Josh Hawley wants to ban TikTok nationwide. Missouri senator will introduce legislation

I don't think you know anything about China or its culture, it's true culture, which is not the CCP. That is government, not culture.

 

A. If one is going to talk about culture, one has to experience it firsthand, even as a tourist, or married to a Chinese person.
B. I have more knowledge than you, and that is obvious. You have none, which is also painfully obvious. All you are doing is regurgitating RW talking points that are based on fear and hatred. Remember, we had the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1873 because we thought, 50000 who came here to build railroads and search for yellow fever, aka gold, in California. The laws that were passed were the precursor to the Jim Crow Laws.
C. Yes it is. It is simply you cannot explain your hatred logically, errationally and illogically.
D. They were to serve a purpose. What you read on the internet is not always true, especially if you are on social media platforms where gossip and innuendo are the game, and not facts. In fact, there are 54 ethnicities in China, each with their own unique culture. It is not as homogeneous as you might think. Neither is European, African, South American or wherever you may go. Not even the United States is homogeneous in our culture. What binds us is family, communities, and the belief of why we became independent, but not the belief of government from any political party.
E. That is because you are not listening here, or willing to listen.
F. It's a debate, and if you are interested in culture, I suggest you take a trip. with your attitude, not even the Western Europeans who are conservative would want you around, much less russia.

 

So?

 

A) Boring
B) don't care
C)yawn
D) Boring
E) Because I didn't ask for a lecture and you aren't in any position to lecture.
F) Just because I scoff at insufferable know it all doesn't mean I have an attitude towards less unbearable people.

 

Can you tell us about this bill, as you are apparently familiar with it? A link would also be very helpful, and much appreciated.

The story from the OP's link, does not talk about anything but TikTok, but here is a quote that shows that there are multiple facets to this issue.

<Snip>

But experts warn that the amount of data being collected by ByteDance, the Beijing-based company that owns TikTok, could be used by the Chinese Communist Party. FBI director Christopher Wray told Congress last year he had security concerns about the app.

It is difficult for a country to ban an application like TikTok, as its a form of internet censorship. Former President Donald Trump’s attempts to ban the app in 2020 were challenged in the courts until President Joe Biden dropped the ban.

Last month, however, the app was banned from federal government devices when a previous bill sponsored by Hawley was included in the federal government’s $1.7 trillion spending bill. Hawley did not support the bill, which was signed into law by Biden.

At least 15 states have also attempted to ban the app from government devices, including Kansas. Gov. Laura Kelly signed an executive order last month that banned the app from devices used in the executive branch, executive branch agencies, boards and commissions employees and prohibited access on the state network. It does not apply to the judicial or legislative branches and will not apply to the state’s other constitutional offices.
<End>

I do think there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about this. Unfortunately, our efforts to integrate China more into the world economy, have not led to a willingness on that government's part, to respect any rules or norms, if it thinks it can get away with ignoring them.

Josh Hawley may truly have concerns about this, but I don't trust him at his word, either, and I believe that at least part of this bill originates from the Senator's desire to project a "tough on China" image, to voters.

What this story most highlights, to my mind, is the lack of rules, policies, and regulations, governing the internet. Having a defined set of standards and protocols, is long overdue. I have little confidence, though, in seeing any such guidelines, being agreed upon, in the next two years.

 

While certainly not defending Polydectes' attitude, I wonder what specific point you are trying to make about China, based on their people and traditional culture, as opposed to the inclinations of its government. From a pragmatic perspective, the CCP & now Xi Jinping, call the shots. It is a known fact that China has not only long conducted a campaign of raiding business trade secrets, comparable to no other country, but that the government is completely behind these efforts: stealing technology, has been a key part of their strategy. Are you suggesting that there is any reason for a business to not be concerned with Chinese cyber-theft, because of some impression you have of the common people?

How does what you have learned of Chinese people, affect the possibility that students from China who have been allowed to come to the U.S. for college, in all likelihood, include a far greater percentage of spies, than from any other foreign country? Much like TikTok, unfortunately, any time a Chinese national is in a position of access to any information that the CCP deems useful, they are a potential tool of that government. The idea that there may be some brave souls who might refuse a government order, does not override the fact that most Chinese people know better, than defy their rulers. That is part of their culture, as well. And it is also common sense. Their system does not protect their personal freedoms, against the government, which makes all the rules.

 

It had to do with culture and Polydenctes attitudes towards China. For Polydectes view, China, and pretty much anyone Chinese, is the "enemy" in his mind and does not separate the people from the government. And thus my point. He gets his information strictly from the internet, mostly, I my view, from platforms such as Rumble, Truth Social, and so forth who pretty much don't know anything, or from Epoch Times, which is a newspaper that is more tabloid than anything else. The GOP has now made China, and the Chinese in general the boogeyman and are using such propaganda that we have not seen since WW2 in reference to the Japanese.

You have to separate the government from the people, but you also have to understand why the CCP is doing what it is doing as well. Xi, is a hardliner, but a lot of their decisions have also been reactionary. For instance, we, as a government, try to dictate to a place like China as if they are a child. We have seen this when we banned flights from the US with US airlines to China, and China did the same with its airlines. Thus, if someone who is Chinese living in the US wants to go home and visit family, it is pretty much damn near expenses, such as $4k for a one-way flight. Prior to that, it was about $500 for a one-way flight, economy class in all circumstances. Or with Taiwan and its exercises. We made it as if China is getting ready to invade Taiwan. But that was not the point of the exercises. Neither are ours when we do exercises near Taiwan. It is to send a "message" to the other side. I know China wants a One China, two systems agreement with Taiwan, and CCP still considers it their territory, not an independent country, kinda like what Washington would do if Hawaii decided to become an independent country like it once was. No US government would allow that because it will make us look weak, and it will do that with any US state or territory we control.

Technically, they do have certain freedoms as a citizen. Their freedoms are not defined as we have them, but they do have them. Religion is very important in China. Many of their customs, such as dying, is rooted in either Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism. Even with Christianity, it is generally allowed as long as you don't preach in the streets, or teach the Book of Revolation, or challenge the authority of the state. Again, different, but their freedoms are still there. If they are arrested, they have a right to an attorney. You just have to pay the attorney, especially if you are a foreigner. So some do it pro bono. Does that sound familiar? Yes, we call it Miranda rights, specifically a right to an attorney. They just don't have the "5th." Their judicial system is very similar to how Europe's judicial system worked before the industrial revolution, where you are judged and sentenced by a judge, not a jury. They even have a freedom of religion, but without the priests to guide you. They have freedom of expression as long as they don't criticize the government in any way. Yes, they put limitations, but we do too such as "don't say fire in a crowded room" or the other exceptions SCOTUS has made that is not free speech. So, we are more similar in nature than we are different. But with Polydectes, he thinks we have nothing in common, and that is a person who does not look, see, or hear the similarities because he has been more programmed than a die-hard communist in China.

Finally, when it comes to students coming here. In Chinese culture, education is treated more like a religion than anything else. That is the general case in most of SE Asia. Coming to the US to any school or university is the platinum standard. Ironically, it is the same with Taiwan, except it is Peking University in China and any of the other tier-one universities there. But when they do come, their parents take out loans, pretty much "sacrifice" themselves for their kids to have an education, and most try to obtain degrees from accounting to management to any of the STEM courses that pay top dollar financially so that they can repay, both literal and figuratively for all their sacrifice. Family to them is extremely important. But family to them is much broader in scope than in Western Culture. And yes, they are taught that the state is both "mother and father" but most don't believe that literally, especially if they go abroad. And they don't talk about it because of another cultural phenomenon, saving face, both for the outsider and themselves. In essence, they are extremely curious about our culture. They have seen our culture through the movies and now they are experiencing that culture firsthand. When I was in college, I was part of an international friendship program where we helped Chinese, Japanese, Thai, British, Norweigan, and pretty much everyone who was an international student helps adapt to our culture. We took them to cultural events here. Amazing how Brazilian and other South Americans will experience Madi Gras from a US perspective compared to their own experience. Or Oktoberfest from a German perspective relating here.

 

I think you just described every social media app

 

Banning TikTok is not the solution. Sen. Howley's bill is simply an extension of the US and specifically, the GOP, anti-Chinese sentiment. Everything that Josh Howley describes with TikTok can be applied to every social media app we have, with the Patriot Act helping the US government obtain the metadata it needs on a routine basis. So, why just Tik Tok and not the others in the Bill? Politics is the answer. It appears reasonable, but in reality, it really does not solve the problem. For starters, it uses fear to try to sell the bill. Blame the Chinese. It uses distraction. The Chinese are spying on you, not us. And the "it's from China so therefore it must be bad or cheap." That is similar sentiment when the Japanese came into our market selling very small trucks and other vehicles. And look at them now. We now emulate most of the Japanese designs, quality control, and method of production, that Just in Time production method that Toyota first adopted in the 1950s.

I have no problem with government devices. In fact, no social media app should be on any government device PERIOD whether it is US owned or not. If an app is connected to the internet, it is vulnerable to hacking. The question is why one should hack a computer unless there was something valuable to hack for. Hence, the government. especially the US government is vulnerable to hacking, and we have seen that on US government websites from time to time where data was stolen, namely SSN, payment info, and so forth. Sometimes it is the fault of an employee who loses their laptop, such as a VA employee who lost his laptop and then later reported it stolen. Cellphones have been hacked. Cars, by DARPA, have been hacked and controlled.

I think it was an executive order by Biden to ban TikTok on all government devices. But that executive order did not go far enough since we demand metadata from all US owned and foreign-owned operating on US soil with their data per the Patriot Act, and without a warrant.

 

The next time you want ro debate a,topic with me, be prepared. Your propaganda will not work on me.

 

It isn't necessary to flip R votes...but this will motivate TikTok users who might not have voted to line up and have their voices heard.

 

I am sure you are correct, but even when one goes to the grocery store, and uses their rewards fob/ card, what one purchases is used to identify ones habits.

 

For a consideration of the risks of TikTok-- no, you do not need concern yourself with that distinction. That was why I had been emphasizing the pragmatic approach. If it is the government which makes all the decisions, then that reality must be reflected, when one considers an issue involving China's international relations.

What does any of that, have to do with TikTok? You seem to want to have a much broader discussion of China, than implied by this thread.

I will have to stop there, for now, but will get back to you, about the rest of your reply.

 

My interest is, knowing absolutely nothing about the fore mention program, how or why does it bring you down some "rabbit" hole?
Hopefully, you view this as a legitimate question.

 

I don't give a crap but your opinion or your vacation.

It wasn't any part of this debate.

 

Actually, you do. In many countries, including countries friendly to the US, the people and/or government have disagreemetns with our polices,. Should they now consider banning US companies altogether because of policy disputes? For instance, should Japan now consider banning GM, Ford, KFC, McDonalds, Subway, and every other business in Japan if the government decides to "punish" the government for not listening to them? That would not be right would it? Most Americans would find that outrageous no matter that the issue, and yet, governments do disagree with us, but they don't just go banning

The CCP does not have that much control over TikTok. It can if TikTok disagrees with the party or the CEO makes disparaging remarks about the premier, Xi. But then again, we kinda of have that with Trump and a few other republicans. But in reality, TikTok really is not much different than any other social media app when it comes to "spying." But there is more spying on you by your cellphone and internet carrier than you realize, and if the NSA wants metadata from your carrier, in your cellphone number range with all numbers beginning with your area code and prefix, it has to oblige, with no warrant whatsoever. So, what's the difference? From my understanding, banning government devices is no problem for me. I understand that. But to ban the social media app in its in entirety is at the least, hypocritical, all because we, as a nation, don't listen to what Xi is actually saying. And this has been going on for years, beginning with the end of the Bush administration, increasing under Obama, and going almost full monty with Trump. And now Biden is doing the same thing all because of politics so he does not "appear" weak.

It's the foundation for the anti-Chinese sentiment, the same type of foundation Germany used to blame a group of people for all their ills. We do the same thing. We just change the groups from time to time. This flavor of the month is China. Who knows, maybe it will go back to Irish or Nigerians or Russians in general, or whoever. But that is what the GOP likes to do, and we have constantly done this in all of our histories.

https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/83962

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/...at-they-think-about-china-in-their-own-words/

 

It was, but you refuse to listen, which is your motif operendi.

 

I totally disagree with your equating of the relationship between any Chinese company & the Chinese Communist government, w/ that which exists between American companies and the U.S. government. I never said the CCP had any involvement with the running of TikTok. The company, like any social media company, collects extensive data on its users. But here is the significant difference: the Chinese government has access to that data, any f'ing time they want. TikTok has zero say, in that. So, in effect, it is the Chinese government which is collecting all this data on American citizens. And, because of the way that government has chosen to comport itself, in global affairs, this has got to be a concern, of any prudent individual.

If all the info that Facebook collects on even Americans, the U. S. government had open door access to, there would be taken to be big problems with that-- wouldn't there be? Now, make it not American citizens, but citizens of foreign countries, whose data, on an incomprehensibly massive scale, was being collected for the U.S. government-- you still think you would not acknowledge any concerns over this?

Your argument's intrinsic flaw, is considering the Chinese company & their government, as separate entities. But in Chinese law, any records of TikTok, are intelligence resources for the CCP, available for the asking. That is a relationship that bears little resemblance to the one between the American government, & U.S. companies, so your supposed analogy, does not hold water.

 

I don't listen to people who have zero authority on the subject. You just claim to have gone on vacation I don't know if that's true.

 

Why? US companies are pretty much at the forefront of US policy. Hence, if they have a disagreement with US governmental policy, there is a sure bet one of our largest US corporations is lobbying or behind the ordeal. But it pretty much applies to the same bread and butter. You may resent it, but the fact is, and thank god, most countries don't do that. If they did, we, as a country would be totally screwed. And the same can be said with the Chinese government and its companies. Chinese government pretty much dictates everything from imports/exports, to business to whatever. So, if you deal with business in China, you deal with the government. And if you deal in business here, especially internationally, you will eventually deal with US government. For starters, the US Import/Export Bank and the Department of Commerce, DHS, and other governmental agencies. And if Amazon does not want you importing into the United States, they can lobby certain government officials to make it happen. How the US does international diplomacy is through our MNC that are abroad. These companies know it, they exploit it to their fullest advantage, and so forth. We have seen this when US petroleum companies were upset in Mexico, so we pressured Mexico to "liberalize" their economy. Since then, their economy fell apart. They did the same in Nigeria where the French Petroleum Company had the goods and the near monopoly of those oil fields until Chevron and others complained tpo the state department. So, we created policies against that French Petroleum company in which our companies took over beginning in the post cold war era, our energy policies in Nigeria and elsewhere. So, the major industries can keep this in check by recommending the undersecretaries of state for the various regions, where most of the work and policy decisions are made, discussed, analyzed, and proposed to POTUS. And that is how our companies have their hands in our government. Same thing, just in reverse order. In retrospect, our foreign policy was more direct, more hardcore in the past, from the Banana Wars to the Cold War mentality of containing communism abroad, but now, it is softer in retrospect, but it is still being used to dictate foreign policy, especially with the Miliary Industrial Complex gets involved in any conflict abroad.

So If the EU or any other country really wants to go after us, they can look at our US corporations on how these companies influence our policy in a similar fashion the same way we go after China and Chinese companies.

Chinese companies, especially the really large ones, have to deal with the government to get things approved or to do business not only in China but abroad as well. The CCP is the lobbying and the business. But we still must separate the distinction between the two much like the rest of the world deals with our foreign policy and the companies and people, even though the companies, industries, and associations are heavily vested financially and politically into our system. But at the same time, most Americans try to kid themselves, and convince themselves that somehow we are different when in reality we are not. And history has a way of reminding us of that from time to time, unfortunately.

 

Again, you're trying to equate two very different things. That ANY government is going to be swayed by the interests of its large industries, is a common sense given, and you erroneously seem to believe that this only happens in the U.S. & China, and not in the E.U. or the rest of the world. But the influence that businesses have on government policy is irrelevant to the reason for concern over TikTok.

You did not really prove a case of the American government forcing U.S. businesses to implement U.S. policies, but regardless, that argument also does not go to my point. Since my argument was very straightforward, I can only assume that you are purposefully trying to conflate these other things you are arguing, with the true point: that there are, in effect, no WALLS between personal (or other) INFORMATION gathered by a Chinese company & the Chinese government. You have, in your voluminous replies, not once addressed this, dealing instead with only indictments of the U.S., meant to muddy the waters. No matter anything else, there are laws in the U.S., protecting confidential information even from the government having access. I am not saying that it has or could never happen, that a company would share info with our government, but that would be up to the company. And if the government subpoenaed information, then there'd be a legal process, that would need play out, to adjudicate the question. You may "resent" it, but judges in the U.S. do not, by any stretch, all roll over, for whatever the government wants. In China, however, there is no force, constraining the country's leaders.


So, is my point now clear to you? I don't know how it could not have been, after my last post:

DEFinning said: ↑
I totally disagree with your equating of the relationship between any Chinese company & the Chinese Communist government, w/ that which exists between American companies and the U.S. government. I never said the CCP had any involvement with the running of TikTok. The company, like any social media company, collects extensive data on its users. But here is the significant difference: the Chinese government has access to that data, any f'ing time they want. TikTok has zero say, in that. So, in effect, it is the Chinese government which is collecting all this data on American citizens. And, because of the way that government has chosen to comport itself, in global affairs, this has got to be a concern, of any prudent individual.
<End Snip>

Will your next reply finally face this issue-- or will you bring up the Bay of Pigs? I am making no argument about "punishing" a Chinese business, because of not liking Chinese government policies. It is the substance of the "policy," itself, which is at issue. To wit, the CCP has unimpeded access to all of the data collected by TikTok. There is no analogous situation to that, that exists in the U.S.

 

Look, I have addressed your point. I think you are more in love with the myth of American exceptionalism and the anti-Chinese fearmongering in your post, which is clearly indicated. I gave you that the US Government is no different. Private media companies here have no choice or no say in the matter when the US government comes knocking and wants that matadata, the same way China does. There is no say so even if a FISA warrant for a particular person is given because you, if you are the object, will never be told of that FISA warrant. And then NSA and other national security agencies within the US government constantly monitor the chats and other things in all of the social media apps. See, same bloody thing. And yet you think there is a difference? That is complete BS and you know it, But you anti-Chinese sentiment is clouding your judgment here.

Josh Howley wants to ban Tik Tok in its entirety, lists all the same reasons that apply to all the other social media apps. That violates our first amendment, doesn't it. Most on TikTok are younger generations who make funny videos and such. And yes, if security is your concern, then all social media from youtube to Tiktok and anywhere in between should be banned from government devices. But not the general public. And because our government has access to that very same information without you knowing about it, or realizing it, again, the arguments you are making is hypocritical at best, and naive at worst.

Third, if you want to be snarky to me with the Bay of Pigs then I will be snarky in return. but first, the reason why I gave those examples is that I know a thing or two about China. I am no expert, but you kinda do when you are married or if you know people who do business there, the same way people do business here. That is called similarity, but again, the myth of American Exceptionalism in your post gets in the way of true facts and analysis of the situation. But then again, those similarities went through one ear and out the other faster than the speed of light. And that happens too if you don't know and are fear of something you don't understand completely.

Either ask honest questions about why I included a similarity or maybe learn something for once.

 

Source? I believe your assertion is false, as I have already said. If you think that just because you say otherwise, I must accept your word, I will have to disappoint you. My argument, I have already thrice explained to you. It is based on a factual difference between the Chinese government, and our own. Your calling this, "anti-Chinese fear mongering," only betrays your own Sinophilia (and possible anti-American bias).

This is very simple, if you have any basis to your argument: just back up your contention, that U.S. companies have to open up all their data, any time the government asks, the same way Chinese companies have "no choice...no say in the matter," and you will have secured your point. All your bluster, in lieu of that, is meaningless, because I view your talking point as B.S. I believe the U.S. government would need get a court order, which would then be for only specific data. This is nothing like, the Chinese government having full access to all of TikTok's data, without being compelled to justify or even explain, their reason, to a government judge. Your equating of the two systems is either your argument's error, or its deceit. If what you keep contending, is true, what has been holding up, your citing of a reference? You are not typically one to hesitate, providing links.

But even if it were true, that would not fully "address (my) point." Let's start with this: do you recognize that the Chinese 1-Party system is distinctly undemocratic, and significantly different from the U.S. government? Because not only is the access to the data, by the two governments, as different as night & day, but so are those governments, incomparable. One is beholden to its country's citizenry, and one is not. When it comes to personal information, there is a greater risk in having it compromised to an institutional structure which is not accountable to its populace.

Any of this logical argument, getting through to you? Or shall I expect just more inexplicable charges from you, as of my being, "in love with the myth of American Exceptionalism," or of my being afraid of something I don't understand? On the contrary, it would seem that you are the one with the fear of reasoned arguments, based in fact. I would ask where you got those desperate "arguments," but let's not get off the main point. You say, here, that the American government has the same carte blanche as does China, regarding private data, held by any company under its jurisdiction. I say that's a load of crap. Can you prove your claim?


If you can't, I will thank you to be mature enough, next time, to not again respond with baseless insults and insinuations. I don't think anyone has a clue what you are referring to, when you imply that I ask dishonest questions-- do you have one? As to my not having once, ever learned anything-- what were saying about dishonesty?

Out of curiosity-- is the idea that I would, of course, learn from you, if I accept your unsupported argument, while there is nothing you could ever learn from me, childish name-calling, or simply your own unwarranted hubris, raised to an Exceptional level of conceit?

 

I don't like TikTok and would never use it, but the dirty little truth about this issue is that Western apps are doing the exact same thing TikTok and China are, often a lot more successfully. If you're worried about privacy and data you should get a dumbphone like me. Western nations are all over their apps - they have special backdoors, they deputize these companies, weaponize their platform against their users and make it a felony to tell them about it.

My solution to this has been to get rid of my smartphone, read more books, and talk to people in person a lot more. It's working well, I've never felt less stressed. You'd be surprised what you can do when you aren't scrolling - I read the complete works of Shakespeare in under a week. I don't feel I've lost out on anything by doing this - people just call me or text my dumbphone if they want to catch up.