Should the US ban TikTok?

[@HulksterHogan]

"Inciting violence should not be tolerated" unless you see it on CNN or Twitter right?

[@eavyeavy2864]

Trump got banned

[@ckmbyrnes]

This was a bait and switch article. While you think they are going to talk about the legal, moral or ethical concerns of banning an app based on ideological principals, they instead talk almost exclusively on why only 1 app, TikTok, should not be banned. The couple of times they mention Parlor, they basically justify its ban with flimsy excuses, like unmoderated content. Last time I checked, unmoderated speech was the same as free speech. The truth is they, being the media and tech companies, have wanted to silence Trump for a while. He owed them nothing so they could not control him. When rioters started to storm the capital building, Trump tried to stop them through Twitter, but they permanently banned him so that message did not get to the people. Then he tried Facebook, but with the same reaction and effect. Then they realized they had control over Parlor, possibly the last conduit for Trump to speak to his followers, they turned off its internet feed, silencing him and other conservatives. So despite the paper thin excuses justifying Parlors banning, it is an attempt, so far successful, to silence a segment of the population based on ideology. If its the violent rhetoric they fear, why haven't other organizations, like BLM or Antifa been permanently banned. Because they are in ideological step with the media and tech companies. It started with Alex Jones, then a former president, nor entire platforms they don't agree with. If they can do it one they will do it again. Are we ok with that?

[@joshuaalley4193]

There was a clause in the contract between Amazon and Parler that required Amazon to give Parler time to resolve complaints. Parler was responding to, and resolving all of Amazon's complaints. There was another clause that allowed Amazon to "suspend" Parler immediately. Amazon "suspended" Parler, despite Parler's efforts to address all of Amazon's complaints, then transfered the suspension into permanent ban, while also choosing their contractual obligations to allow Parler to download all of their data. Eventually, Amazon did allow Parler to get their data, but by that time, the damage was done. The best solution I've seen proposed to fix Section 230 is to change "objectionable" to illegal. Removing the responsibility for determining was is objectionable from the service provider

[@shanerichards3014]

The Chinese government bans apps all the time. Why should they be able to do that and have their apps allowed?

[@MrPrince600]

Lets Make it fair. BAN TIKTOK

[@BuddyCrotty]

Why does the title have a question mark if it's structured as a statement?

[@AndrewDeFaria]

Because the state and qualify of education sucks?

[@williamoneil9787]

I was just asking myself the same thing (?).

[@nanochase]

Libertarians don't believe in grammar rules, just market force supremacy and corporate carte blanche

[@BuddyCrotty]

@@nanochase they updated the title, the free market prevails!

[@TheRealCoryKent]

@@nanochase This is a silly statement, and clear attempt at a dig, but otherwise is simply specious. They put a question mark BECAUSE they are following grammar. It's a question; it starts with "Why"... SMH

[@aeebeecee3737]

I still don’t have a TikTok yet.

[@How_To_Drive_a_TARDIS]

Good

[@AndrewDeFaria]

In a free country, compelling people (or companies that are essentially just groups of people) is usually wrong. Who are you to say that I can't share my data with the CCP? Perhaps I want to. Or closer to reality - I don't care if they get my personal data. Who are you to say I must care?!? (Actually, the real deal is I don't care about TikTok or Parler or whatever). BTW whatever happened to personal responsibility?

[@KLP99]

You missed the facts about Parler. Research seems slanted against conservative values. That's my take anyway.

[@TheRealCoryKent]

Because the video wasn't really about Parler. It was about companies and governments censoring and banning apps. That's a different topic.

[@fegolem]

They should cut to the chase and sue... the electromagnetic spectrum.

[@triumphsrule0793]

These private platforms get lots of protections from the government they should not be allowed to pick and choose who gets to say what , otherwise nationalize them

[@redlefevre5448]

This channel used to be awesome, now it's just propaganda 🙄

[@dioc8699]

Oh god ! that scary music in the background though lol. We in the global south too are also worried about US government stealing our data thorough Facebook, Google etc. Edward Snowden reallly blew the cover of US gov.

[@senpaitm8742]

Awesome

[@freesk8]

Thanks!

[@chrise1237]

I was hoping this wasnt another Trump video

[@Mr.Mister420]

Capitalism Promoting Channel

[@whatsyurprob158]

GOODIE-GOODIE, commie!!! 😁

[@JonMI6]

You have a problem with Capitalism but you have none with “Invest” and “Innovate”. I wonder what system allows you to invest and innovate. Oh wait...CAPITALISM

[@TheRealCoryKent]

Duh, it promotes freedom. Liberty. It just so happens that capitalism is the most free form of economics and government. What would you think you'd get from a channel called Learn Liberty? I mean I knew exactly what kind of things I'd see on this channel, before I clicked on it.