A different interpretation is that those social media platforms keep the dissent monitorable and under control, and the powers that be are quite happy with the status quo. If that was the case, as soon as a platform that was not US-controlled gained a foothold in the US, we'd see a crackdown from the establishment. It would be painted as a tool of a foreign power and shut down or forced to be turned over to a US-based entity.

If that ever happens, we'll know democracy in the US is under threat.

> as soon as a platform that was not US-controlled gained a foothold in the US, we'd see a crackdown from the establishment

Telegram is not US controlled. There is no crackdown from the "establishment". Except if you meant only in situations where there is widespread unrest? If it is not relevant to Facebook here in the US in the first place.

3.5 million monthly active users of Telegram in the US. 80 million MAU of TikTok in the US. Makes a difference. They didn't crack down on TikTok until very recently.

> If that ever happens, we'll know democracy in the US is under threat.

Not to get political or anything, but with the clear election interference with dismantling the USPS and removing sorting machines only in swing states it's clearer than ever that democracy is already currently under threat.

Was there something about TikTok recently?

Democracy in the US has always been under threat, because the elites aren't stupid and realize that letting the masses rule leads to Third Positionism.

Social media != instant messaging

Both are thought + location + picture + file + link sharing platforms. Perhaps you're not publishing to as wide audience, but still, they're extremely similar.

As similar as an antelope and myself have two eyes, one nose, molar teeth and four limbs.

Because right-wing nationalism is not a good thing.

Please direct me to the comprehensive list of "valid" ideologies. Also, if you can get me the methodology for deciding what ideology is considered "valid" I would greatly appreciate it.

CIA encourages lots of friendly articles about social disruptions they've planned and funded. It seems likely they didn't plan BLM and related recent American protests, but definitely they are behind anything going on in Belarus.

That sounds like taking the claims of every strongman that their internal opposition is an external malevolent actor. The CIA would only be needed for sufficent state level resources such as training or large quantities of munitions beyond what they could source without intervention.

Dissent is very damn cheap with modern communications infastructure and can exist with and without it.

The only funding the CIA certainly provided was historical general purpose funding of computers and cryptography research. Calling it planned would certainly be a stretch.

It's certainly true that politicians can be unpopular for entirely local reasons. For instance, most politicians in USA, for at least the last decade. They are corrupt and incompetent, so they are unpopular.

However, both TFA and other things I've read about Belarus have a very "Euromaidan"/"Kong Tsung-gan" flavor to them. This is the sort of thing CIA does. They publicly claim this is the sort of thing they should do. Why would they be sitting this one out?

This is a myopic eastern-European worldview where general population are sheep and nothing ever happens unless some sort of Illuminati has planned it.

CIA does a lot of things, but they are not the only ones, and they can't be everywhere at once.