Ricky RigatoniIt's only okay when MY favorite country does it.
Pan_ZiemniakOoh… i dont think the tankies will like this!
Oh no anyway
breadsmasherIts hilarious the instance the tankies most frequent is banned in china
vegantomatoTankies like a lot of evil shit, so I really don’t care about what they like or don’t like.
(Not you OP, you = governments)
You want to block corporate social media sites as propaganda
I want to block corporate social media sites because they’re parasites on society.
We are not the same.
Im actually quite upset that lawmakers havent used this to pass generalized privacy protection.
They have an opportunity to end mass survailance, but thats OK if its US survailance
Our tools of social connection vs their tools of propaganda.
Now fill in the possessive pronouns with either country and change them depending on the specific tool used.
Because the US government is more interested in picking who can spy on us for fun and profit, not whether anyone should.
GladiusBI want to block them because they are both
I don’t care what they are. I just think the internet in its current state sucks and I like the idea of there being less of it.
Oh look… the liberals are at it again.
Your whataboutism doesn’t change the fact that the west’s claims of valuing “press freedom” turning out to be completely false posits severe implications for your ideology, liberal - not anyone’s living in China.
You’re not communicating your point very well. Do you mean like neoliberal liberal or like fox news liberals?
He’s on lemmy. He def means “non-tankies”
“non-tankies”
Perhaps it’s best not to use terms you don’t understand, liberal.
😂 okay buddy.
Alright fuck it, I’ll ask: what do you think tankie means?
And more-importantly, what did you actually mean? lol
It’s very simple. “Authoritarian Communists”
Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to authoritarian communists, especially those who support acts of repression by such regimes or their allies.
The term “tankie” was originally used by dissident Marxist–Leninists to describe members of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) who followed the party line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). Specifically, it was used to distinguish party members who spoke out in defense of the Soviet use of tanks to crush the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and the 1968 Prague Spring uprising, or who more broadly adhered to pro-Soviet positions.
Sorry, I must be the dumbest person who ever tried to be a leftist.
So the first guy criticized libs (seems like the answer is fox news type libs) and then I asked him to clarify and another person replied saying he means not-tankies (so leftists that aren’t neolibs/or just communists maybe?). At that point replies saying he knows what tankie means and that the other guy doesn’t
Now it seems like you (and voters) are saying the guy that replied to me was in fact correct in his usage meaning she didn’t guy’s actually a tankienor maybe a conservative? I get lost there. Surely the first guy isn’t an authoritarian communist. Like what? Someone help!
I just want to communicate with other political junkies and nerds that want to fight capitalism… someday, somebow.
Sorry, I must be the dumbest person who ever tried to be a leftist.
So the first guy criticized libs (seems like the answer is fox news type libs) and then I asked him to clarify and another person replied saying he means not-tankies (so leftists that aren’t neolibs/or just communists maybe?). At that point the first guy replies saying he knows what tankie means and that the other guy actually doesn’t. That’s when I replied again.
Now it seems like you (and voters) are saying the guy that replied to me was in fact correct in his usage meaning she didn’t guy’s actually a tankienor maybe a conservative? I get lost there. Surely the first guy isn’t an authoritarian communist. Like what? Someone help!
I just want to communicate with other political junkies and nerds that want to fight capitalism… someday, somebow.
Like the other guy said, authoritarian communists.
Or authoritarian communists pretending not to be. The type of people to come out and defend everything China and Russia do while decrying “the west” at every opportunity. Constantly at it with “what aboutisms” and other bad faith arguments. People who claim we should vote third party/not vote while pretending they want to make the US better through these actions, when really they just want the US to fail. Jackson Hinkle types or Infra Haz types.
If I recall correctly, tankies are named because tanks were used to put down protests in Czechoslovakia under the USSR and tankies will defend it.
Interesting. I looked at the urban dictionary definition, which was super helpful from a historical perspective (people that support sending in the tanks). But appreciate the straightforward answer. Thanks!
Not sure why people were offended by my comment. Maybe I could’ve worded the question better. It’s weird if people expect others to know this super obscure shit no one ever really talks about anywhere else.
Oh yeah, I definitely thought you were the other guy when I was responding, who definitely seems like a tankie.
neoliberal liberal or like fox news liberals?
Is there a functional difference?
Doesn’t fox refer to anyone to the left of the American center as liberal? I’m not super versed but I was thinking it wouldn’t make sense to call socialists, neoliberals, and communists all liberals and I def don’t think fox is being that specific
Doesn’t fox refer to anyone to the left of the American center as liberal?
Yes, they do… but this doesn’t change the fact that Fox itself peddles liberalism - ie, capitalism. That is, when it’s not peddling outright fascism - liberalism’s status quo-sustaining alter-ego.
I was thinking it wouldn’t make sense to call socialists
No, it doesn’t make sense to call people such as socialists - who want to dismantle all aspects of liberalism (and with it, fascism) - “liberals.”
China isn’t a good country either. I don’t get why your so excited to back people up who commit genocide.
Also is banning TikTok really preventing freedom of the press? They are beholden to the Chinese government and used to suppress talk about the Uighyur cultural genocide.
How about we instead replace it with something like Lemmy but for video?
China isn’t a good country either.
China never claimed to have a “free press.”
Also is banning TikTok really preventing freedom of the press?
What (alleged) “freedom of the press”? This (supposed) “freedom of the press” is a cornerstone of liberal ideology - not whatever it is that China is doing.
Again… the realization that liberal ideology is full of holes (and always have been) has implications for liberals - not people living in the PRC.
So by blocking apps we’ll be more like China? Great point!
It’s not being more like China. It’s treating them the way they treat us. Simple reciprocity. The same thing is often done when other countries level a tariff against our products.
It’s not being more like China. It’s treating them the way they treat us.
So…acting like China acts is not being like China?
The same thing is often done
Did nobody ever teach you that two wrongs don’t make a right? Or about the Appeal To Tradition logical fallacy?
when other countries level a tariff against our products.
Which rock were you living under when Trump waged his stupid tariff war with China? Nothing good came from that bullshit, least of all for the working class people of both countries.
That doesn’t apply here since Tiktok isn’t being intolerant. The Chinese and US governments are.
It’s not “being like China” so long as the U.S. does not seek to ban platforms from countries that do not ban U.S.-owned platforms.
The freedom of information should absolutely be bilateral between states, otherwise the permissive state cedes undue influence to the restrictive one.
Again, Tiktok ≠ China.
While it can certainly be argued that its ties to the government are problematic, it’s not Tiktok banning US platforms.
If Tiktok WAS banning platforms for xenophobic reasons (demonstrating intolerance), banning it for that would be prudent as per the paradox of tolerance linked above.
That isn’t the case, though. The US ban is an intolerant and oppressive violation of the freedom of expression of the users of Tiktok and, yes, even the owners.
Even if the oppressive Chinese government has a big influence on the platform, that influence hasn’t been proven to cause Tiktok to behave in an intolerant manner, so it’s basically a case of declaring guilt by association.
The US government could and SHOULD introduce regulations to minimize the amount of data collection and -sharing that Tiktok, Facebook, Twitter, Google and others currently get away with and then punish all transgressions against those regulations.
AKA regulate and punish bad behavior from anyone doing it, not banning a popular platform guilty only of what congress refuses to try to stop them and others from doing.
Again, Tiktok ≠ China.
Point to where I said TikTok = China lmao
it’s not Tiktok banning US platforms.
I also never said TikTok is banning U.S. platforms…
The US government could and SHOULD introduce regulations to minimize the amount of data collection and -sharing that Tiktok, Facebook, Twitter, Google and others currently get away with and then punish all transgressions against those regulations.
Yes.
Point to where I said TikTok = China lmao
I also never said TikTok is banning U.S. platforms
What you DID say was that it’s ok to ban Tiktok because of the actions of China, namely the banning of some American platforms. That would only make any kind of legal sense if Tiktok indeed WAS China.
Dude, what?
You claim that banning TikTok would make sense if TikTok was China. How would the U.S. “ban” China if not for banning Chinese private enterprises from U.S. markets?
Since you’re slow on the uptake, let me try an equivalent example.
Imagine that a UK-based social media based platform is banned im the US for some reason or the other.
Would that justify the UK banning Google?
The actions of the Chinese government are not the fault or responsibility of Tiktok and as such punishing Tiktok for them is by definition grotesquely unjust.
Would that justify the UK banning Google?
…Yes? It’s called a trade war, they happen all the time, and that’s exactly what would go down. What else do you expect them to do, nothing? (They usually end when a bilateral free trade agreement is established between the two parties that covers the industries in question.)
punishing Tiktok for them is by definition grotesquely unjust.
Oh no, my poor little $200 billion corporation! I must spend my days fighting for your justice!
Seriously, how do you expect people to react to that? Why would anyone possibly give the smallest fuck about a faceless, soulless corporation unless they have a significant stake in it?
Oh no, my poor little $200 billion corporation
I don’t give a fuck about Tiktok the corporation. I do, on the other hand, give a fuck about the users of the platform. Especially the ones using it for activism.
I’ve thought about that too, and to be honest, I can’t identify what makes TikTok special in that regard. TikTok’s moderation policies aren’t substantially different from other platforms (except maybe Twitter… fuck Twitter), and I don’t see how it became known as a hub for activists.
In either case, relying on a hyper-capitalist platform that is controlled in no small part by an a authoritarian, imperialist, and hostile foreign government through so-called “golden shares”, was always a bad idea.
I can’t identify what makes TikTok special in that regard
Demographics. Tiktok has more Gen Z people than the other platforms and Gen Z are just a much better generation than the others at activism. As a left wing anti-authoritarian pacifist elder millenial, I’m frankly in awe about how much ass they’re kicking compared to my generation, Gen X and Boomers.
Gen Z goes where other Gen Z are and if we scatter them by letting some xenophobic politicians close down their main platform for activism, we lose a shitload that’s much more important than appearing “tough on China” in an election year.
relying on a hyper-capitalist platform that is controlled in no small part by an a authoritarian, imperialist, and hostile foreign government through so-called “golden shares”, was always a bad idea.
That’s just the thing, though: Tiktok activists have invented am enormous glossary of code words and other tricks to get around the censorship and other suppression of the platform.
Anti-authoritarian Tiktok activists are beating the hypercapitalist corporation and the oppressive government and American politicians want to shut them up just as much as they want to score cheap political points by pretending that China is any more of a danger to democracy and free speech than Facebook and Google.
They’re banning ByteDance from owning it. TikTok will live on
Yeah, they can’t do that. They can’t just tell an officially private company that hasn’t broken any existing laws “you don’t own it anymore. Sell it to someone we approve of* or we shut it down”
If any country tried to do that to an American company, they’d be treated like Cuba 2.0.
*read: someone who pays us more in legal bribes
An eye for an eye leaves the world blind
livusExcept blocking an app is also a treatment of your own citizens.
What kind of brainwashed supporter can you be to say such thing? This is about freedom of speach and right of property, the things supposedly sacred in the USA.
USA is merely demonstrating its hypocrisy here.
Isn’t TikTok owned and operated out of Singapore?
So no different than any international corporation that offshores for best financial advantage?
Where a business is incorporated or operated from has no bearing on where the ownership money comes from.
Patapon EnjoyerWell, do you want to be like China in that regard?
Yes clearly the way you know you are always doing the morally correct thing is to sink to the level of the everyone else.
And by everyone else you mean one country known for authoritarian censorship
What I meant was a general operating principle, not to take a side in a pissing match.
The standard is good behavior, not other people. Pointing out that X country is doing something wrong does not mean every country gets to do that wrong thing. The alternative to this viewpoint is one where we are effectively or actually extinct from an escalating cycles of violence and a race to the moral bottom.
See I thought you meant the exact opposite she thought “damn that’s dumb”
No worries, should have been more clear. Have a good day.
USA is not banning tiktok, it’s banning china’s ownership of tiktok. If Chinese stake is sold to someone else, tiktok will remain.
Cloudless ☼Don’t forget China blocks tiktok too.
IIRC China tried to stir up its internet users about the US blocking Tiktok and it fell flat because it’s blocked for them too.
China doesn’t block Douyin
I believe they use a different backend/storage. Different content shows up depending if you are searching from Tiktok or Douyin. Perhaps someone from Bytedance is curating select content from Tiktok for Douyin.
Either way, if I put a video on Tiktok it does not mean Chinese users on Douyin will see it.
Tiktok and Douyin are not the same - China Social Media
TikTok, known as the international version of the Chinese successful short video app Douyin, is a global hit. Despite Bytedance’s efforts to present Douyin and TikTok as being the same product, they are actually two separate entities. Douyin, (抖音, literally “shaking sound” in Chinese) is a short video media app owned by China’s young tech
I don’t understand why you guys are trying to educate me on how Bytedance operates. It’s the same as how Weixin and WeChat work. China wants to moderate and curate Douyin but you guys still expect China not to get involved in Tik Tok. Sure it’s content is different but it’s literally the same thing with the same backdoor accessibility.