It’s because this isn’t about privacy at all, it’s about a popular social media platform being outside the control of domestic intelligence agencies. The US is unable to control the narrative on TikTok the way they do on American social media, which allowed pro-palestinian sentiment to spread there unhindered. It had a huge effect on the politics of the younger generation (IMO a positive one) by showing them news and first hand accounts they wouldn’t have seen otherwise.

Edit: And yes, China is able to control the narrative on TikTok and that is a potential problem, but so far they’ve had a fairly hands-off approach to US TikTok aside from basic language censorship. I figure the way China sees it is that an unmoderated free-for-all will do more to sow divisions in the US than a carefully controlled (and therefore obvious) pro-China narrative ever could.

The solution to athlete’s foot is to chop off your toes. Harder to get foot fungus without all those pointless crevices.

Make the consequences you want to see in the world.

I love this, what is it from?

For starters, all liberals have Reddit and Lemmy.world, which are large. Where do leftists have?

I agree that lemmy.world is a primarily liberal instance, but I haven’t seen the same level of censorship on lemmy.world as I have on hexbear, though I’m open to evidence to the contrary. You can create a space for a specific ideology without resorting to such an extreme level of censorship and lemmy.world is proof of that. Also see my home instance slrpnk.net, we’re a primarily anarchist instance and we haven’t had to resort to extreme censorship to achieve that.

Secondly, this comment is indistinguishable from concern-trolling. I’d have to read through your post history or go back and forth with you to know if you were an honest actor or just a troll.

By what method do you distinguish concern-trolling from legitimate concern? Concern-trolls generally want to shut down discussion, and the whole reason for my concern is that censorship shuts down discussion.

Thirdly, most of us know your views, and have rejected them.

They’re not my views, did you miss the part of my comment where I said I disagree with the comments that got them banned?

We don’t live in a tame world, lots of people have deeply problematic viewpoints. When someone who expresses such viewpoints is otherwise well-intentioned it’s better to address them directly and potentially change some minds (or at least plant the seed) than to shun them and further entrench them into a problematic worldview.

I disagree with those comments, but they seem pretty mild to have been banned. I just don’t see how it’s productive to ban all liberals the moment they try to explain their views. All that does is push people away who could potentially have been a future ally.

Judge argued it wasn’t relevant to the case. Obviously I disagree, and so did the prosecutors. The prosecution mentioned it during the trial anyway and was scolded by the judge, which was later used by the defense to try calling a mistrial.

There was a video from 15 days before the incident where he fantasized out loud about shooting some people he believed to be shoplifters. The prosecution tried to admit the video to evidence in order to demonstrate his mental state but was denied.

Kyle Rittenhouse showed up to a protest armed with an AR-15 intending to defend property that was not even his with lethal force, having been encouraged to do so by other militant conservative groups on social media. He then proceeded to shoot and kill two unarmed people who were attempting to disarm him and injured another who was armed with a pistol and who was also attempting to disarm him.

Hillary undermined his whole presidency.

Yes, the fact that Russia ran a coordinated disinformation campaign that favored Trump does undermine his legitimacy a bit, but let’s not miss the forest for the trees. The fact that Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 and lost the election entirely in 2020 is more significant.

Al Gore tried to use law to win election.

61,000 ballots were not counted by mistake. Gore used the law to try and have them counted and the conservative supreme court interfered for political reasons. Gore was in the right.

Conspiracy theory

The amount of evidence supporting this theory rivals the theory of gravity.

A bot would surely have better grammar.

Hilary with making false russian claim

In what way do claims of Russian interference - which has some truth to it btw - directly result in the overturning of an election?

Gore with all the counting shenanigans

Insane to present an example of an election being manipulated in Bush’s favor as an attempt by Gore to overturn an election. How are we supposed to have a discussion when we clearly live in different realities?

How were they going to overturn an election by occupying a building?

The attack on the Capitol was part of a wider plan orchestrated by Trump and his backers. The fake electors, the call to Georgia’s secretary of state, the baseless accusations of voter fraud… All of these combine to paint a pretty clear picture. Hell, the crowd at the Capitol called to hang Mike Pence because he refused to count the fake Certificates of Ascertainment.

I’m only responding for the benefit of others since I know you’re just going to deny all of this or try to claim Democrats did the same or worse, but I really do hope you overcome your delusions someday.

Legal warfare, I dont like it either, but the losers do this a lot.

Show me one time Democrats have attempted to stop the certification of an election by force. You can’t just pretend this happens as a standard matter of course.

what was May 29th?

May 29th was a riot and not an insurrection because it had nothing to do with trying to overturn an election. Are you getting it yet?

Are you suggesting that an attempt to halt the certification of a presidential election endorsed and encouraged by the sitting president in the hopes of avoiding abdicating power is equivalent to a protest over police brutality?

Is that what you think happened on J6? Failure is not the same as giving up.

Any good leftist candidate would mobilize opposition voters, that is unavoidable. It’s no reason to not run a good candidate.

It does actually. The status quo is maintained by authoritarians utilizing the state to enact violence against the working class.

The most effective method to improving our democracy is using our democracy. US history has demonstrated this repeatedly.

Meaningful progress has only ever been made in the US after mass movements engaged in direct action and protests (often met with violent state repression), and even then the legislation that’s made is usually much less than the people wanted. This is not a sign of a democracy that functions for the people.

You can only continue to call this system a democracy by setting the bar very very low. Pointless to argue semantics though, better to argue substance. We won’t get to a better - more representative - democracy by working within the current system; we need to apply external pressure. People don’t feel that voting in this election will save democracy because they don’t feel there’s enough of it left to be saved. Voting in this election can at best stave off a total collapse to fascism, but that’s it.

Your anecdote seems to support that it’s a learned behavior/skill, which tracks for me. I have a very active internal dialogue that’s difficult to turn off. I say dialogue instead of monologue because I often make up “other voices” that bounce ideas off each other, and this generally happens without my conscious effort. I think I developed this because as I was growing up I was encouraged to pray regularly, and I was very fanatically religious as a kid so I did so as often as I could. I prayed silently so often in fact that my thoughts were basically a constant one-sided monologue directed to god. Whenever I would daydream or let my imagination wander I would imagine god responding, and eventually the constant monologue became a dialogue. I would work out problems or make decisions by having conversations with an imaginary god. When I stopped believing in god the second voice never went away, I just started recognizing it as my own.