181–190 of 401 posts
The irony is a US Judge rules to Protect an app that does not allow free speech on the basis of free speech.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Americans don't need to try to understand the effects of mercantilism. They were subject to the same draconian economic policies by the British Empire. This is largely what prompted the American Revolution. [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteen_Colonies#Economic_pol...
> This is largely what prompted the American Revolution The American Revolution was much more about representation and the rights that British Parliament held (or, from the American perspective, didn't hold) over the colonies. The primary effect of mercantilism is exclusive trading agreements with the ruling empire, which was not being argued against by the colonials. It even says as much in the paragraph you linked:…
But to counter your claim that mercantilism wasn't the inspiration for the American Revolution, I recommend reading up on the "Sons of Liberty" movement that rose up after the Stamp Act of 1765. [0]
Good. I didn't think the WeChat ban made much sense to begin with. Sidenote, I've noticed more and more people joining Telegram to evade a potential WeChat ban. I wonder if they're going to stay on Telegram.
>Sidenote, I've noticed more and more people joining Telegram to evade a potential WeChat ban. I wonder if they're going to stay on Telegram. Isn't the whole point of using wechat is its large chinese userbase? AFAIK telegram is banned in china, so I'm not sure why that'd be the logical choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The unreal part is that your don’t understand free speech rights, ie that the users possess them. Are you claiming that ByteDance controlled the tanks used in Tiananmen square massacre or is conducting the Uyghur massacre? If so, the Trump administration screwed up by not presenting that evidence.
The executive order bans the service, not the users. Users can speak freely in any forum that exists
IMO the forced sale of TikTok is very worrying for American production in China; in any future escalation China will likely use that same move as a card to play.
Haven’t they been doing that already? At least requiring companies to use data centers in country so they can siphon/spy on the data? Is that any less nefarious than a forced sale in order to operate in the country? I’d argue at least it’s more explicit (to sell).
China came into the US and is operating under the rules, while the US is forcing TikTok to sell or die. This is the US seizing TikTok. What US firm has China seized?
It would be shocking if in the next round of escalations, China doesn’t respond in a way which sufficiently addresses the magnitude of Huawei, TikTok, WeChat, Tencent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what context does those articles add, other than what's already presented?
China fought a land war against a coalition of invaders who attempted to subvert its economic, political and religious sovereignty. China lost, was forced to cede Hong Kong to the British for 99 years, and paid 668,661,220 taels of silver from 1901 to 1939, equivalent in 2010 to $US 61 billion on a purchasing power parity basis. A large portion of the reparations paid to the United States was diverted to pay for the…
I know symbolically this is of great importance to the Chinese, but at the time it was an easy thing for the Emperor to give up given he was on the losing end of a war.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Island#British_colon...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is that China has been able to redress the power embalance. The decendents of slaves and indigenous Americans have not.
Please. At this point, both blacks and Indians are able to take various Federal and State monies to be the best they can be. The Indians have relative sovereignty. They could take their federal and casino monies and plow them into an R&D bonanza. Blacks in the US have a golden ticket to pretty much any institution they wish to attend. Both have had trillions of US dollars plowed into their communities over the year v…
You seem to be of the opinion that we have as a society attempted to resolve this imbalance with wealth and government programs. However due to the unfortunate characteristics of those affected communities they have failed. Likewise, if these communities would only be like other groups of your choosing they would be much better off and societies' efforts at redress would not have been wasted. Is this correct?
I think this might be relevant.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/01/08/how-democr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is that China has been able to redress the power embalance. The decendents of slaves and indigenous Americans have not.
Please. At this point, both blacks and Indians are able to take various Federal and State monies to be the best they can be. The Indians have relative sovereignty. They could take their federal and casino monies and plow them into an R&D bonanza. Blacks in the US have a golden ticket to pretty much any institution they wish to attend. Both have had trillions of US dollars plowed into their communities over the year v…
Yes affirmative action is just a bandaid, but it’s necessary due to the symptoms of injustice and oppression still being present.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The unreal part is that your don’t understand free speech rights, ie that the users possess them. Are you claiming that ByteDance controlled the tanks used in Tiananmen square massacre or is conducting the Uyghur massacre? If so, the Trump administration screwed up by not presenting that evidence.
The executive order bans the service, not the users. Users can speak freely in any forum that exists
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the argument is china was once invaded by foreign gunships (not american) so they should be allowed to ban american companies (Google, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Whatsapp, Netflix & hundreds more) but allowed to operate any company they want in the U.S?
Yeah, that seems like a very weak argument. It might be helpful to understand why China does what it does. It doesn't really excuse it though.