3 ms·

The US has no rule of law for national security consideration in other countries. As a non US citizen the US government in practice has no due process considera

The US has no rule of law for national security consideration in other countries. As a non US citizen the US government in practice has no due process consideration if they wish to spy on you, torture you, or kill you. Corporations are an extension of the state in this process, as we have learned thanks to Edward Snowden. They have no choice but to facilitate the use of state power on foreign nationals. As a non-American I don't see the difference for me. If you are an American all you're saying is "only my government should spy on me".

aaomidi 4y ago
+1 to all of this. US has no standing with the people of a lot of the world.
- asah 4y ago
  While perhaps true, it's irrelevant to THIS conversation - THIS conversation is about a Chinese company operating IN THE US. There does not need to be parity.
  - aaomidi 4y ago
    How is looking at the larger picture irrelevant here?
    - mlyle 4y ago
      Wishing countries could be better actors towards foreign geopolitical interests and foreign citizens is a nice thought and a world we should work towards. In the meantime, countries still need to act to protect their citizens and their national interests against foreign adversaries-- especially prohibiting adversarial/dangerous behavior within their own economic zones and borders. (i.e., China also has a rational interest in restricting operations of US firms gathering information on Chinese citizens-- we don't need to choose "good" or "bad" guys).
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  The American governments job isn’t to look out for foreign citizens. That’s the foreign citizens governments job. This is specifically about American national security, not any other countries.
jmyeet 4y ago
> As a non US citizen the US government in practice has no due process consideration if they wish to spy on you, torture you, or kill you. Spy? Sort of. Generally speaking, US intelligence agencies have a lot of leeway when 1) you're not a US citizen AND 2) you're not on US soil. If either of those things isn't true then it's a different story. There are workarounds (eg outsourcing spying to allies). Torture and kill? Huh? I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Do you mean in a war zone? > Corporations are an extension of the state If anything, I'd argue in the US the government is an extension of the corporations. The US government certainly acts at the behest of the capital-owning class. > They have no choice but to facilitate the use of state power on foreign nationals. I mean US companies are subject to US laws and that includes (as stated) pen registers, NSLs, FISA warrants, etc. Still, there's more due process here than for Chinese companies. > If you are an American all you're saying is "only my government should spy on me". That's not what I said at all. What I will say is that given the choice between living in China and being subject to Chinese spying and living in the US subject to US spying I'll pick the US hands down every time. Why? Because I can talk about US atrocities without "disappearing". I could compare the president to a cartoon character without "disappearing". The US also doesn't (currently at least) engage in ethnic cleansing and eradication through "re-education" camps (eg Tibet, Xianjiang). Nor do I have to worry about my ability to get anywhere because I said something critical of the government and took a big hit to my social credit score. And the US has no equivalent to Hong Kong's "security" laws.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  > Torture and kill? Huh? I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Do you mean in a war zone? Extraordinary rendition, "targeted killings", enhanced interrogation. The US often kills non US citizens on foreign soil without any due diligence. > What I will say is that given the choice between living in China and being subject to Chinese spying and living in the US subject to US spying I'll pick the US hands down every time. That's a nonsensical fallacy of choice. No one here is talking about emigration to China. We are talking about banning TikTok. The choice is between being spied on by foreign companies or by domestic companies. The correct answer is of course neither, and trying to say that being spied on by the US government is better than the Chinese government is nonsensical - if you aren't American or Chinese they are basically the same, and if you are American your own government is the only one that can opress you. > And the US has no equivalent to Hong Kong's "security" laws. Of course it does, it has the same standards whenever the US wants to occupy some country.

aaomidi 4y ago

+1 to all of this. US has no standing with the people of a lot of the world.

asah 4y ago
While perhaps true, it's irrelevant to THIS conversation - THIS conversation is about a Chinese company operating IN THE US. There does not need to be parity.
- aaomidi 4y ago
  How is looking at the larger picture irrelevant here?
  - mlyle 4y ago
    Wishing countries could be better actors towards foreign geopolitical interests and foreign citizens is a nice thought and a world we should work towards. In the meantime, countries still need to act to protect their citizens and their national interests against foreign adversaries-- especially prohibiting adversarial/dangerous behavior within their own economic zones and borders. (i.e., China also has a rational interest in restricting operations of US firms gathering information on Chinese citizens-- we don't need to choose "good" or "bad" guys).
colinmhayes 4y ago
The American governments job isn’t to look out for foreign citizens. That’s the foreign citizens governments job. This is specifically about American national security, not any other countries.

jmyeet 4y ago

> As a non US citizen the US government in practice has no due process consideration if they wish to spy on you, torture you, or kill you. Spy? Sort of. Generally speaking, US intelligence agencies have a lot of leeway when 1) you're not a US citizen AND 2) you're not on US soil. If either of those things isn't true then it's a different story. There are workarounds (eg outsourcing spying to allies). Torture and kill? Huh? I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Do you mean in a war zone? > Corporations are an extension of the state If anything, I'd argue in the US the government is an extension of the corporations. The US government certainly acts at the behest of the capital-owning class. > They have no choice but to facilitate the use of state power on foreign nationals. I mean US companies are subject to US laws and that includes (as stated) pen registers, NSLs, FISA warrants, etc. Still, there's more due process here than for Chinese companies. > If you are an American all you're saying is "only my government should spy on me". That's not what I said at all. What I will say is that given the choice between living in China and being subject to Chinese spying and living in the US subject to US spying I'll pick the US hands down every time. Why? Because I can talk about US atrocities without "disappearing". I could compare the president to a cartoon character without "disappearing". The US also doesn't (currently at least) engage in ethnic cleansing and eradication through "re-education" camps (eg Tibet, Xianjiang). Nor do I have to worry about my ability to get anywhere because I said something critical of the government and took a big hit to my social credit score. And the US has no equivalent to Hong Kong's "security" laws.

sudosysgen 4y ago
> Torture and kill? Huh? I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Do you mean in a war zone? Extraordinary rendition, "targeted killings", enhanced interrogation. The US often kills non US citizens on foreign soil without any due diligence. > What I will say is that given the choice between living in China and being subject to Chinese spying and living in the US subject to US spying I'll pick the US hands down every time. That's a nonsensical fallacy of choice. No one here is talking about emigration to China. We are talking about banning TikTok. The choice is between being spied on by foreign companies or by domestic companies. The correct answer is of course neither, and trying to say that being spied on by the US government is better than the Chinese government is nonsensical - if you aren't American or Chinese they are basically the same, and if you are American your own government is the only one that can opress you. > And the US has no equivalent to Hong Kong's "security" laws. Of course it does, it has the same standards whenever the US wants to occupy some country.