US lawmakers introduce bill to ban TikTok

[Ag3ma]

That's the exact problem. If tell you I'm a capitalist, you know what I am and don't have to ask me what I mean.

No, that's not the same thing. All the West is mostly the same and the West is capitalist, so everyone has a similar idea of capitalism because of their shared existence of the current status quo.

In reality, however, capitalism too covers a broad range of different models (albeit with the same underlying principles) just as socialism does: anarcho-capitalism, welfare capitalism, state capitalism, corporate capitalism, etc. Switching from our current model of capitalism to one of these others could have the ability to radically alter the economy and society.

 

[Trunkage]

No, that's not the same thing. All the West is mostly the same and the West is capitalist, so everyone has a similar idea of capitalism because of their shared existence of the current status quo.

In reality, however, capitalism too covers a broad range of different models (albeit with the same underlying principles) just as socialism does: anarcho-capitalism, welfare capitalism, state capitalism, corporate capitalism, etc. Switching from our current model of capitalism to one of these others could have the ability to radically alter the economy and society.

I would slightly disagree

Since most other economic systems have been declared anathema, what tends to happen is that what is popular in a country is called Capitalist. Leading to every country having their owm version of Capitalism which is somewhat like real Capitalism but generally not

Calling yourself or country is more about declaring your acceptable to the world rather than on any actual economic principles

(I.e. Calling yourself Capitalist is performative. It's just identity politics to make in and out groups. And I would say the exact same thing about Comminist)

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You suck at this. You try to pull a gotcha with the name of the USSR, then when called out on it, you go ahead and answer your own question and continue to hammer on the same fucking point as if you weren't plainly trying to bait a gotcha. And what's really sad is:



You think this tautology is your best argument because that's what you're leading with.

How was the USSR not socialist?

Well, only because trying to quantify the proportion of capitalism and socialism, to stick a number on it, is an impossible errand.



That's not arbitrary. Judging it by the proportion of GDP is an arbitrary decision.

I also notice that this "key tenet" is not the same as the definition of socialism you gave before, which was ownership by the state.




If someone says they're "generally for" or "generally against" capitalism, without digging further into it, then you've also got a useless answer there as well. Because that, too, could mean a hundred different things to fifty different people.

Words have meanings. Umbrella terms are broad ones which cover lots of variation. Like capitalism, socialism, conservatism, liberalism.



By some definitions. Not by most. Not by the Marxist definition, for example.

No, that's not the same thing. All the West is mostly the same and the West is capitalist, so everyone has a similar idea of capitalism because of their shared existence of the current status quo.

In reality, however, capitalism too covers a broad range of different models (albeit with the same underlying principles) just as socialism does: anarcho-capitalism, welfare capitalism, state capitalism, corporate capitalism, etc. Switching from our current model of capitalism to one of these others could have the ability to radically alter the economy and society.

If you're generally for capitalism, you're pro private ownership, it's not that complicated.

 

[Buyetyen]

How was the USSR not socialist?

Explain to me how it was.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Explain to me how it was.

Wikipedia literally says Soviet Union was socialist...

 

[Buyetyen]

Wikipedia literally says Soviet Union was socialist...

That's not an explanation. Try again.

 

[Silvanus]

If you're generally for capitalism, you're pro private ownership, it's not that complicated.

Except that almost all forms of socialism acknowledge a role for private ownership, and private ownership predates capitalism by thousands of years.

 

[CastletonSnob]

Let's be real, the majority of Congresspeople and American politicians are old people who probably still think the internet is a fad.

 

[Absent]

Let's be real, the majority of Congresspeople and American politicians are old people who probably still think the internet is a fad.

Twist. You're an old person who still thinks the internet is a thing.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

 

[Gergar12]

Part of me wants Tik Tok to be banned so DC will get another large protest. Also, it's odd no one wants to go after Google/Youtube, but everyone on Tik Tok is super angry at Meta, even more than I am.

If Tik Tok falls, Youtube's quality will go down since that is where they are headed and congress will want Google to control it more to favor conservatives and centrists like CNN. Also, I hate Congress almost as much as I hate the supreme court, but people on Tik Tok hated them a lot more than me, and that made me feel so warm inside. Knowing there are people my age that hate congress with a burning passion.

 

[Ag3ma]

Part of me wants Tik Tok to be banned so DC will get another large protest. Also, it's odd no one wants to go after Google/Youtube, but everyone on Tik Tok is super angry at Meta, even more than I am.

I think the USA is going after TikTok for crude economic protectionism.

The USA comprehensively rules the global roost in the hugely profitable social media sector, and is hugely affronted that its main geoplotical adversary has a major market player. That the Chinese government may be able to demand access to TikTok's data has some valid concern, but is more an excuse to defend their own corporations. And to be fair, it's not like China hasn't spent decades restricting Western companies so to build up its own.

 

[Gergar12]

I think the USA is going after TikTok for crude economic protectionism.

The USA comprehensively rules the global roost in the hugely profitable social media sector, and is hugely affronted that its main geoplotical adversary has a major market player. That the Chinese government may be able to demand access to TikTok's data has some valid concern, but is more an excuse to defend their own corporations. And to be fair, it's not like China hasn't spent decades restricting Western companies so to build up its own.

Yeah, but Congress will lie to your face about it.

 

[ralfy]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rejected banning TikTok in her first TikTok video, saying it 'just doesn't feel right to me'

The New York Democrat said America needed stronger privacy laws to stop data harvesting rather than simply banning one social media app.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Silvanus]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rejected banning TikTok in her first TikTok video, saying it 'just doesn't feel right to me'

The New York Democrat said America needed stronger privacy laws to stop data harvesting rather than simply banning one social media app.

www.businessinsider.com

She's right. Targeting a specific foreign-owned app to deal with privacy concerns would be arbitrary scapegoating, and leave the core issue unaddressed. Stronger privacy regulation would apply across the board-- to the shitty American companies alongside the shitty Chinese companies.

 

[Bedinsis]

The Swedish armed forces announced today that they forbid their employees from having Tik Tok installed on their work-telephones, in related news.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I mean, that makes sense...although I'm flabbergasted that *any* social media app is allowed on work phones

 

[FakeSympathy]

Yeah, I just want TikTok banned. As much as that hearing was pure cringe, and the bill sounds like a pure sci-fi nightmare, I want Tiktok banned for spreading toxic, dangerous, and false information.

Before you say "There are stuff like dancing, harmless trends, cooking, etc", I agree. But that's not the only stuff on the app. There are femi-nazis and liberal snowflakes to want to paint sane indviduals as crazy oppressors, trying to start a dangerous trend like stealing cars, doing dangerous stunts, and eating seriously hazardous food. And they are quite common then you think. I've seem stuff like that taking weeks before being taken down.

When the stuff that seems harmless can be really disruptive, and I experienced this first-hand; I tried leading a PE activity with mentally disabled children at a volunteering. But the volunteers, mostly in middle-high school, who were supposed to help students engage in activities, just wanted to shoot Tiktok with them. In fact, they actively encourage the students to disregard my instructions and join them in shooting videos. And I felt powerless to stop them because as a 29 years-old man, if I tried to confront them I would be labeled as the bad guy.

IDK, I never liked social media in general, but Tiktok seem to get on my nerves the most. Just the name itself makes me wanna puke

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Oh man, this bill is hyper bullshit:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text

For starters, did you know that Venezuela is an Adversary of the United States? And if you make a VPN to access Tik Tok or Weibo or whatever, it comes with a potential million dollar fine and/or 20 years in prison?

 

[ralfy]

Interestingly enough, an article about the issue, but from HBR, and from 2020:

The TikTok Ban Should Worry Every Company

While the proposed U.S. ban of the social media app TikTok may seem novel, it’s actually just the most recent high-profile incident in a string of cases of countries banning products or services over alleged cybersecurity concerns. The authors have studied more than 75 such events involving more...

hbr.org