As an avid TikTok user, I support the app’s existence, not just because I refuse to use Instagram Reels as a substitute for my favorite platform, but because its potential ban is a clear manifestation of yellow peril – the Western view of Southeast and East Asians being a threat to Western society. Though TikTok’s chokehold on the younger generation is easy to make fun of, it’s important to appreciate the app’s purpose: different users attempting to capture the most viral moment through short videos.
There is a large range of uses for TikTok, not just the obvious lip-syncing, dancing and meme-sharing; the app is also a way to connect with others through common and creative expression. TikTok demonstrates how we communicate through social media – one of the ways being through spreading awareness about social justice issues. Though sources on TikTok are not always 100% reliable, some content consists of first-hand accounts, opening up new perspectives through oral history. Additionally, since most videos range from 15 seconds to 10 minutes, content creators are motivated to appeal to their audiences in a small amount of time, and quickly spread information about topics that they may know little to nothing about. This encourages users to do research beyond social media and educate themselves on worldwide issues.
So why has the government been against TikTok for so long?
Rumors of TikTok’s ban in the U.S. have been ongoing, dating back to August 2020 when President Trump signed an executive order that would have banned TikTok if it hadn’t been sold to an American company within the next 45 days. To this day, it is still owned by a Chinese company called ByteDance. 3 months after Trump signed the ban order, a federal judge blocked the ban, arguing that there should be a rational motive before banning TikTok. The next year, the Biden administration also continued to monitor the security measures taken by TikTok. In March of 2023, U.S. senators proposed the RESTRICT Act, which states that “Specifically, the Department of Commerce must identify, deter, disrupt, prevent, prohibit, investigate and mitigate transactions involving ICT products and services (1) in which any foreign adversary (such as China) has any interest, and (2) that pose an undue or unacceptable risk to U.S. national security or the safety of U.S. persons.”
Doesn’t that sound familiar? When has there been a point in history where the Chinese identity hasn’t been seen as a threat?
Dating all the way back to the 1880s, Chinese immigrants were viewed as “potential threats to national security, [securing] Congress’ exclusive Constitutional right to regulate immigration as a function of its war powers, internal and external.” The idea that East Asians were a threat to American growth was further reinforced by Kaiser Wilhelm II’s depiction of East Asians as a threat to Western society, ultimately leading to the coining of the term “yellow peril.” No one knew that an image based on Wilhelm II’s dream would have a permanent impact and create never-ending damage to the Asian community.
A few days after the RESTRICT Act’s proposal, TikTok’s CEO Shou Zi Chew testified before the U.S. Congress for over five hours, where he denied any allegations of TikTok being owned or controlled by the Chinese government, claiming that there was no sufficient evidence to support the alleged claims.
But is a ban on TikTok truly a national security concern, or just a reinforcement of anti-Chinese sentiment?
Initially, when I heard about TikTok’s ban, I was alarmed by the term “security risk.” However, when I saw clips of the court hearing with Chew, I realized that the hyperfocus on TikTok is an attack on Chinese identity and politics. Politicians from both Democratic and Republican parties asked Chew repetitive questions relating to his association with the Chinese Communist Party. In a clip that went viral, from NBC News, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark asked Chew, “Have you ever been a member of the Chinese Communist Party?”
Chew replied, “Senator, I’m Singaporean.”
Sen. Cotton then asked again, “Have you ever been associated or affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party?”
“No, Senator. Again, I’m Singaporean!” replied Chew.
Cotton couldn’t have demonstrated his true intentions of a series of repetitive questions any more obviously – it was an expression of distrust towards Chew’s Asian identity and ByteDance’s Chinese association.
The entire plan to ban TikTok is a manifestation of yellow peril. If the government’s concern is truly about data privacy, then why have there not been concerns about apps like Facebook, Twitter or Snapchat? Why is there a double standard when it comes to holding every platform accountable – not just the ones that promote Western economic growth? Thanks to the legacy of yellow peril, the distrust and threats associated with China continue to thrive within our society and most importantly, our legal system, which after all these years, continues to be fueled by hypocrisy and bias.
TikTok is set to be banned this Sunday, January 19, 2025.
So what now? Many users are shifting to RedNote, another Chinese app with a striking resemblance to TikTok which has become the #1 App on Apple’s app store this week. Many native users of RedNote have been welcoming to the influx of Americans, even labeling them as “TikTok refugees,” poking fun at the app’s sudden growth. If there’s one thing that’s clear about Gen Z in America, we can find creative ways to critique the government’s handling of the country and protest their attempts to silence us.
This ban has been a topic of discussion for politicians for quite some time, and action has quickly been taken. The majority of both Democratic and Republican parties coming together to take down the app and labeling it as a step to “protect” youth is extremely misleading. If there was truly any concern about “protection” or children, then why hasn’t the government come to agreement about the fact that the U.S. leads globally in school shootings? There’s one thing the American government protects more than their own citizens: guns.
China has always been seen as a threat to American society, and it is important to recognize how historical context has shaped our current way of living. We need to continue challenging the systems, which emphasize the vilification and competition between other countries and their citizens. So what may seem like a simple ban to “protect” American citizens, is really just an evolution and disguised version of yellow peril.
