Slashdot Mirror
Doubts On Yahoo's Human Rights Code of Conduct
Ian Lamont writes "The US Senate has been pushing American technology companies to work with rights groups to develop a human rights code of conduct, which would help to guide their overseas activities. Yahoo now claims that it has established the 'core components' of a global code of conduct, and a more complete version will be ready this fall. However, the Industry Standard notes that there's a fundamental flaw with such efforts: US law is not world law. Following the local laws is a requirement of doing business in any country, and conflicts between corporate ethics and the law of the land in which these corporations do business are inevitable. The US Senate's push for such a code was prompted by a number of incidents, including Yahoo's complicity in the arrest of Chinese dissidents and a Chinese journalist."
"Moral relativism syndrome: The tendency to believe that all aspects of all cultures are equally "valid"."
Moral superiority syndrome: The tendency to believe that ones own morals are 'equally valid' to other cultures.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Yahoo can point the finger back at U.S law and claim that their hands are tied.
No they cannot. You can't excuse breaking the law in one country because you'll break the law in another. It is Yahoo who have to decide which penalty they wish to accept. This is not just true in China but in Canada and Europe where we have far more stringent privacy laws than the US and companies may well find themselves breaking our laws when the US government demands they hand over private data.
China has moved from being communist to fascist in the sense that they allow capitalism by under one party rule. Basically, the merger of state and business. We Americans are always fussing about it because we have free speech, etc (at least for the most part), but I say if the Chinese citizens want what they are seeing, then they can have it. It will only be their loss in the end. Civilizations go through cycles. From lots of personal freedom to none, then destruction and rebirth. The seeds of destruction is usually planted from inside. The closer they get to fascism, the closer they get to destruction. Look at history if you doubt. The people simply cannot be dominated.
We know the US is perfect. Its citizens have no complaints about the government and how the country is run. If something is perfect then you should imitate it!
Don't worry, I think the western "dogs of war" would be just as easy to arouse when they are attacked.
You are correct that both sides are currently battling for the attention of the western media. However, the Geogians attacted first and regardless of wether the US had anything to do with the first attack, few people will now belive that Georgia was/is not a puppet. A perfect camera angle at the games with Bush screwing his face up to Putin's words isn't going to convince the world Bush is THAT stupid. Putin is a strongman, he went from the games directly to S. Ossetia to put his stamp on the actions of the Russian military who he claims were attacked by their fellow (Georgian) peacekeepers in "fith column" style.
Rice to her credit did something similar by travelling to the Georgian Capital while Russin troops were stationed on it's outskirts. FWIW: My prediction is Georgia will be cut in two (like cyprus and so many others), there will be endless accusations, arguments and comparisons between looting in Iraq and Georgia, but the real fireworks will start if Poland starts breaking ground for US missile sites. The only sensible approach is offered by the French, ie: both sides back down, bring in international peacekeepers, and finally - blame the whole mess on an over zealous Georgian president.
As an Australian who remebers "duck and cover" training, my reaction to all this is: Thank god that Bush's dad forced him to sack Rummy and this all happend on Gates' watch!
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.