5 ms·

Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am mor

by tehjoker 11mo ago

Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept. For what it's worth, I am not aware of any evidence that TikTok did anything intentional to promote anti-US narratives. To be honest, I think they accomplished that goal by simply promoting what people wanted to see, which is in large part, simply the truth. The so-called enemies of America do not have to work very hard or lie, they just need to expose our propaganda in a very straightforward fashion. Since the COVID crisis at least, US owned social media companies have become very censorious and we know they tamper with the algorithms. It may be that simply having a less biased algorithm is too clarifying for American elites.

ronnier 11mo ago
Try using American social media and offerings in China, and lately, Russia.
- Daishiman 11mo ago
  But it's not about reciprocity if you're truly committed to free speech right?
  - zeroonetwothree 11mo ago
    Americans still have free speech. There are many other platforms to use. Foreign governments never have had free speech rights and I doubt most people support them having those rights.
    - LtWorf 11mo ago
      > There are many other platforms to use. That will promptly proceed to bury whatever the government tells them to bury.
  - loeg 11mo ago
    The first amendment isn't a suicide pact, and foreign corporations were never covered by it.
    - vkou 11mo ago
      It's not a 'suicide pact', it's a clear commitment that the government will not ban speech it finds inconvenient. It's not done a great job of living up to that promise.
- codedokode 11mo ago
  To be fair, in some Russian regions you cannot access even most Russian sites from mobile (we have whitelist mode). Also, not everyone, but some people started using VPN after Instagram ban, and even more after Youtube ban. Like drug addicts who cannot drop their habits.
Seattle3503 11mo ago
> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept. I think there are important differences between China any democracy. In China, each company needs a internal party cell or party commitee to police and control that companies actions. If you don't find differences between China and open democracies compelling, we won't find much common ground. Nonetheless, we are seeing US tech companies facing scrutiny in Europe. Something else I'll say is I think some of the big tech companies should be broken up, which I see achieving similar goals by similar means. Reduce centralized control by a change in ownership. If China were a corporation instead of a country, old likewise advocating divesting control of TikTok
- orwin 11mo ago
  I mean, having local government and employees represented on the board seems to be an increasingly good idea.
glenstein 11mo ago
>Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? I don't understand why that's your response to a question about them both being true. It seems like a perfectly legitimate observation: China can and probably is leveraging social media to shape global discussion of political topics that they deem sensitive. And it's also the case that at least for some voting block of conservative Republicans in the US Senate, it's an opportunity to potentially shut down communication on Israel's actions in Gaza. It's a classic both can be true situation. I actually think you're right that Tiktok isn't necessarily intentionally promoting Gaza but that it has organically emerged simply because it legitimately is an issue that is an issue that has provoked moral outrage of the western world. To the extent that China is shaping anything, I think it's more about suppressing disapproved narratives than amplifying approved ones, as well as surveillance of Western opinion that can be channeled into soft power infrastructure outside the bounds of the internet.
- tehjoker 11mo ago
  I don’t disagree that there is a soft power component, but it is strange in my opinion to narrowly focus on China when there are demonstrable harms from american allies and none so far as I can tell from China. In my view, people getting exposed to China and seeing them as human will help prevent the war our capitalists are cooking up.
  - Seattle3503 11mo ago
    How are you scoping harms this context? Are we setting aside Chinas actions inside of China or Hong Kong?
    - tehjoker 11mo ago
      It is true that China controls the conversation around e.g. Tienanmen square (an event that is not accurately portrayed in U.S. media), nor the Xianjiang "genocide" that Biden concocted for which there was zero proof (we know what a genocide looks like in Gaza, the most tightly controlled, censored, and surveilled territory in the world, it is also laughable that the U.S. would pretend to be the champion of muslims while enacting a genocide of a population that is predominantly muslim and putting a self-proclaimed crusader in charge of the department of war). However, the "harms" of exposing the U.S. population to Chinese influence would be to tamp down the population's aggression towards China. I cannot see a single problem with that. China is a democracy, but it is not a liberal democracy. It represses the right wing and allows democracy within a window defined by the communist party. I think we would be hard pressed to call America a democracy at this point. We repress left wing viewpoints that gain traction and allow "democracy" within a right wing capitalist framework. Funnily enough, this is not a symmetric mirror. Right wing viewpoints are oppressive and minoritarian. Left wing viewpoints at least purport to represent the majority of workers and China does in fact increase the material well-being of its population by leaps and bounds year-over-year.
XorNot 11mo ago
> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? This is hardly the "gotcha" you're framing it as. Building sovereign capability has shot to the top of a lot nations priority lists. In a lot of industries this is also just standard even amongst allies: national security related contracts have extensive clauses about ownership, structure and access.
loeg 11mo ago
China already bans American media companies from operating in China.

ronnier 11mo ago

Try using American social media and offerings in China, and lately, Russia.

Daishiman 11mo ago
But it's not about reciprocity if you're truly committed to free speech right?
- zeroonetwothree 11mo ago
  Americans still have free speech. There are many other platforms to use. Foreign governments never have had free speech rights and I doubt most people support them having those rights.
  - LtWorf 11mo ago
    > There are many other platforms to use. That will promptly proceed to bury whatever the government tells them to bury.
- loeg 11mo ago
  The first amendment isn't a suicide pact, and foreign corporations were never covered by it.
  - vkou 11mo ago
    It's not a 'suicide pact', it's a clear commitment that the government will not ban speech it finds inconvenient. It's not done a great job of living up to that promise.
codedokode 11mo ago
To be fair, in some Russian regions you cannot access even most Russian sites from mobile (we have whitelist mode). Also, not everyone, but some people started using VPN after Instagram ban, and even more after Youtube ban. Like drug addicts who cannot drop their habits.

Seattle3503 11mo ago

> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? Should Israel be banned from interfering in American politics? If yes, then I am more open to this concept. I think there are important differences between China any democracy. In China, each company needs a internal party cell or party commitee to police and control that companies actions. If you don't find differences between China and open democracies compelling, we won't find much common ground. Nonetheless, we are seeing US tech companies facing scrutiny in Europe. Something else I'll say is I think some of the big tech companies should be broken up, which I see achieving similar goals by similar means. Reduce centralized control by a change in ownership. If China were a corporation instead of a country, old likewise advocating divesting control of TikTok

orwin 11mo ago
I mean, having local government and employees represented on the board seems to be an increasingly good idea.

glenstein 11mo ago

>Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? I don't understand why that's your response to a question about them both being true. It seems like a perfectly legitimate observation: China can and probably is leveraging social media to shape global discussion of political topics that they deem sensitive. And it's also the case that at least for some voting block of conservative Republicans in the US Senate, it's an opportunity to potentially shut down communication on Israel's actions in Gaza. It's a classic both can be true situation. I actually think you're right that Tiktok isn't necessarily intentionally promoting Gaza but that it has organically emerged simply because it legitimately is an issue that is an issue that has provoked moral outrage of the western world. To the extent that China is shaping anything, I think it's more about suppressing disapproved narratives than amplifying approved ones, as well as surveillance of Western opinion that can be channeled into soft power infrastructure outside the bounds of the internet.

tehjoker 11mo ago
I don’t disagree that there is a soft power component, but it is strange in my opinion to narrowly focus on China when there are demonstrable harms from american allies and none so far as I can tell from China. In my view, people getting exposed to China and seeing them as human will help prevent the war our capitalists are cooking up.
- Seattle3503 11mo ago
  How are you scoping harms this context? Are we setting aside Chinas actions inside of China or Hong Kong?
  - tehjoker 11mo ago
    It is true that China controls the conversation around e.g. Tienanmen square (an event that is not accurately portrayed in U.S. media), nor the Xianjiang "genocide" that Biden concocted for which there was zero proof (we know what a genocide looks like in Gaza, the most tightly controlled, censored, and surveilled territory in the world, it is also laughable that the U.S. would pretend to be the champion of muslims while enacting a genocide of a population that is predominantly muslim and putting a self-proclaimed crusader in charge of the department of war). However, the "harms" of exposing the U.S. population to Chinese influence would be to tamp down the population's aggression towards China. I cannot see a single problem with that. China is a democracy, but it is not a liberal democracy. It represses the right wing and allows democracy within a window defined by the communist party. I think we would be hard pressed to call America a democracy at this point. We repress left wing viewpoints that gain traction and allow "democracy" within a right wing capitalist framework. Funnily enough, this is not a symmetric mirror. Right wing viewpoints are oppressive and minoritarian. Left wing viewpoints at least purport to represent the majority of workers and China does in fact increase the material well-being of its population by leaps and bounds year-over-year.

XorNot 11mo ago

> Should American owned or controlled companies be banned in other countries? This is hardly the "gotcha" you're framing it as. Building sovereign capability has shot to the top of a lot nations priority lists. In a lot of industries this is also just standard even amongst allies: national security related contracts have extensive clauses about ownership, structure and access.

loeg 11mo ago

China already bans American media companies from operating in China.