China also uses a VAT and they’re way more progressive than the EU. As far as I know it’s generally worse in both fairness (can’t be used to decrease inequality) and impact to productivity to income tax, but it’s much easier to administer.
The only people we need to be messaging are the DNC. Policy that improves people’s material condition is louder than any of us can hope to be. Same goes for genocide.
There is nothing you can say to someone who sees people just like them getting massacred by American bombs that will make them vote for you. I spent over a year screaming this, but I was drown out by people saying “no, actually because the republicans will do it worse, all the anti-genocide voters are still gonna vote so the democrats don’t need to change course”. And now those same people are saying the voters learned their lesson and will vote blue no matter who next time or that democrats issue is messaging.
The most dangerous animal of all: Man.
How much did it cost?
extreme left wants to use violence in order to get rid of everyone they deem unfit for their ideal society
lmao there’s a difference between using violence to remove the capitalist class from power and using violence to genocide minorities.
Relevant because it showcases liberals’ political illiteracy?
Not throwing any shade at Cleese though, he’s one of the few conservatives who was genuinely talented at comedy.
Quick, where can I find a wolf?
It is and they have a lot of progress to make. Nobody thinks any socialist project is a utopia.
In any case, you don’t understand how the idea of paying less than a thousand dollars for a month long hospital stay is mindboggling to Americans. Like that’s “You’re declaring bankruptcy” expensive here.
And no one owns a home at all in China, it’s all leased.
Only in the cities, rural land is owned outright, but I think they have to jump through some hoops to be able to sell rural land.
In cities, it’s a 70 year lease, and the owner has first right to renew. If you don’t own the property by that logic, then you don’t own property in any place that has property taxes.
Also as Yogthos alluded to, China doesn’t have eminent domain, they can’t just take your house like in America. This has lead to people who refuse to sell having highways diverted around their house, parking lots, and in 1 case, a shopping center surrounding the house.
No I’m not, you’ve been misunderstanding me from the start.
Tiktok does not amplify views that make the US look bad, it demotes them. That demonstrates that china is not using tiktok to influence Americans because they would want the opposite.
Instead they do exactly what any media subservient to the state department does.
Amplifying shows of division in a country promotes the view that said country is flawed and weak, in this case along racial lines. China has plenty to gain by showing that.
Exactly! So demoting those videos suggests that China is not using the algorithm to promote anti-american views.
That seems entirely speculative. There are plenty of other reasons to hire them. Can you provide evidence for your claim?
No, CIA agents don’t go around saying they’re working for media companies to disseminate propaganda, and media companies don’t broadcast that they take extra care to make sure their coverage lines up with the state department’s narratives.
If it’s being done in a manner that promotes Chinese narratives while demoting American narratives
Spicy in this case means protests, police misbehavior, stuff the US wouldn’t want amplified. The big waves of censorship came in 2020 and 2022. You can search news articles from the time with lots of people wondering why they’re no longer getting that content in their FYPs and content creators getting <1/10th of the views. FB and reddit do the same thing.
I don’t really see why not demoting BLM videos is not in the CCP’s interest; videos that make America seem racist seems entirely in the interest of an Anti-American country.
Amplifying the videos that show America’s response to antiracist movements would make America look like the racist country it is. Demoting them conceals that.
I also don’t see why hiring former American intelligence operatives demonstrates a pro-American stance, as their motivations for doing so could be to learn about American intelligence-gathering methods while promoting Chinese interests.
CIA agents living in America who disseminate intelligence-gathering methods while promoting Chinese interests get charged with treason.
They were hired to help identify and amplify US state department narratives, same reason CNN and Fox hires them.
It is, but the relevance to the discussion is that China getting american’s data isn’t the reason for the ban. Nor is China influencing Americans because they tend to derank politically spicy videos. If China was controlling the algo to make the US look bad, videos tagged BLM wouldn’t have been deranked.
It’s because it pissed off the wrong people. The initial push to ban tiktok was by Trump and republicans after TTers organized a mass RSVP of one of Trump’s events and he spent a lot of money on extra staff and ended up performing in an empty stadium.
That failed and Trump was mocked. 4 years later, it was used to counter zionist propaganda, and that got the democrats on board. Here’s Blinken admitting as much.
Additionally, Insta is TT’s biggest competitor, and FB, which owns Insta, lobbys to the tune of 20M/year.
Except FB and Twitter sell their data to the highest bidder. If China wanted American’s data, they can just buy it.
Looking it up, it’s unclear how much jesters were respected for having political competency that kings and court would listen to vs how much they were were entertainers who were permitted much greater liberty with content because he was non-threatening and affected nothing.
We are also controlled by 1 party with total dictatorial control, but in typical American extravagance, we have two of them; the party of capital, and the other party of capital.
ITT.
I love the scene where a group of sociopathic murders are all shocked at how scummy someone has to be to deprive a waitress of her wages, as if it’s justified because the owner doesn’t pay her either.