One has to wonder why the only major non-Western social media outlet turns out to not suppress anti-Israeli sentiment. Of course it could be possible that TikTok could have placed a bias in the algorithm somewhere. But honestly I think it's more likely that the bias is in the Western social media platforms, as has been reported by non-other than Western-media.
Are you joking? China and Russia want "a new world order", which is a reference that would be extremely clear to (older) politicians but not to most people. The US (even under Trump) supports the UN world view, which is a lot of independent small countries that serve their own interests, protected by a group of nuclear-armed "superpowers" that can annihilate each other, but only at the cost of their own lives.
The "new world order", Putin said it most explicitly. It is to not necessarily end countries as a concept, but to create 2 kinds of countries: the "superpowers", with in his case a focus on Russia, but essentially the US, Russia, China and maybe India. Every other country would have to choose one of the superpowers ... or face military action and invasion. And, like Belarus, Moldova and Hungary, but equally Mongolia, Tibet, ... would have to do what their allied super power wants, whatever it wants.
This usually means giving up their natural resources without getting the best price on international markets. But it can mean other things, like sabotaging other would-be superpowers (like Hungary's "EU membership" that is working overtime to prevent EU "interference" in Ukraine)
Now rule number 1 of the "old" US-centric post-WW2 world order is, of course, no moving country borders, under any circumstances. There is a tiny escape hatch, which is that if you absolutely utterly for some reason have to move country borders, you need agreement of EVERY nuclear power (this is the UN security council), and a majority of all members. Now Palestinians want to conquer Israel ... and ... well. Sorry. Not allowed. If that's allowed then this might spiral into 500 conflicts worldwide with a lot of countries trying to conquer ... something (like natural resources, harbors, eradicate and/or replace some ethnic group (for example Rwanda/Congo) ...), and because of the total military dominance of a few countries, lead to the "superpowers-get-anything-they-want-for-free" world order vision of Putin and Xi.
Hence how the cards lie: US - wants the "two state solution" (meaning Israel and Palestinians DO NOT MOVE). This solution has the problem that Palestinians (and most of the world's muslims) hate it, and after 7 or so wars, Israel is no longer much of a fan of it, either. But if there's one thing that neither the US, nor China, nor Russia, nor the UN cares about, it's what anybody other than they themselves want.
Russia and China - want the situation destabilized. Just so we're clear: they don't want Palestinians to win, they want war. They want the whole middle east fighting, which seems achievable, they want borders to move because that will be one more argument for their new world order. You should not misunderstand this as wanting to help the Palestinians. They DO NOT want Palestinians to win. Just to not lose quite a rapidly. Get enough people to die on a constant basis to get the middle east boiling, nothing more. They want chaos, and they probably perceive Israel's attitude as being 20% removed from finally giving the Palestinians the chaos they so desperately seem to want (I would argue Palestinians don't really want war, they just have corrupt leadership that keeps getting bribed by Russia and now China to cause war. For Palestinians, it's about money for the rich, not land, not religion or racism. Even though they are racist pseudo-religious fanatics, but beyond a good sounding excuse, that's not important at all. The world is full of racist pseudo-religious groups of fanatics).
What China and Russia see in the Palestinians is a way to create war, create chaos. To be able to say to African nations "you know, if Chinese companies get to mine those lithium deposits in your country, we could protect you from your neighbor that wants to eradicate your people with Russian weapons ... deal?"
I would argue that absolutely nobody other than Putin and the CCP want that (and therefore, yes, rational people want the Palestinians to lose any conflict as badly and as quickly as possible, to minimize the chance of the conflict blowing up, while simultaneously pressuring Israel to leave the status quo alone)
> They want chaos, and they probably perceive Israel's attitude as being 20% removed from finally giving the Palestinians the chaos they so desperately seem to want
Did you come to this conclusion on your own, or did you see it in an article from some think tank?
do other americans think the way as same as you? that "we are the less of evil and the necessary evil" "there are bigger evil outside we must support the empire"
A lot of Americans support America being the world police, yes, among them capitalists who like having international waters and various canals and straits open for business, but also a lot of Christians who consider more atheistic nations a threat to global christendom (hence the weird alliance between the American right and Orthodox Russia)
I recognize America has a lot to answer for (Israel too) but I also consider it preferable to a world with Islamic and communist nations being ascendent (the presumed outcome of a weaker America among those of us who like the defense budget where it's at)
You neglect to mention that America is a nation, like Europe, with massive imports and exports. Which require safe seas. In particular, they require safe seas in the Mediterranean and especially the Suez Canal.
In other words, it's not like the US does this for brownie points. It's absolutely required for the economy the US has.
I don't think China wants chaos per se. I don't think either China or Russia want a situation where any given state can just decide to invade another state and move borders.
What you described as a "new world order" is a return to spheres of influence. The regional hegemon usually wants some degree of stability within their sphere. The whole imperial project is impeded when your subjects are fighting each other.
I think it is true that both Russia and China are open to limited chaos now, but not as a constant on-going feature. Chaos now is just a symptom of the current system in terminal decline. I can imagine all major powers of a new system using the relative stability of the new system as a legitimizing point (aimed both at domestic consumption, as well as to their subject states).
Finally, I think describing "what the US wants" right now is basically impossible. Even before Trump, there has always been (and especially in the last ~20 years) this ever growing chasm between the reality of soft empire, and "what the man on the street" believes and thinks about the reality of American power and its benefits and costs.
Yes Russia and China are causing Israelis to elect people like Smotrich and Ben-Gvir.
Xi Jin Ping finances terrorist violence in the West Bank. Putin funds politician that wave around Greater Israel maps in official government gatherings.
Oh wait that's the US!
The fact that you cite Israel as a model for US-backed border stability is hilarious. This is being misinformed on an embarrassing scale. It is ahistorical idea constructed only of state department press releases.
Government contractors have been banned from having Tik-Tok installed on any device they use since June 2023, legislation to force divestment was introduced in January prior, so I was tempted to dismiss this article front the first sentence, of course it did not start with oct 7, but fine, the matter became more urgent with the swell of content that’s, let’s say, critical of Israel.
But the article is reaching by asserting that pro Israeli lobbyists have outsized sway and we banned Tik-Tok as a favor to an ally. There are other factors that freak out American politicians and their constituents (I just wish they were equally freaked out by American corporations doing the same things wrt surveillance and behavior modification)
Isn't what you're saying fitting to the narrative presented by Gallagher? Also why are you focusing on what the article is portraying and not what the politician who pushed for the bill is literally stating exactly what happened?
> the article is reaching by asserting that pro Israeli lobbyists have outsized sway
Given that 38 US states have laws against boycotting Israel, Texas required hurricane aid recipients to promise not to boycott Israel as a condition of receiving aid, and Texas will fire teachers for not pledging not to boycott Israel, I wouldn't say it's reaching at all.
What’s crazy to me is that Washington is still naive about the China threat, only when Israel came into play did the bill have legs again. I’ll say it again, you can’t let your near peer adversary own a mainline into the eyeballs of your population. The US knows this, because just decades ago, they were mainlining anti-communist and pro-Contras content through radios in Latin America
If this post gets flagged I will lose all trust in this forum and its admins. This is not the first instance a post like this gets flagged. This post perfectly relates to the themes of the forum. This is completely and utterly unacceptable.
Edit: I'm at least thankfull the admins have restored the post.
Lots of users flag things because it’s a guaranteed flame war, I almost flagged it after reading because it’s kind of one persons opinion with a few references to politicians’ statements and it asserts that this is the whole story when it’s not, ie, just someone’s crappy substack without any substantial new info. But I’ll refrain hoping that there’s some discussion on the merits of banning Tik-Tok, but really anything Israel adjacent is not going to last long on hacker news. Arguing about it does not do much to build community.
The comment by the politician that pushed for the bill gives the post sufficient merit.
> but really anything Israel adjacent is not going to last long on hacker news. Arguing about it does not do much to build community.
I'd like to believe that the forum I'm reading from does not censor or facilitate the censorship based on political bias. I don't think I'm the only HN user to feel this way. This argument is purely defeatist.
NB: The post got killed from an abundance of flags btw so you were right about that. This flagging and "vouching" system is ripe for abuse and needs to be fixed.
> but really anything Israel adjacent is not going to last long on hacker news. Arguing about it does not do much to build community.
hahaha, anything bad adjacent china/russia/DPRK(aka enemies of the democracy) were never flagged
but to be fair, there are rarely any disputes under these submits.
> Lots of users flag things because it’s a guaranteed flame war
no, lots of users flag things because it doesnt fit the narrative
i know this clearly, you know this clearly, everyone knows this clearly, some just pretend they don't
However, I believe this is precisely one manifestation of democracy. Just as the Israeli people "democratically" support genocide, once you control education and dominate the narrative, democracy will do the rest for you
20 years later, genocide in gaza will become misinformation pushed by CCP and Putin, everyone mention it will be flagged