Comment on The TikTok deal is done - TikTok is now under new ownership in the US
TehPers@beehaw.org 4 days agoThe ban had bipartisan support, and even if that all never happened, you’d still be in the same situation. They would have sold off their US business anyway whether they were forced to or just got a big offer.
Keep in mind that TikTok also put out messages during that period practically deep throating Trump and sent it out to all their users. This was going to happen either way.
Ironically, a ban could have prevented this from happening entirely by making TikTok no longer relevant to the US. Not that banning it wouldn’t come with other issues as well, of course.
Maybe rather than blaming those in search of a solution, you could try blaming those who created the problem. Friendly fire doesn’t do a whole lot of good, but does support Trump, which I’m assuming isn’t your goal here.
spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org 3 days ago
yeah…that’s the point I was making?
the initial attempt to ban TikTok happened in 2020, in Trump’s first term. it was part of the general wave of anti-Chinese racism and xenophobia that the Republicans stoked up during the pandemic.
the “bipartisan support” for it is because a whole bunch of fucking Democrats hopped on board with it when they really should have known better.
to be specific, when you refer to “that all” happening, you mean Biden signing the bill that banned TikTok in April 2024, I think?
your timeline is jumping around a bit here, because now you’re referring to “that period” and linking to a source from January 2025, the time of Trump’s inauguration.
sigh. here’s the actual roll call vote.
it had 197 Republican “yes” votes. which is not enough. it would have failed without Democratic support. and then Biden signed it into law.
so like I said, this ban only passed because Democrats were bamboozled into supporting a proposal that has its roots in Republican “omg China scary” bullshit. I don’t know how to explain it any more clearly.
ahh yes, “criticizing Democrats is the same thing as supporting Republicans”, the free square on the bingo board.
there’s an analogy I saw recently that I really liked:
there’s cockroaches in my house, so I call an exterminator.
the exterminator shows up, but he just hangs out with the cockroaches.
I get mad at the exterminator, and he says “don’t be mad at me, be mad at the cockroaches”.
but…I was already mad at the cockroaches. that’s why I called the exterminator in the first place.
also, the cockroaches are cockroaches. me being mad at them is never going to change their behavior.
on the other hand, if I get mad at the exterminator…it does have a chance of changing his behavior.
if you want to view the world through an oversimplified lens that there’s the red team and the blue team and you can never criticize the blue team because that’s “friendly fire”…that is a choice that you can make. but don’t act surprised if I don’t subscribe to the same oversimplification that you cling to.
TehPers@beehaw.org 3 days ago
Yes. Biden happened to be president, but any president would have signed that into law because of the support, and even if it hadn’t become law, we’d still be in this position. Trump wants to control the media. He’ll do it however he needs to.
The period in question went on for quite a while (a yearish if I remember correctly). Anyway, your comment doesn’t actually say anything to contradict my point of ByteDance spreading their cheeks for Trump.
You don’t need to. The ban is irrelevant. Without the ban, we’d be in the same place, with Trump attacking all forms of media to gain control.
You’re not criticizing lawmakers here. You’re criticizing the common person, the people actually affected by the purchase. What you’re doing is essentially victim blaming.
Your entire analogy is irrelevant. The people you’re criticizing are the people who reviewed the exterminator, not the exterminator.