Part 1
1. ...National security, in its narrow sense, is certainly not the most important consideration for the US. The real issue that truly concerns Washington is the ability of Huawei and TikTok to challenge the high-tech hegemony of the US. If this is also national security, then US national security is synonymous with hegemony.
We can clearly see the ugliness demonstrated by the US government as well as the relevant high-tech giants. One of the companies hardest "impacted" by TikTok has been Facebook. Its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, became the most public and aggressive promoter of TikTok's demise in the US tech industry...
This is the barbaric act of a rogue government, and yet another dark scene in Washington's struggle for US supremacy. The idea of hegemony as national security enforced beyond the laws and commercial rules is the nature of the hunt against TikTok that we see today.
In the most barbaric way, the US is trying to solidify a high-tech world order in which it is the absolute center. Whether it ends up "killing" TikTok or forcibly taking the child out of Bytedance's arms, it is one of the ugliest scenes of the 21st century in the high-tech competition.
Source: https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1196404.shtml
2. Just think mathematically and logically. The population of America is 331 million, but China has 1.4 billion people -- almost one quarter of the world's population.
Ends up "killing" TikTok? Can't one quarter of the world's people support a small company like TikTok and its parent company ByteDance? What's all this worry about being banned from the US which has only a population of 331 million compared with 1.4 billion in China?
Forcibly taking the child out of Bytedance's arms? Just ask one hundred poor families to find out how many of them are willing to sell their children. Or try to snatch a tiger cub from its mother and see what will happen.
If the US wants to ban all trade with Chinese companies, let it be. China could do the same by banning most, if not all, the US companies from operating in China. Without the US, the markets of China and the rest of the world are big enough to support all Chinese companies.
3. In conclusion, let us recall Qianlong Emperor's Second Edict to King George III of Great Britain in 1792:
"Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians in exchange for our own produce."
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macartney_Embassy
1. ...National security, in its narrow sense, is certainly not the most important consideration for the US. The real issue that truly concerns Washington is the ability of Huawei and TikTok to challenge the high-tech hegemony of the US. If this is also national security, then US national security is synonymous with hegemony.
We can clearly see the ugliness demonstrated by the US government as well as the relevant high-tech giants. One of the companies hardest "impacted" by TikTok has been Facebook. Its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, became the most public and aggressive promoter of TikTok's demise in the US tech industry...
This is the barbaric act of a rogue government, and yet another dark scene in Washington's struggle for US supremacy. The idea of hegemony as national security enforced beyond the laws and commercial rules is the nature of the hunt against TikTok that we see today.
In the most barbaric way, the US is trying to solidify a high-tech world order in which it is the absolute center. Whether it ends up "killing" TikTok or forcibly taking the child out of Bytedance's arms, it is one of the ugliest scenes of the 21st century in the high-tech competition.
Source: https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1196404.shtml
2. Just think mathematically and logically. The population of America is 331 million, but China has 1.4 billion people -- almost one quarter of the world's population.
Ends up "killing" TikTok? Can't one quarter of the world's people support a small company like TikTok and its parent company ByteDance? What's all this worry about being banned from the US which has only a population of 331 million compared with 1.4 billion in China?
Forcibly taking the child out of Bytedance's arms? Just ask one hundred poor families to find out how many of them are willing to sell their children. Or try to snatch a tiger cub from its mother and see what will happen.
If the US wants to ban all trade with Chinese companies, let it be. China could do the same by banning most, if not all, the US companies from operating in China. Without the US, the markets of China and the rest of the world are big enough to support all Chinese companies.
3. In conclusion, let us recall Qianlong Emperor's Second Edict to King George III of Great Britain in 1792:
"Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians in exchange for our own produce."
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macartney_Embassy
