Are you arguing that because voting was involved, the majority of Americans thus must approve of the things the government claims it doesn't do and/or would never voluntarily reveal?
The press is a hugely important part of democracy, because it's their job (in theory, anyway) to keep the populace informed of what their government is actually doing in their names, vs. what they claim to be doing.
If the government is lying about what they're doing (and doing things that are contrary to principals they're pretending to uphold), whistleblowers are necessary.
I agree that if you live in a democracy, you're going to sometimes disagree with policies the majority things are fine. If I think legal abortion is evil but politicians who explicitly support it are elected, I should not "exert more leverage" by threatening to detonate a dirty bomb if the laws are not changed in 72 hours.
Whistleblowing is different -- it's the act of revealing information that was intentionally hidden from the public. Certainly, it may be breaking laws (and the laws may in general be justified!); that doesn't mean the whistleblower's decision is automatically wrong, or that they're cheating the normal democratic process. On the contrary, in most examples they're exposing others who are cheating (by hiding pertinent information from voters, thus affecting their votes).
The press is a hugely important part of democracy, because it's their job (in theory, anyway) to keep the populace informed of what their government is actually doing in their names, vs. what they claim to be doing.
If the government is lying about what they're doing (and doing things that are contrary to principals they're pretending to uphold), whistleblowers are necessary.
I agree that if you live in a democracy, you're going to sometimes disagree with policies the majority things are fine. If I think legal abortion is evil but politicians who explicitly support it are elected, I should not "exert more leverage" by threatening to detonate a dirty bomb if the laws are not changed in 72 hours.
Whistleblowing is different -- it's the act of revealing information that was intentionally hidden from the public. Certainly, it may be breaking laws (and the laws may in general be justified!); that doesn't mean the whistleblower's decision is automatically wrong, or that they're cheating the normal democratic process. On the contrary, in most examples they're exposing others who are cheating (by hiding pertinent information from voters, thus affecting their votes).