David Brooks in Tuesday’s Times:

"According to The Washington Post, he has not been a regular presence around his mother’s house for years. When a neighbor in Hawaii tried to introduce himself, Snowden cut him off and made it clear he wanted no neighborly relationships."

(…)

"He betrayed his employers. Booz Allen and the C.I.A. took a high-school dropout and offered him positions with lavish salaries. He is violating the honor codes of all those who enabled him to rise.
He betrayed the cause of open government. Every time there is a leak like this, the powers that be close the circle of trust a little tighter. They limit debate a little more."

(Read the complete article here.)

Brooks seems to suggest that there is a connection between not talking (enough) to your neighbors, not visiting your mother enough and becoming a whistleblower.

The antisocial young man, according to him, is a big threat to society.

And Brooks seems to suggest that Snowden should have been thankful to Booz Allen and the C.I.A. for offering him, a high school dropout, a job with a “lavish” salary.

Interesting: the higher your salary the less qualms you should have about moral issues relating to your job.

And high school dropouts and other outsiders should be even more grateful for not being in prison.

Yes, Brooks says that sometimes the leaker has to leak. But he doesn’t make clear when this is ethically justified.

According to this article Brooks is probably in favor of creating a government agency where would-be whistleblowers can apply for a special permit to leak.

“You have reached the National Whistleblowers Association. Press 1 if you are a new whistleblower, press 2 if you have already a permit for leaking secrets to media outlets, press 3 if you don’t talk to your neighbors.”