1. MAGA’s xenophobic rhetoric about ‘China’, and bipartisan Red Scare tactics about China.
2. The power of AIPAC to lobby both parties to support this bill, as they fear main stream criticism of Israel on social media.
3. The Trump administration wants American ownership and oversight over the platform as it has a huge gen-z user base (which will be important for future elections). They want to conduct censorship on the platform if Trump is criticised.
The logic of the people who suggest Tiktok is ‘too addictive’, and that ‘they’ve too much private power over the citizen with their manipulative algorithms & are spying & collecting data’ -- is flawed. Because if people want to honestly apply this logic then that would mean also including Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and Twitter in the ban, as they equally do all of these things.
If 3 is true, then why does Trump oppose the ban/obligatory sale?
You appear to recognize there are foreign nations whose ability influence we should be wary of, hence your comments on AIPAC—so why is being concerned about China having access to a large channel to influence Americans "xenophobic" and a "scare tactic"?
I guess the difference is that AIPAC has a direct supervisor reporting to every political representative on their books in congress (see Thomas massie talking about this https://youtube.com/shorts/u2reaGhLnYI?si=05oKdoAe1JqVBGyq). Whereas, China’s ability to influence policy through the medium of Tiktok Media is not as direct as Israel’s— who have well-documented lobbyists and lobbying campaigns where funds can be traced. The accusations levelled against Tiktok and China are not well evidenced or even thorough enough to conduct legal action. We can say the same for Facebook and Twitter, it’s impossible to prove their influence. I’m not in favour of any social media platforms being banned.
To me it’s Xenophobic as it just looks like the Trump administration just wants to punish China for evolving economically. There’s not even enough proof to say market access is at risk from corporate subsidies to Chinese competing firms. Economist Simon Evenett had found in a 2021 research study that Market driven economies (US and EU) are just as likely to implement subsidy practices as state driven ones. It all just screams hypocrisy.
China's economic evolution was in many ways detrimental to US workers in ways that have been amply documented. That's not because China is bad, but because economic competition works this way. China is itself "hypocritical" in the same way you (correctly) note the West is. Its own banning of US social media companies while expecting other countries to not do the same to Chinese ones is one instance.
I agree in certain aspects but I struggle to see how banning Tiktok would protect American workers in this instance. H-1B workers will be flown in even if the company is American owned. There’s no domestic benefit to this ban. What kind of a geopolitical message does it send to other countries that the US (with the dollar monopoly) will ban foreign-owned tech apps to disrupt their economy? I.e. You’re existing to make us profits, and if we can’t profit from you, we’re going to wreck you.
As Michael Hudson says “We materialists think that people and countries are going to act in their own economic self-interest but the United States are not acting in their own self-interest. How on Earth do you project what countries are going to do if they don't know what their own self-interest is? How do you forecast what countries are going to do when their leaders don't know what they're doing? You can no longer think what's reasonable for them to do because they don't know what's reasonable because they don't have a way of thinking about what's reasonable or what their interest is.”
Ultimately it comes down to several factors:
1. MAGA’s xenophobic rhetoric about ‘China’, and bipartisan Red Scare tactics about China.
2. The power of AIPAC to lobby both parties to support this bill, as they fear main stream criticism of Israel on social media.
3. The Trump administration wants American ownership and oversight over the platform as it has a huge gen-z user base (which will be important for future elections). They want to conduct censorship on the platform if Trump is criticised.
The logic of the people who suggest Tiktok is ‘too addictive’, and that ‘they’ve too much private power over the citizen with their manipulative algorithms & are spying & collecting data’ -- is flawed. Because if people want to honestly apply this logic then that would mean also including Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and Twitter in the ban, as they equally do all of these things.
If 3 is true, then why does Trump oppose the ban/obligatory sale?
You appear to recognize there are foreign nations whose ability influence we should be wary of, hence your comments on AIPAC—so why is being concerned about China having access to a large channel to influence Americans "xenophobic" and a "scare tactic"?
I guess the difference is that AIPAC has a direct supervisor reporting to every political representative on their books in congress (see Thomas massie talking about this https://youtube.com/shorts/u2reaGhLnYI?si=05oKdoAe1JqVBGyq). Whereas, China’s ability to influence policy through the medium of Tiktok Media is not as direct as Israel’s— who have well-documented lobbyists and lobbying campaigns where funds can be traced. The accusations levelled against Tiktok and China are not well evidenced or even thorough enough to conduct legal action. We can say the same for Facebook and Twitter, it’s impossible to prove their influence. I’m not in favour of any social media platforms being banned.
To me it’s Xenophobic as it just looks like the Trump administration just wants to punish China for evolving economically. There’s not even enough proof to say market access is at risk from corporate subsidies to Chinese competing firms. Economist Simon Evenett had found in a 2021 research study that Market driven economies (US and EU) are just as likely to implement subsidy practices as state driven ones. It all just screams hypocrisy.
China's economic evolution was in many ways detrimental to US workers in ways that have been amply documented. That's not because China is bad, but because economic competition works this way. China is itself "hypocritical" in the same way you (correctly) note the West is. Its own banning of US social media companies while expecting other countries to not do the same to Chinese ones is one instance.
I agree in certain aspects but I struggle to see how banning Tiktok would protect American workers in this instance. H-1B workers will be flown in even if the company is American owned. There’s no domestic benefit to this ban. What kind of a geopolitical message does it send to other countries that the US (with the dollar monopoly) will ban foreign-owned tech apps to disrupt their economy? I.e. You’re existing to make us profits, and if we can’t profit from you, we’re going to wreck you.
As Michael Hudson says “We materialists think that people and countries are going to act in their own economic self-interest but the United States are not acting in their own self-interest. How on Earth do you project what countries are going to do if they don't know what their own self-interest is? How do you forecast what countries are going to do when their leaders don't know what they're doing? You can no longer think what's reasonable for them to do because they don't know what's reasonable because they don't have a way of thinking about what's reasonable or what their interest is.”