This is an interesting argument against walled gardens I don't often see: that it gives your government an easy chokepoint to prevent users from using software it doesn't like.
Much easier than having to bother with a VPN, and many Chinese people are already used to jumping through such hoops.
Do the Hong Kong protest crackdown not scare anyone else?
Now they have an excuse. It won’t look suspicious if they communicate to each other on channels that can’t be monitored by their oppressive government.
There’s great alternatives to wechat that are secure by design, rather than spy-by-design, such as telegram or signal.
And the US has done hundred of renditions without trial, so while far from the scale of China, US spy agencies still do some awful things.
And _their_ point, which came first and you came here to argue against, is CCP monitoring is especially bad for particular political reasons.
As for me, I believe allowing WeChat to become anything like the structural institution it is in China in any part of the US would be a mistake. Imagine if Google was as controlled by and as much of a cheerleader for the US government as WeChat is for the Chinese, and the kind of threat that would pose to European sovereignty.
- "allow WeChat to gain an even greater foothold on American soil" - does this mean have more users?
- "minimize total damage" - it would be good if you articulated the damage being done
- "Imagine if Google was as controlled by and as much of a cheerleader for the US government as WeChat is for the Chinese" - according to Julian Assange, https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/
Maybe they have lost some influence in the current administration (maybe not), but Facebook has by all appearances been eager to take their place.
The US government can’t be seen openly wielding large internet companies for its interests. But any modern state needs to. And so it does it within the paradigm of the West: public denial, private understandings.
The difference between China/Wechat and US/FB/Google is one is out in the open, and the other is covered by a fig leaf.
Imagine that! Imagine if some US agency had a global dragnet surveillance network!
Yet that didn't happen. Why are things turning out differently in the internet age?
The USPS did do exactly that. Read about how abolitionists attempted to spread anti-slavery literature through the federal postal system in the antebellum era, and how the post office decided it would suppress those mailings for being supposedly insurrectionary.
If you ask a random Chinese citizen "are you okay with the government listening in to your phone calls?", most people would say Yes. Having the government listen in and having government presence on the streets makes us feel safe, because most of us trust our government. Sure, it has it's issues, but in general, the government acts in our favor, and without it we'd have far lower standards of living.
The US is a total polar opposite in this regard.
Another is that in days before the internet, the technology for small numbers of people to cause mass violence did not exist.
But also, the government in the 19th century was much weaker than it became in the 20th and now 21st centuries.