Congressmen Condemn Companies for China Policies

koweja writes "Members of Congress have taken the step of criticizing various IT companies for their international policies. This includes Google and Microsoft, for what they call 'bowing to Beijing' and 'putting profits before American principles of free speech'. Most of the specific incidents have been covered on Slashdot already. Yahoo and MS countered by pointing out that event censored network access 'enabled far wider access to independent sources of information for hundreds of millions of individuals in China and elsewhere' than not entering China."

Comments

More American: Capitalism or Democracy?

[eldavojohn]

And so it comes to it. While Democracy is a form of government and capitalism is a way to run your market system, these two are being compared in this issue. Which is more American.

Obviously, there is a conflict of interest between these two ideals. On one hand, it's very American to be a capitalist. After all, what is the American dream? On the other hand, it's very American to cherish the freedoms that we are privileged to have. But is it American to push the ideals of Democracy on the rest of the world? Some people would say that it most certainly is, some people would wager to leave well enough alone.

Depending on how you want to look at it, Google and Microsoft are more American than Thomas Jefferson.

Because of the Cold War in the 80's, the worst thing you could call an American was a Communist. But Communism is only talking about the market--Socialism is how the government is run. So what do we value more as Americans, our market system or government? If you claim them to be inseparable, you're greatly mistaken.

And now, Google and Microsoft are trying to bring out beloved capitalism to China. But they aren't also enforcing Democracy in their wheeling and dealing. Is this so wrong? Probably not if you believe every country has a right to govern itself as it so chooses. To quote Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill K.G.:

Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

So I encourage you to think twice before faulting Microsoft and Google for their entrance into China. One of the most revered and holy things the American people have is a free and open market system. Granted it's not perfect, we still value it to a great extent. With our corporations extending into China, perhaps they will change to full blown Capitalism also. This is also capital exported from China to America which benefits our economy in some small way.

So remember, we elect our congressmen to represent us , not the people of China. I'd like to see them show more concern for the ebbing of Democracy in our own damn country before they start working on forcing the Chinese to accept our form of government. Perfect the system we have here and, as in the case of East and West Berlin, the people will vote with their feet.

Same jackasses that smashed Toshiba laptops...

[R2.0]

on the Capitol steps when Toshiba sold advanced milling machines to the Soviets in the laet 80's.

Generally, when Congressmen resort to theatrics, its a sure sign the actually plan to do nothing.

Yea!

[gowen]

Thank God that Congress will never grant China "Most Favoured Nation" trade status...

Legal requirement

[DoofusOfDeath]

And yet, they sustain the laws that basically force publicly traded companies to have profit maximization as their main goal.

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation:

Profit Maximization. In Anglo-American jurisdictions, for-profit corporations are generally required to serve the best interests of the shareholders, a rule that courts have interpreted to mean the maximization of share value, and thus profits. Corporate directors are prohibited by corporate law from sacrificing profits to serve some other interest, including such areas as environmental protection, or the improvement of the welfare of the community. For example, when Henry Ford cut dividends and reduced car prices in order to increase the number of people who could afford to buy his cars, his brother-in-law, Mr. Dodge, a shareholder, sued him for having harmed profitability: Dodge v. Ford Motor Company, 170 N.W 688 (Mich.S.C. 1919). Mr. Dodge succeeded and went on to form his own car company with the proceeds of the suit. Modern corporate law is settled and clear that corporate directors are only allowed to act in the best interests of the corporation, and that this means maximization of profits (see for example J.A. VanDuzer The Law of Partnerships and Corporations (Irwin Law: 2003, Toronto) at pp. 271-2). Corporations may be able to make charitable contributions to society, but only where this will enable profit maximization (e.g. if the public relations value of the contribution would boost profits more than any other potential use of the funds).

*Loud Laugh*

[Gryle]

The US might have more creidibility if our record on civil rights wasn't so shoddy right now.

Re:*Loud Laugh*

[Pig Hogger]

How is our record on civil rights so shoddy?

Native american indian extermination?

Slavery?

Institutionalized anti-black apartheid until the 1960's?

Rampant unofficial (private) racism (property sales contract that say "you can't sell your house to niggers") and property values that go down because "some niggers moved in the neighb ourhood"?

Guantanamo bay?

A president that goes ballistic to change the Constitution to prohibit gay marriage?

The most powerful superpower in the world discriminating against latino people because "they don't want to take our culture" - imagine that: a superpower that is scared shitless by some of the poorest people in the world!!!

What country in the world would you say has a better record on civil rights? Or instead of a record, a better existing civil rights situation currently?

Belgium? The Nederlands? Canada?

Stupid hypocrite lawmakers...

[brxndxn]

'putting profits before American principles of free speech'

OMG.. No they didn't.. I can't believe they want to make money while sacrificing some American principles..

Meanwhile, lawmakers are getting paid how much by tobacco, big media, defense contractor, corrupt unions, questionnable interest groups, etc?

Maybe someone can help me out and post another few thousand ways Congress and the Senate are corrupt..

Right, congress, that's the paragon of free speach

[Maury Markowitz]

Does anyone else find it ironic that the US govt is yelling at companies about free speach, while illegally (yes, that's the correct word) conducting spying operations on its own citizens?

Maury

Lemme get this straight

[JustASlashDotGuy]

Microsoft and Google do business in another country. They follow that
countries laws, and that makes them the bad guy?

The law is the law. When doing business anywhere, you must obey the laws that
that land, not just the laws you agree with.

And moreover, if you want to put pressure on a foreign body to change their
laws.... wouldn't that be the job of politicians (talking to other
politicians) and not the job of some corporation?

Google Response

[yEvb0]

Google's response.
My apologies if this has been posted already.