9 ms·
More than likely its intentional. One of the main reasons TikTok has been grilled by congress is because of China's stance and willingness to violate any law f
by than3 3y ago
More than likely its intentional.
One of the main reasons TikTok has been grilled by congress is because of China's stance and willingness to violate any law for their own benefit.
One of those benefits not very commonly understood in America by the general populace is Political Warfare, which China calls the destruction of national will in their own documentation.
The USMC University has an ebook that is freely available that describes what is done, why its important, and its effects. It is a worthwhile read, if you do further research on this know that Bezmenov is not credible; there are much more credible sources, that's not to say what he says is necessarily incorrect, the best deceit weaves truth into lies.
The general gist is they seek to put people into a psychological state of demoralization, in that state you typically polarize into two separate groups.
Apathetic and complacent where you don't react to anything, and the other where you lash out at anything that you perceive or triggers you (through psychological anchoring [using NLP vocabulary], and various form of isolation). The conflict between these three groups (apathetic, violent, rational) allows a smaller number of people to seize power in a destabilization event which is a regime change playbook that most governments have used at one point or another. Historically, the last stage of that playbook involves getting back to a new normal by consolidating, and eliminating detractors (those people that lashed out).
Its subtle, and deceitful, but certain things you just can't give others the benefit of the doubt. Existential threats to your individual identity (which is what's often targeted during propaganda, and political warfare efforts), are one of those things. If its present, the source isn't credible and shouldn't be used regardless of what they say.
P.S. There's also a lawsuit from a TikTok insider that just made headlines recently disclosing how code was in the app to allow CCP backdoor access to US data and amplify or de-amplify narratives according to Communist core values. If there was any question about TikTok's credibility and their narrative that they don't do this; that pretty much seals the deal given everything else assuming of course what was said is factually correct.
They clearly would not have credibility, which would eliminate them as a potential choice in any risk management analysis you might need to do.
[Link]: https://www.businessinsider.com/new-lawsuit-alleges-tiktok-owner-let-ccp-access-user-data-2023-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/new-lawsuit-alleges-tiktok-o...
- aaomidi 3y agoHere’s the solution here: 1. Proper data protection laws that apply universally to every company. No more “oh sorry we fucked up here’s free credit monitoring”. I’m talking fines of 5% base + 1% daily increase for every day they delay announcing their fuck up of global revenue. If they’ve tried to hide it and it comes out later, that company gets nationalized. 2. Actual lawsuits against the various social media companies that have actively aided in manipulating people. E.g Cambridge Analytica 3. Removal of any “limited liability” protections against execs that actively stood by and waited for this to happen. Execs being defined by the top 10-20% of the company by both assets and income (stock and cash) If you’re talking about “communist core values” you’re, respectfully, fallen into a weird propaganda trap. Nothing about China is “communist”. North Korea calls themselves democratic, but no one actually calls them that. To me, your comment sounds like a bag of Sinophobia mixed in with a bunch of “ok” takes assuming you want this applied to everyone. Not just the new big baddie.
- _siis 3y agoWhile I agree with some of what you say, with respect, that latter part I think you've fallen into a flawed association trap through the use of corrupted language. Anyone that's educated in this area knows just because someone says something is true, it doesn't make it so, and discussing that wasn't even part of the comment so you are getting into the weeds. For your own edifice, can you (for yourself) tell what are the differences between socialism, communism, fascism and fabianism; and which ones are mutually exclusive? A google search surface view won't be much help with answering that; best resource is historical texts and essays. To me, you seem to have mixed objectives or have been seriously misled. You claim its new, but this in fact is a very old 'baddie' wrapped up in new clothing.
- mistermann 3y ago> Anyone that's educated in this area knows just because someone says something is true, it doesn't make it so With additional education one might also know that something not being actually true very often has little influence on whether people believe it to be true, which is what really matters when it comes to propaganda...and I found your text quite impressive, very believable.