

So please don't confuse people not wanting to pay more taxes with not loving their country, USA or otherwise.

Re:Terrible news...

[cheekyjohnson]

As someone who is a NSA contractor, I would retort that we do a lot more good than bad

Of course.

so I think the ends justify the means.

Of course you do.

I don't know about you, but it is my firm believe that individual liberties should take precedence over safety. If you can't save people without violating their rights, then perhaps you should simply accept the casualties.

Re:Terrible news...

[Chris Mattern]

Hell, most people aren't even willing to see a 1% increase in their taxes in order to fix this nation's problems.

Let me get this straight. The problem under discussion is the government recording the trail of every email and phone call, and you think the answer is to give them more money? For what, so that they can do bigger and better tracking?

Should we be surprised?

[Mr. Freeman]

This isn't terribly shocking. If the last several years have told us anything it's that the American people don't really care if the government abuses its authority. Remember the Nixon scandal? That guy tried to wiretap a *single office* and the only reason that he wasn't impeached is because he resigned before congress could file the impeachment paperwork. Yet, when the government started wiretapping citizens years ago due to "national security" reasons, there was no such uproar. Sure, there were a few people that wanted the president impeached, but there was no real support for it. It's no surprise that the recent news of the wiretapping being larger than we thought has fallen on deaf ears.

Every single issue over the last couple decades has been met with more and more apathetic responses. The problem is going to get far worse before it gets better.

Re:Should we be surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

More to the point, who cares what a YouGov poll says?

YouGov is one of those pollsters that will show whatever you pay them to show by selecting biased samples.

I believe it was them who at the last general election in the UK on the same day put support for the Liberal Democrats at something like 19% and 29% because two different papers had asked for 2 different poll outcomes to support their chosen supported party (FWIW the actual result was 23% at the election). That's not in the realm of legitimate statistical error margins and is proof of outright biased sampling.

So the problem is that whilst this may be an independent study it may also not. Given that we know for a fact they do seem to produce results to order it's impossible to tell which of their polls are and aren't biased. The safest option then is to just ignore them or risk being grossly misinformed.

Re:Maybe

[Meshugga]

That's exactly the kind of psy-op that has been going on for weeks now in discussion forums all around the internets.

Slowly, but steadily comments pop up that put Snowden in a slightly bad light, for no good reason at all. Depending on the target audience of the forum, it's anything from "because 'MURICA" to what you just said.

Doesn't anyone notice that?

That's also why such programs are so enormously dangerous. Who in the world would know best how to manipulate public opinion? Only those whose sole reason of existance it is to peek into other peoples lives ... so even when the programs are known (which happens very rarely), we can't fight it because they have already become too powerful.

No wonder...

[Anonymous Coward]

...when you condider the 24/7 anti-Snowdon propaganda in the US-media.

Shooting the messenger has a long tradition.

Re: No wonder...

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously.. We have journalists suggesting journalists should be executed as traitors for doing journalism and we don't think this s all part of an organized propaganda effort?

Re: No wonder...

[johanw]

Of course I'm not surprised. Goebels would be proud to see how well his lessons were learned and laugh on the irony of how his victors would call themselves moraly superior.

Re:obviously

[Meshugga]

Not just spin doctors. Commenters on the internets. Public opinion is made today by manipulating virtual peer groups on social media, discussion boards, online newspaper comment sections, newsgroups etc.

Shocking

[Spad]

Is this really a surprise? Most sections of the media have spent the last month or so trying to portray Snowden as a traitor, who's weakened the national security of several countries, endangered inter-governmental cooperation (because now they know they were all spying on each other rather than just assuming they were), is possibly a bit weird and is now "palling around" with Russian and various South American states who are "enemies of teh freedoms".

In that context, of course peoples' opinions are going to start to shift.

Re:Shocking

[Livius]

The public may not have clued in, but the "journalists" are aware they Snowden also outed them for their incompetence and corruption.

5% shift

[jbolden]

Wow does this headline have things reversed.

Edward Snowden has been subjected to a month long attack campaign. This started with go after his girlfriend for being a pole dancer. It followed with other negative news stories and criticism by major politicians. From there there was a federal espionage indictment. He then had to flee the country and the USA has gone to extraordinary lengths putting pressure on countries to isolate him. The media has been mainly complicit. And after all that is approval rating has dropped a mere 5 points.

That's the story.

Of course they are going to vote against him

[detain]

now that they know they are being monitored and showing him favor might get them on a watch list.

Declining support by creating desinterest

[the.emmef]

By continuously shifting the attention away in the media from the human rights violations to what Snowdon is doing now (sitting on an airport) or did (show that the government is acting outside the law) people get bored. And especially since the violations of Americans' own rights is covered by law (that is implemented in a completely unaccountable way, though) the American people forget even more. But the European people - not their politicians, of course - are furious. If one chooses to be a diplomat or a politician, one knows there will be eavesdropping. But when I write a letter to someone, a foreign government that is supposed to be an allie should stay the f**k out of my mail: paper and electronic alike. Of course, I'm also blaming the United Kingdom. The western world induces terrorism itself by performing terrorism in other parts of the world. Conquer and divide. Give them weapons, let them fight each other as long as our companies' interests are ensured. Shoot people on flimsy evedence with a drone, without a trial, in countries we're not at war with. And the bloddy mess (innocent civilians) is a don't care. They are not our boys, but theirs. No wonder people start to fight back. People like Snowdon and Bradley Manning are necessary to show that politicians commit war crimes, blackmail countries and violate every possible law that's about humanity. That is because they act not in our interests (the public, the believed to be free people) but in the interest of big companies. Who also happen to own the media. And there goes your information, your well informed opinion and as a result yout humanity. The trend that you're seeing in this article is indifference. Governments are lobby clubs that lie to their people and allies alike. And they succeed.

Re:Maybe

[Vintermann]

It is now official. YouGov has confirmed: Edward Snowden support is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered internet community community when CNN confirmed that support for whistleblowers has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all important people. Coming on the heels of a recent Pew survey which plainly states that...

Gonna Have to Disagree with You There

[eldavojohn]

Wow does this headline have things reversed.

Edward Snowden has been subjected to a month long attack campaign. This started with go after his girlfriend for being a pole dancer. It followed with other negative news stories and criticism by major politicians. From there there was a federal espionage indictment. He then had to flee the country and the USA has gone to extraordinary lengths putting pressure on countries to isolate him. The media has been mainly complicit. And after all that is approval rating has dropped a mere 5 points.

That's the story.

Submitter here and I'm afraid I'm going to have to outright disagree with you. I just don't see your events lining up with this recent drop in support. You're talking about months old efforts to discredit him that seemed to have little effect on his popularity. If you read the HuffPo article you'll see:

Much of the drop in support for Snowden's actions since the earlier poll appears to have taken place among Republicans, who were divided, 37 percent to 37 percent, on whether Snowden did the right thing in the previous poll, but in the latest poll said by a 44 percent to 29 percent margin that he did the wrong thing.

As fallout from his revelations ruin our foreign relations I think you'll see a lot of conservatives switch positions. This is simply a more plausible explanation. US as a power player in world politics and economics is simply higher on some people's agendas then their own damned privacy.

Re:Maybe

[Wildclaw]

That's exactly the kind of psy-op that has been going on for weeks now in discussion forums all around the internets.

It is standard propaganda tactics to describe people as unreliable attention whores to place blame on them. It works in various ways.

For example, take the fable "the boy who cried wolf". It is not a tale about a boy lying, but a tale about blaming a boy for the failure of others to build fences to protect the sheep.

Re:Maybe

[Dr Max]

Maybe if the NSA can secretly record information on billions of people, then rigging a yougov poll would be child's play. 4chan does it about once a month, like how they got kim jong un times people's choice award of 2012.

Re:Maybe

[Ragzouken]

The proper channels do not work. There is no "right" way to be a whistleblower. The systems are in place to define any possible effective attempt to whistleblow something this big as "wrong".

Push polling is a sign of fear

[Anonymous Coward]

Push polls are a sign of fear. They're trying to give the impression that protestors are isolated and thus should be afraid of stepping out line by protesting. If people really didn't care, then you wouldn't need to keep the program secret, and continue to lie about it.

The details of the economist poll I could not find, only the claimed single question, which is rarely the full story, there's always pre-questions to remove the 'don't know'.

For example the first poll 'Pew', was heavily loaded with pre-questions to push the person to accept surveillance:

e..g.
"Did you follow reports about the government collecting emails and other online activities directly from large internet companies to track foreign suspects in terror investigations very closely,"
See the "to track foreign suspects in terror investigations" part?

If I told you the surveillance is everyone for everything (which it is), that's different from tracking a few terror suspects (which it isn't). The loaded questions were only able to just take it above 50%.

If they're pushing, then its fear.

He is rocking the boat, don't rock the boat

[SmallFurryCreature]

Life for most of us is already complex enough. We know we are in a tiny sinking life raft with an insane incompetent captain on a hostile ocean filled with sharks. If someone then starts to show just how leaky the boat is by poking at its holes... well, they can expect a punch in the face.

Those that are upset by all the revelations are the people who thought the captain was competent and sane, the ocean was our natural home, the raft an ocean lines and the sharks to be dolphins.

In reality of course, the spying while much worse then what the dreamers thought is probably in reality far less effective. If it worked, they would be capturing more terrorists and criminals. Most of us in the real world DREAM of an effective secret shadow government ruled by aliens, it would mean that for once somebody intelligent was in charge. Or at least something with a plan. It doesn't matter that the plan is to harvest your organs, at least it is a goddamn plan.

Take the attitude in the US towards veterans. The average American KNOWS the average US veteran is a war criminal. Plenty of examples even very clear once like the Mai Lai masacre. Point out however that just because someone is a vet, they are therefor NOT automatically worthy of worship and they will spout all sorts of nonsense, even going so far as liberals stating that orders are orders.

The same people who cry foul (justly so) over Japan worhshipping its war criminals, can't see the tree in their own eye.

Because it rocks the boat. And people HATE that.

Ideally people want today to be followed by tomorrow and for it to be not to much worse.

If you read about daily life in the death camps of the holocaust, the normalcy of it all is the most shocking. Life went on, even if all around you it didn't. The same is true of children raised in the most appalling conditions. Humans adapt, to ANYTHING. It allows us to survive. Both Douglas Adams and Terry Pratchett have written about this, we all need to be slightly drunk all the time because if we ever saw the world sober, we would lose our minds.

Think about this, while you are reading me prattling on, children are being hurt and killed, are dying of hunger RIGHT now and all your are doing is wishing you had mod points to mod me up/down. YOU (and I, because I am prattling on while I could be saving someone) can't deal with the real world all the time.

And snowden tried to force us to do so, to see the man behind the curtain and we hate him for it. Well not hate, just wish he would go away so we can pretend the world ain't that bad after all.

Want proof? Red nose day. A british charity event were they gather money through comedy. It is VERY succesful. Because it offsets the horrors for which the money is needed with plenty of entertainment and happy endings to make us forget how horrid it all is. Charity organizers know this, you show a BIT of misery, the photogenic part because if you just show thousands of dead children, nobody would donate anything because nobody would watch. Show however a story of how a child went from carrying water all day to sitting in a happy classroom and you can't accept the donations fast enough.

Snowden showed us the Auswitz that is our privacy and we can't cope. It is to much, to far. He didn't just rock the boat, he nuked it out of existence. And have us nothing in return. He didn't give us any tools to stop Prism. EVERYONE is in favor. The only ones speaking out against it so far are SOME tea party members and socialist semi-dictators. In Europe NOBODY has spoken out against it.

We can now either face the full machinations of the system OR wish Snowden went away.

I am betting on the latter. Because I am a old middle class man who frankly has every bit of fight beaten out of him. I used to be an activist for a local union, then had people who fought me every way demand that they get all the benefits they didn't fight for... let someone else fight this fight. I am done and frankly I can see why some people walk f

Re:He is rocking the boat, don't rock the boat

[davydagger]

I think you lost me with the "Aushcitz" remark, and the concept that the average veteran is a war criminal, soley based on a few examples.

While I certainly condem the spying, full out, and sympathize with snowden, its extreme.

Re:He is rocking the boat, don't rock the boat

[FriendlyLurker]

We know we are in a tiny sinking life raft with an insane incompetent captain on a hostile ocean filled with sharks.

Bad time to be a small furry creature then, eh, a chinchilla perhaps... but I digress. Interesting post what you say is right in some respects, however just because, as you say you dont have any fight left in you, just because things are SNAFU, does not mean you and people like you cannot be passively supportive, which in its own way does help young are more motivated people change the system for the better wherever possible in a peer support kind of way. Of course I am not telling you anything you dont already know - I just thought it worth a minute to prattle on with you out loud because after reading your post, a weak mind might decide that it is all useless and just why bother. Well it is worth the bother, we (some of us) can do our little bit to change our world for the better, roll back injustices, expose powerful corrupt petty self interested people, even in the face off crafty devious "news" like this that is taking questionable methods to arrive and questionable conclusions all in order to tell use what we should be thinking with some semblance of credibility (again, that a weaker mind might buy into). As mentioned elsewhere in this thread - this is here as news right here and now because "they" are afraid, afraid that the curtain has been lifted even for a moment. Afraid that right now an unknown number of young motivated people are doing their little bit to change the status quo. For example all the geeks I can hear right now, frantically coding encryption solutions, plugins and gizmos that give the middle finger to the man, blind him even slightly to other peoples business, and in so doing reduce his absolute power just a tiny fraction (I accept might be overstating the case - maybe not afraid, just a little pissed off).

Think back through time, England was nothing more than a bunch of lords who owned all the land, all the people on it, everything they ever did, said, married or ate was their business, no privacy from the tax collector. Nothing changed for centuries. Your post is like the old guy sipping (swilling?) on the mead he illegally brewed, the last remnant of his earlier activist self, trying to tell the young uns that yes it sucks the lord can fuck any of their daughters/wives up in the castle whenever he likes, kick the them off the land they work to die next winter because they did not produce enough last year, send them all off uneducated untrained to a die in pointless war that only reinforce the lords holdings, cut off their hands or their tong if they complain about anything... that this is how the world is just accept it dont complain there is no point. There will always be a lord and they are all just dreamers if they think different or that anything can change to better "your lot in life". Look where we are today by comparison only a few short centuries later. Lucky for us all that not everyone took that old guys words as absolute truth.

the answer your looking for is 42. It is just that the time frame your looking at it is too short so it does not look like the right answer...

Re:He is rocking the boat, don't rock the boat

[IamTheRealMike]

The average veteran in the USA is a war criminal. How is he supposed to demonstrate this fact other than by giving examples? Was Iraq invading the USA? Was Afghanistan? The people who fly the drones, are they fighting people who are attacking the USA?

The answer to all these things is clearly no. When people volunteer to take part in the US military, they volunteer to travel to some foreign country the other end of the Earth and bomb, snipe and shoot their way through the local populace to achieve extremely vague and open ended "goals" which are self evidently bullshit (bringing freedom or whatever). They volunteer knowing full well what they're going to do, how pointless it all is, and they sign up anyway.

How Americans go out of their way to engage in hero worship of vets is one of the most troubling and pathetic parts of US culture. You don't see it to anywhere near the same extent in other parts of the world. Maybe people if directly challenged would say "yes I support the troops" because any other answer is picking a fight, but the anti-Iraq-war rallies were the largest anti war protests in recorded history. That shows you what people really think of the military. I'll know there's a chance for the US when a politician gets up and says, "no, I don't support the troops". Not holding my breath.

A fervent defense of Apathy

[argStyopa]

Nonsense.

Zealots, psychotics, and sociopaths that have nothing to live for are willing to "give their lives for what they believe in". The simple willingness to die for a cause bears NO weight on the moral quality of the cause, nor on the worthiness of the person.

History is littered with nutballs who are willing to give their lives for 'a cause'. Unfortunately, they usually convince others to join them, and invariably some non-nutballs die too.

I know it's all charmingly enthusiastic and romantic to be zealous about a cause but personally I commend American apathy. As we've recently been witness to (repeatedly) the world is FULL of people who are so partisan they are willing to DIE for their local interpretation of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Is that commendable?

We rightly mock the Byzantines for the Nika riots (in which tens of thousands of people were slain in street violence over the span of a week, largely over which color team they supported). We stand aghast at today's news about a Brazilian referee stabbing a player because he wouldn't leave the pitch (and then the crowd QUARTERED him and left his head on a stake in the center of the pitch). They certainly "cared" a lot about something, so much so that they were willing as a consensual group to murder a man. Shall we canonize them for their dedication to their beliefs?

America has been accurately characterized as the 'lifeboat from history'. America is where a Jew and an Arab can live next to each other in peace, not brainwashed from birth to destroy each other because of some argument between scruffy goat-herders hundreds of years ago. America is where a Catholic girl can marry a Muslim guy simply because they love each other, and not be bred into fervent hatred because of the faiths of their families. The ESSENCE of this is - dare I say it - an apathy to the fervently-held beliefs and concepts that their parents and homelands were willing to die and kill for.

Partisans of both extremes like to mock what they call the 'apathetic' center, mainly because we won't (whether the reason is intellectual or mere laziness) join their crazy-train of vituperation, spitting at the "other guys" simply because they're "not us".

Well, I'm sorry - I refuse to buy your motivational screed that I "must" care about this or that. I refuse to give a shit about whatever happens to get you all riled up, simply because you're agitated. I'll cheerfully go about my life, earn a living, and celebrate my "apathy" because that's one of the things that make this country great.

I'd stake my life on it.

Re:A fervent defense of Apathy

[fnj]

A truly interesting point of view. There's a lot to think about there, even if I am a little vague what the "it" is on which you would stake your life.

I have a bad feeling about your point that (forgive my perhaps presumptuous rephrasing) the sheep can live with the lion in the US because of widespread apathy; of lack of widespread blazing dedication to principles (good or bad). It appears to me that it is an unstable situation. As more and more lions are constantly perversely imported and cloned, their native fierceness will assert itself (and is asserting itself) more and more, while sheep by definition never can learn to defend themselves, and the apathetic prefer to keep their heads in the sand.

I admit the above is symbolic, and I would rather not give labels to the lions and lambs, but I am sure that i will not deliberately stake my life on a bunch of people who don't care much about any issues being able to hold the lions in check, even if the latter be still (but not necessarily always) a group more limited in numbers.

I would beg you to consider one thought, if no other. There are not "both extremes". There are a vast many extremes. It never did exactly fit the mold of dichotomy on any very consequential subject, but it is far less so now and getting even less so all the time. The complex of issues is a complex of many polychotomies - but not precisely polychotomies because these are static, and the shifting sands of blazing viewpoints are anything but static.

Consider that 911 truthers are composed on many who count themselves on the left, many on the right, and many who refuse the false left/right dichotomy. Many of them think the ufo disclosists are crazy; and many agree with them - and vice versa. There are those who see positives in both the tea party and the occupy wall streeters. There is an overlap between socialists and libertarians. The neo conservatives seem to have rejected conservative political beliefs (and may or may not retain conservative economic ideas).

Re:Maybe

[Black Parrot]

Right or Left, we choose to disbelieve math and science when it doesn't fit our view of the world.

Disbelieving an internet poll is another matter entirely.

Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[AliasMarlowe]

You Americans deserve what you're about to get.

What they're about to get is nothing to celebrate, and should motivate one towards resisting the trend. The rest of the world either will get the same shortly thereafter, or is getting it already. The difficulty is that a group of persons must interpret the limits expounded in their constitution, and are not doing so well at it. One is reminded of the comparable commands in Orwell's Animal Farm, and their weasely reinterpretation:

• No animal shall drink alcohol. (No animal shall drink alcohol to excess.)
• No animal shall sleep in a bed. (No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets.)

And so forth...

Re:Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[Opportunist]

Odd, ain't it? How the US resemble more and more the USSR after the USSR is no longer...

Re:Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[BrokenHalo]

You Americans deserve what you're about to get.

I suspect that this has more to to with the limited public attention span fostered by the 30-second soundbite that passes for journalism these days. I don't think the symptom is unique to the US. All of the media seem to be in a conspiracy to disengage peoples' brains from actually thinking about what they are reading.

I suspect this is why so many of the media manage to get away with recycling the same syndicated garbage day after day (or sometimes for weeks on end). This is why I absolutely refuse to take out subscriptions to any of the major media.

Re:Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[anagama]

Talk about limited attention span. The Seattle restorethe4th rally was scheduled for July 6 at Westlake Center in Seattle. You would think that in a city of a half-million people, a few of which are tech savvy, the protest would have drawn something.

Instead, there were three ambulances, three cop cars, a dozen cops, and one guy walking around with a sign saying "What does Jesus mean to you" or some crap like that.

What the hell? Anonymous could get a pretty big turnout to protest the Church of Scientology, an organization that harms a minuscule fraction of the world's most gullible people, but nobody in Seattle can turn out to protest programs that harm every fucking person in the planet?

YOU SUCK SEATTLE.

Re:Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[Anachragnome]

"Odd, ain't it? How the US resemble more and more the Stasi after the Stasi is no longer..."

That better?

Seriously folks. Look at the previous posts of "Cold Fjord" and see for yourselves--this "man" is a government shill, a "forum breaker".

Re:Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[Anachragnome]

Look at the previous posts of "Cold Fjord" and see for yourselves--this "man" is a government shill, a "forum breaker".

For some interesting parallels, compare his posts to the techniques outlined in the document linked in my signature.

Re:Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[abirdman]

It's easy enough to agree with your sentiment, but I don't believe the US today resembles the USSR (before it was no longer). The problems with the US today are a direct result of the explosive growth of unfettered greed capitalism. Pervasive electronic eavesdropping isn't used to enhance "security" but to protect capital and IP, and more generally the economic interests of the elites. Security is just another industry for them, witness StRATFOR Security (or whatever their name is) who were so severely pwned by kid-hackers. They're not there to provide security (they clearly don't know anything about it), they're there because that's where the big checks come from.

The Soviet Union used horrible excesses in their attempt rectify centuries of gross economic inequality by trying to move economic power from the top to the bottom, and it was an utter, tragic failure. The private power structure of the US today is engaged in moving capital the other way-- to soak the lower and middle classes (until they're paupers) and move their assets back up to the top 400 families. What those venomous leaches want is for everyone to work at below minimum-wage jobs for their entire lives, always beholden to their employers (for both their paycheck and their health insurance), and for their communities to crumble to nothing-- cut off infrastructure, education, and relief and services for the poor. Detroit is, for the US elite, a success story. And they now own all three branches of the government, and even more importantly, they own the press.

It's fine to believe the excesses of the USSR are being repeated in the US, but it's misleading, and probably not useful to equate them. It just makes it harder to discern who the true enemy is.

Re:Weasely "interpretation" of Constitution

[Opportunist]

I grew up in a country with a front row seat to the iron curtain. I've spent quite a bit of my time in the late 80s helping people get out. Apologies that I was a wee bit too young earlier to affect much.

I know what It was like. Funny enough, as crappy as it was, our western propaganda managed to paint it even blacker. We didn't have to add much, but we still did. Today, a lot of things surface that the average person didn't even know about, people who really had no reason to believe they were under surveillance discover that there are actually detailed files about them. And it comes to them as quite a shock.

But when you compare what they knew about their country and what we know about ours now, you can't help but to draw parallels. Of course it varied from country to country, and someone in, say, Azerbaijan certainly had a very different life from someone living in the GDR, just like today it is quite a bit of a difference whether you live in the US or in India. But if you compare their "first class" countries (i.e. pretty much any country with a first class view to the West) to ours (take the G7), the people aren't that much different off. As long as you keep your mouth shut and do your work, there's little you have to fear. Your opinion doesn't count, neither in politics nor in economy. You get to buy what is offered because nobody gives a crap what you actually WANT to buy. The main difference is maybe that here you can say whatever you want with impunity, at least as long as you don't have any kind of backup or power to put your money where your mouth is and actually cause some change. Then you're gone.

And whether you're labeled terrorist or counterrevolutionary when you disappear somewhere, do you really care anymore?