The Implications of the TikTok Ban: A New Age Patriot Act?

Introduction

Authored by Aaron Sobczak via The Mises Institute, HR 7521, also known as the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, is a recent development in the realm of American politics. The popular social media app, TikTok, owned by the Chinese company ByteDance Ltd, has been in the limelight for its alleged connections to China. Given the tense relationship between China and the United States, there are concerns that the Chinese government could use this app as a surveillance tool. As a result, several states and counties have restricted the app's use, especially on government-owned phones. Recently, the US Congress passed a bill that would limit the app's availability unless ByteDance meets certain requirements.

Comparing with the Patriot Act

Although politicians' motives are often questioned, this act could potentially be as dangerous as the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act, under the guise of protecting American national security, gave the federal government and the National Security Agency extensive permissions to spy on American citizens, often bypassing due process. This new act, in addition to potentially violating privacy rights and the Fourth Amendment, is a direct assault on property rights. The act's claim to national security contradicts the collective rights, which are not rights at all.

Details of the Act

The act starts by prohibiting any entity from distributing, maintaining, or updating any application controlled by a foreign adversary. This is problematic as the American national security regime's ability to determine adversarial countries or entities is questionable. The act also bans the hosting of internet services that enable these apps, furthering the state's control over the internet. Senator Rand Paul pointed out that many Americans own a stake in ByteDance; this restriction would mean that the government is confiscating American property without suspicion of a crime.

Implications

This act will inadvertently restrict competition in the American marketplace. Companies like Alphabet and Meta will greatly benefit from a significant decrease in competition in the social media marketplace. Alienating states considered adversarial has been shown to reduce peace. The act, although not as extensive as the Patriot Act, is dangerous in several ways. It puts the natural rights to free expression, property, and privacy at further risk.

Conclusion

While this legislation may seem to be in the interest of national security, it could potentially support large companies like Alphabet and Meta, who have been known to spy on American citizens on behalf of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Furthermore, this legislation could further alienate already-estranged nations, making it less likely for any reasonable agreement to be reached. The American national security regime's ability to accurately identify enemies and ensure the safety of Americans is questionable. This legislation only serves to increase the state's power, a power that the state has proven itself incapable of using judiciously.

What are your thoughts on this matter? Do you agree or disagree with the points raised in this article? Feel free to share this article with your friends and let's start a conversation. If you want to stay updated with daily news, sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is delivered every day at 6pm.