this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2024
1429 points (99.0% liked)

memes

10217 readers
2141 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] nymwit@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It does smack of hypocrisy but I've been feeling more it's a paradox of tolerance thing. Which itself a sort of hypocrisy now that I'm thinking about it. Huh.

[โ€“] archomrade@midwest.social 0 points 6 months ago

nah, i don't see it as a tolerance issue at all, I see it more through a Chomsky/Foucault lens.

US social media has been used as a state messaging apparatus for going on two decades now, and a foreign-owned platform is simply not as responsive to US state pressure as a domestically-owned one. China was simply playing the same game as the US has been. It's not at all surprising that the US would want to ban one that has gotten to be so widely used - but what's funny about it is the messaging/logic used to do so.

"A communist authoritarian actor is influencing civilian opinion through media curation, so we must take drastic authoritarian action to control media curation to stop foreign influence of civilian opinion."

I think seeing it through a 'paradox of tolerance' lens kinda misses the point of the irony I see in the response.