China would rather see TikTok U.S. close than a forced sale
reuters.com
reuters.com
India banned loads of Chinese apps, sure, "to put pressure" but is that "pressure" meaningful enough?
Will it work only if all nations decide to do so to counter China? Will that ever happen?
Are we heading towards app-diplomacy?
I think the main concern many people in the west have against tik Tok is that is is a form of social media that is directly or indirectly under control of the Chinese government and will be used as a subtle form of information warfare.
But does this work to nudge China?
Is Indian lost revenue big enough for China to change their style just because TikTok is banned?
Given the context of recent India-China issues, it is fair that India will take punitive steps. But it will not make China to correct her behaviour. I look at the banning of the apps this way:
1. Sends a message to China that India can take further steps and will stand-up to the bullying of China
2. I really doubt that banning apps is the ultimate card with India. It is a just one of the cards and reserving others when things escalate
3. If banning 100+ apps results into even growth of 10 apps India-made apps, it is a good side effect.
4. Any little trust India policymakers had towards China is gone. See [1]
[1] https://theprint.in/defence/china-wanted-no-escalation-on-ho...
Note: theprint.in is not a right-wing media outlet. I could have cited a more pro-govt sources but theprint is a centrist ones.
Sure, few local apps growing through this will be a happy incidence.
And these days, it's a lot - because it's not just Indian public opinion and Chinese public opinion, it has global reach.
It also undermines China enterprises, when a big part of tech business models is economies of scale, such actions basically cut massive slices of the global market.
Even if all of this is a nudge, it's still a nudge in a certain direction.
Because the reality is that India is struggling dealing with China, and all the help they can get in the direction of slowing down China is good for them.
You see news about the conflicts in the Himalayas for small "patches of land", but a lot of the advents in the Indian Ocean are going unnoticed - China is literally expanding their territory aggressively and India doesn't have enough navy resources to stop it.
It represents strength, progress of China and CCP, and maybe a glimpse of change for the perception of China being the global tech powerhouse. Probably Chinese people are proud of it as well.
So it really doesn't impress me to see their intentions to burn it down and keep their pride/save face, instead of turning the the public perception of "losing to the US"/"being the underdog" once again.
USA could perhaps play China's game; ban tiktok, and support a 'local champion' to create an identical US version, let's call it, toktik - it at least sounds more like the poison it is.
Then again, we need to find ways to stop China gaming the world open trade system, forcing the rest of the world to follow Chinese values and become more like China - ie less free.
The US is the one going out of its way to attack countries that don't bend the knee like Iraq and Venezuela. China pays its partners in Africa for their resources. US overthrows governments to steal them and “spread democracy”. Why does US spread democracy to Iraq but not Saudi Arabia, a literal monarchy? (Because US only care about power) The projection of US sins onto China is unreal and lays bare US meddling and hypocrisy.
But IMHO a world 'under' USA's insistence on openness, human-rights, democracy, (and free-flowing oil, etc, of course), is preferable to China's opaque mercantilism and spiteful sensitivity.
My point is that USA is aping those attributes.
We need to stop being dragged into a less-free world.
Further, did the US protest when China ordered Google out of the country in 2008? (And Facebook, but it wasn't nearly as large then.) No.
And scrubbing them out without trace prior to ownership transfer is not easy. One forgotten backup copy of the Git database is enough to leak the info.
Imagine how much dirt Facebook, Apple and Microsoft has.
Who can do business as far as social media is concerned is already a situation where the government picks and chooses.
It's certainly an aggressive posture, but it's not really aggression.
If they weren't so big they would have just been shut down.
Abducting protestors off the street in unmarked vans is very reminiscent of what’s happening in Hong Kong. Many people actively support the riots in Hong Kong, but demonize them when they happen here. The NSA spies on everyone, but we care more about when China does it. We have roughly a Social Credit system in the form of your Credit Report and algorithms that determine if you’ll jump bail.[0] Heck, we have a President who has suggested he won’t leave office if he loses in November and a very large chunk of the population supports it (I’ve seen some die-hard Republicans say he should run for a third term in 2024 if he wins 2020). The list goes on and on.
Basically, we may be better than China in some ways, but to say we’re overall better is debatable. I would even go as far as saying it’s disingenuous. We can’t be better if we don’t recognize our own shortcomings.
Saturday marks the 20th anniversary of arguably the worst congressional vote in this century.
On that day in 2000, the Senate approved Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) with the People’s Republic of China by a vote of 83-15. President Bill Clinton signed the legislation into law, declaring: “China will open its markets to American products from wheat to cars to consulting services, and our companies will be far more able to sell goods without moving factories or investments there.”
Republican Rep. Bill Archer of Texas, the lead sponsor of the bill, remarked, “The American people support this agreement because they know it’s good for jobs in America and good for human rights and the development of democracy in China.”
quote.end
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/sep/11/normalizing...
Call me cycnical but review above quotes, multiply by N over 3 decades, and we have a general sense of the type of smoke blown in our face by the representatives of Big Money and Big Business (and possibly some Globalist ideologues) that were elected by "us" to represent "us".
Two possibilities, based on a working memory of what was said and when, regarding China and more broadly "free trade" and Globalism, here and abroad:
option 1: "The West" (which c.f. above regarding "our" representatives) assumed that Chinese greed will exceed Chinese ideological zeal/control, and CCP would ultimately lose its grip over the Chinese nation.
option 2: No such thoughts "clouded" "our" decision makers' decisions. The idea was always and in essence contrary to option 1 - how to evolve from sole Superpower order to a global elite order. China was deemed as large enough, significant enough, and strategic enough to be used as the instrument to evolve post WWII order to a global governance model, as the platform to dethrone USA from its superpower perch. Recently, it appears a sub-set of the US capitalist class has rediscovered a love of homeland or something like that, while another sub-set (with the better sort of propanda organs) is vehemently opposing them. I think the former didn't get the original memo. Sucks not to be in the uber-in circle.
Both sides really do have mass surveillance, China's being a bit further along and a bit more omniscient.
I don't think TikTok, a collection of six-second clips of teens messing around represents a real, material, meaningful threat to freedom and democracy. Even if they collected all the footage and ran it all through their national security apparatus. The signal to noise ratio on this content is incomprehensibly low.
This is grandstanding and showmanship on the part of two strongmen leaders, one totalitarian overlord and one wannabe, and really, I don't think there's a clear right side and wrong side here.
I guess this is where we agree to disagree. I do think a foreign power with direct and absolute editorial control over the #1 content delivery network of an entire generation of our population is cause for concern.
I'm not discounting your skepticism that there is grandstanding involved, but from your comment I see a dramatic difference between a wanna-be totalitarian in a free democracy and an unequivocal one in a single party state. Let's not let perfect be the enemy of better; while domestic surveillance is unacceptable it is most definitely better than the current situation.
I don't love the NSA, or Trump, or the US military-industrial complex, but parroting this "both sides" garbage just makes you sound like a useful idiot for the CCP.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/China_hidden_cam...
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/meghara/china-new-inter...
I don't encounter too much political propaganda on TikTok (lots of BLM stuff though), but the potency of the platform is obvious, and the userbase is overwhelmingly young people who may be more impressionable, idealistic, etc.
Just one example of propaganda: https://www.tiktok.com/@jperkinsauthor
Of course, this exists on other sites as well, but bundling ideas/memes into 30 second bite-sized morsels with video seems like a fantastic design for quick propogation throughout a network of human minds.