Cornel West, a vocal advocate for the poor and a staunch critic of income inequality, views America’s expanding security state as an issue of critical importance, and one that needs to be addressed immediately.
While some in America view NSA surveillance, the Obama administration’s ‘War on Whistleblowing’ and the government’s Fourth Amendment violations as issues of privilege – issues of minor importance in a country full of citizens struggling to survive – West rejects this approach out of hand.
He made that patently clear by metaphorically comparing Edward Snowden to the abolitionist John Brown in a recent Tweet:
Brother Edward Snowden is the John Brown of the national security state. He’s the canary in the mine. http://t.co/yVOqdnFMbP
– Cornel West (@CornelWest) June 28, 2013
In creating this metaphor, West knew it would be viewed as provocative by some and as extreme by others. But his intention was not to equate the liberation of slaves with the liberation of Americans from a growing security apparatus.
His intention was, though, to amplify the issue of NSA surveillance as one of critical importance by pointing out the parallels between Edward Snowden and the famous abolitionist (in metaphoric terms).
In the 1850s, Brown came to believe the only way to abolish the institution of slavery was through armed rebellion. His 1859 raid upon an armory in Harpers Ferry, Virginia – a failed attempt to arm slaves in which seven people were killed – sparked a public, national debate on the issue of slavery that contributed to the start of the Civil War.
In the end, Brown was convicted of treason, murder and inciting a slave insurrection, and was hanged for his crimes. For West, Snowden and Brown share several traits:
- First, both men set out to correct what they viewed as government-sponsored injustices: for Brown, slavery; for Snowden, constitutional abuses and the violation of civil liberties.
- Second: both men were viewed by the government as traitors for acting in the public good.
- Third: both men boldly acted on the injustices they witnessed when so many before them had refused to do so.
It should be noted that West used the Brown metaphor again in defending Bradley Manning, another whistle-blower awaiting a (likely harsh) sentencing for exposing U.S. war crimes:
Manning is our John Brown, without the violence, of our national security state. God bless him!
– Cornel West (@CornelWest) July 30, 2013
West views the Obama administration’s prosecution of those coming forward to reveal American ‘national security’ injustices – as well as the injustices themselves – as critically important.
And his message to those who may not feel this way is, in part, this: too few thought of slavery as an issue of critical importance (outside of those actually enslaved) when Brown committed himself to the cause of abolition in 1837.
While Brown’s violent methods were controversial, his cause was just. So too, today, are the causes of Snowden and Manning, despite the controversies surrounding their whistle-blowing.
Follow David Harris-Gershon on Twitter @David_EHG
I am making a lifetime exception by commenting before I have read an article. I will do so as soon as I can and comment again (getting ready for work now.) But my immediate reaction is “John Brown? Really???” Whatever Dr. West thinks about Snowden (and I’m guessing he’s for him) does he really want to invoke John Brown? Armed insurrection? Ambusher of people who oppose him? Can’t wait to read it – be back later.
OK, I read it. I know that Dr. West says provocative things in order to get people’s attention and I am an active protest person. (You can feel the “but…” coming) I can’t believe that he does any good with this. He now has someone who feels that this issue is of overwhelming importance backing off. And he is giving the perfect excuse to those who are against Snowden to dig in their heels. Never mind, he doesn’t care what I think.
Snowden is sitting in the Russian police state. Go figure. He’s a real hero.
Yes, he is. I wasn’t saying anything against Snowden but against what I thought was a bad and unhelpful analogy made by Dr. West. When the Patriot Act was first proposed I was among a group who protested its passage, asking my town council to pass a resolution opposing it, as many towns did. That Act was passed in a hurry after 9/11 by people who had always wanted more centralized power to curtail the basic freedoms of U.S. citizens for their own purposes and who took advantage of fear to do so. Barack Obama opposed it at the time. He has had at least two opportunities to do something about it — at least to open up a national discussion of the worst provisions of it. He has not done so and it would not be happening now, to the extent that it is, if it were not for Snowden. Snowden is in the hands of the Russian “police state” now because he did not want the U.S. to become one — which it is fast on the way to doing. If you do not think that Russia treats its citizens well, why do you want us to become like them? My problem with Dr. West’s analogy is that it makes a bad comparison between two very different people behaving very differently and therefore harms the cause in which he believes.