4 ms·

So, it's ok for China to ban Google because Google refuses to help with censorship and propaganda, and because Google doesn't want the Chinese govt to be able t

So, it's ok for China to ban Google because Google refuses to help with censorship and propaganda, and because Google doesn't want the Chinese govt to be able to spy on its citizens. But it's not OK for the US to keep out spyware. Heck, retaliation for China's banning of Google etc would be sufficient justification for banning TikTok on its own.

Dahoon 6y ago
You cannot say "A" is evil because it does "X", so we will also do "X" and then still claim "A" is evil without saying you are evil yourself. What you are saying is that unless PRC becomes like the US, the US has to become like PRC. I'm amazed how this is not clear to anyone following this. The only way to go forward and not become what you are pointing fingers at is taking the high road. The US is clearly not doing so.
Talanes 6y ago
If we retaliate against every country that has disallowed something that is allowed in America, we're going to run out of imports very quickly.
Cthulhu_ 6y ago
Oh but it is ok, it's just that there's no good legal precedence for it yet. Plus it goes against the US's low restrictions and limitations on doing business.
powersnail 6y ago
It’s obviously not okay for China to ban Google. That’s why China gets criticized for it constantly, by both the west and its own citizens. If US wants to retaliate China by becoming more China, well, surely China isn’t the only one getting hurt.
- eru 6y ago
  Yes. It's the same situation as 'retaliating' to tariffs with tariffs of your own. It's like butting your head against the wall to teach the other fellow not to but his own head against the wall.
avianlyric 6y ago
Well yes it is ok for China to block Google, they’re allowed to block anyone they want. The issue isn’t a tit-for-tat they block, we block issue, with the US and China acting like playground children. The issue is whether or not the rule-of-law still means anything in the US. Have the executive block things pretty much arbitrarily undermines the rule-of-law. If the US wants to block Chinese companies, then pass laws in congress to do so. Don’t let your executive do an end run around your democratic process.
- eru 6y ago
  And, of course, people are still free to voice their disapproval with actions of their government (whether by law or by executive fiat) they don't approve of. That's independent of the rule of law being preferable to the alternative. The rule of law itself doesn't put much of a constraint on what the government can do, it just requires proper form.
- tooltalk 6y ago
  >> Have the executive block things pretty much arbitrarily undermines the rule-of-law ... If the US wants to block Chinese companies, then pass laws in congress to do so... That's not how the rule-of-law works. The bill of attainder doesn't allow the US gov't to punish an entity (or a group of) arbitrarily by legislating. The legislative and executive branches have already been briefed on privacy and/or security threat Tiktok poses to US. The US senate already passed a bill to ban federal employees from using Tiktok on gov't issued devices, which is exactly what the legislative is supposed to be doing without overreaching and impinging on Americans' civil liberty, and Trump in turn issued executive orders to deter national security/privacy threats from foreign entities. The judicial branch likewise appropriately exercised their power by delaying Trump's EO and challenging his authority. That's precisely how the rule-of-law is supposed to work in the US -- there is nothing novel or arbitrary here.
- starfallg 6y ago
  >The issue is whether or not the rule-of-law still means anything in the US. Have the executive block things pretty much arbitrarily undermines the rule-of-law. If the US wants to block Chinese companies, then pass laws in congress to do so. Don’t let your executive do an end run around your democratic process. The courts are doing exactly that, determining whether the executive has the authority to implement this. This is in fact the rule-of-law in action. This is also the reason why the rule-of-law is lacking in China, the courts rarely if ever finds against the government in constitutional matters like these. Their system was designed for the CCP to retain power.
publicola1990 6y ago
For that it has to be established that TikTok is some type of malicious spyware to the satisfaction of US courts and legal system, which hasn't been done.
marcosdumay 6y ago
You are equating the US government with China's. Those governments are supposed to work differently.

Dahoon 6y ago

You cannot say "A" is evil because it does "X", so we will also do "X" and then still claim "A" is evil without saying you are evil yourself. What you are saying is that unless PRC becomes like the US, the US has to become like PRC. I'm amazed how this is not clear to anyone following this. The only way to go forward and not become what you are pointing fingers at is taking the high road. The US is clearly not doing so.

Talanes 6y ago

If we retaliate against every country that has disallowed something that is allowed in America, we're going to run out of imports very quickly.

Cthulhu_ 6y ago

Oh but it is ok, it's just that there's no good legal precedence for it yet. Plus it goes against the US's low restrictions and limitations on doing business.

powersnail 6y ago

It’s obviously not okay for China to ban Google. That’s why China gets criticized for it constantly, by both the west and its own citizens. If US wants to retaliate China by becoming more China, well, surely China isn’t the only one getting hurt.

eru 6y ago
Yes. It's the same situation as 'retaliating' to tariffs with tariffs of your own. It's like butting your head against the wall to teach the other fellow not to but his own head against the wall.

avianlyric 6y ago

Well yes it is ok for China to block Google, they’re allowed to block anyone they want. The issue isn’t a tit-for-tat they block, we block issue, with the US and China acting like playground children. The issue is whether or not the rule-of-law still means anything in the US. Have the executive block things pretty much arbitrarily undermines the rule-of-law. If the US wants to block Chinese companies, then pass laws in congress to do so. Don’t let your executive do an end run around your democratic process.

eru 6y ago
And, of course, people are still free to voice their disapproval with actions of their government (whether by law or by executive fiat) they don't approve of. That's independent of the rule of law being preferable to the alternative. The rule of law itself doesn't put much of a constraint on what the government can do, it just requires proper form.
tooltalk 6y ago
>> Have the executive block things pretty much arbitrarily undermines the rule-of-law ... If the US wants to block Chinese companies, then pass laws in congress to do so... That's not how the rule-of-law works. The bill of attainder doesn't allow the US gov't to punish an entity (or a group of) arbitrarily by legislating. The legislative and executive branches have already been briefed on privacy and/or security threat Tiktok poses to US. The US senate already passed a bill to ban federal employees from using Tiktok on gov't issued devices, which is exactly what the legislative is supposed to be doing without overreaching and impinging on Americans' civil liberty, and Trump in turn issued executive orders to deter national security/privacy threats from foreign entities. The judicial branch likewise appropriately exercised their power by delaying Trump's EO and challenging his authority. That's precisely how the rule-of-law is supposed to work in the US -- there is nothing novel or arbitrary here.
starfallg 6y ago
>The issue is whether or not the rule-of-law still means anything in the US. Have the executive block things pretty much arbitrarily undermines the rule-of-law. If the US wants to block Chinese companies, then pass laws in congress to do so. Don’t let your executive do an end run around your democratic process. The courts are doing exactly that, determining whether the executive has the authority to implement this. This is in fact the rule-of-law in action. This is also the reason why the rule-of-law is lacking in China, the courts rarely if ever finds against the government in constitutional matters like these. Their system was designed for the CCP to retain power.

publicola1990 6y ago

For that it has to be established that TikTok is some type of malicious spyware to the satisfaction of US courts and legal system, which hasn't been done.

marcosdumay 6y ago

You are equating the US government with China's. Those governments are supposed to work differently.