4 ms·

In case you assumed that corporate responsibility is actually taken to heart by those making corporate strategic decisions, let this show you that it is not. Co

In case you assumed that corporate responsibility is actually taken to heart by those making corporate strategic decisions, let this show you that it is not. Corporate responsibility moves are little more than good PR, a product selling point, and a way to avoid fines in some jurisdictions. Money matters more than morals. These corporations want access to the Chinese market. To gain access (and profit from) to the Chinese market, you must play ball with the state.

mc32 9y ago
When has that ever been in doubt with regard to China? To do any major business in China you have to partner with a local company --which typically have ties to the CCP. This is nothing new. Is there a difference btwn opening factories in China and legally outsourcing work to local cos which may or may not comply with even local labor and environmental laws and bowing to their local mores when it comes to softer areas like western ideas about civil liberties? That in no way means I agree with their view --I'm just asking are the two not different sides of the same coin and we (the "west") pretty much fully accepted the one side a long time ago.
- mooreds 9y ago
  I remember reading about this decades ago in "One World, Ready or Not" by Greider: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/285435.One_World_Ready_or_Not https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/285435.One_World_Ready_o... Well worth the read to understand the different forces tugging on global corporations.
madeofpalk 9y ago
Maybe there's a middleground? You've still got to pick your battles and understand the scope of them. It's also entirely reasonable for a company to not to choose to follow a particular fight because it's too expensive or would have to much of an impact on the strategy of the company. If a company decides to not fund healthcare for everyone in the US, even if that aligned with their values and CSR, there's no need to take a cynical look at that.
- QAPereo 9y ago
  Definitely a middle ground but that's not what is being occupied here.
- jjoonathan 9y ago
  Aiding Chinese censorship for a quick buck is your idea of a "reasonable middleground"?
  - Steko 9y ago
    Apple's been 'aiding Chinese censorship' in hundreds of ways to the tune of billions of dollars for well over a decade and you were ok with it all until they took VPN's off the app store? Lol.
    - evanlivingston 9y ago
      If increased awareness isn't a reason to change our minds and we stubbornly stick to ideas we had a decade ago we're in trouble.
      - mistermann 9y ago
        "We're" already in trouble. Just like HN commenters wisely advise not to build your company on top of someone else's service, the entire planet has built their service on China's manufacturing. The thinking (if there even was any, I personally doubt it) was that we'd just use them for labor intensive but low intellectual assembly work, but it seems no one considered if China was happy to continue being the servant of the West indefinitely. China seems like a country happy to play the long game, but I don't think they're even going to have to.
        sangnoir 9y ago
        Amazon's Cloud services aren't made in China - it's the Chinese market they want, not Chinese factories. China depends on foreign markets for its factories output, but generally isn't as keen on having its (huge) market buying foreign goods and services. Having saturated their other markets, Western companies are desperate to tap into China to keep their growth numbers.
l04m33 9y ago
Agreed. In China, the government controls the flow of money. Sadly, there's a saying among us Chinese netizens: "China is now powerful/rich enough, that no one can actually save us from it."
- ttflee 9y ago
  China is a giant corporation-like kleptocracy, the product of which is the labour of Chinese people. Now that the population that output cheap labour wanes as the demographic data deteriorates. Situations will change.
  - adventured 9y ago
    Unlikely. Even now China has a surplus of 300 to 400 million people that work as subsistence farmers. There's nothing else for them to do. China's manufacturing is no longer expanding meaningfully. They have a truly massive supply of inexpensive labor still accordingly; however those people working as impoverished farmers have nowhere to go, and are held in place by the government, with no rights to property ownership of the farming land (which is also why China's farming productivity is so horrendous, it's intentional). They have hundreds of millions of people living on less than $5 per day still. It's one of the greatest supplies of available cheap labor on the planet, and it's not disappearing any time soon. Now that China has built up immense wealth domestically (along with the productivity, economic capability and infrastructure linked to that step-up), which is very tightly contained within its borders by law, the Communist Party's position is cemented. They have unlimited reach within their borders, they can use any of their industrial might for anything they want at any time, and they can seize any assets they want to at any time. That wealth isn't going away, and their ability to use/abuse it at will is also not going away. Their eventual population decline will do nothing more than than raise the median standard of living.
    - xor1 9y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system
    - 9y ago
jaggajasoos33 9y ago
Are you suggesting that a corporation should not obey local laws ? China's laws might be bad but I am not sure how Americans benefit by not providing a service. If China wanted access to servers in USA then it will be a different story (which I believe US government is already doing through backdoors). Let Chinese government hurt their own pace of innovation by putting politics before the market and let American stock market benefit from the access to such large market. It is going to be fun watching how it all unravels.

mc32 9y ago

When has that ever been in doubt with regard to China? To do any major business in China you have to partner with a local company --which typically have ties to the CCP. This is nothing new. Is there a difference btwn opening factories in China and legally outsourcing work to local cos which may or may not comply with even local labor and environmental laws and bowing to their local mores when it comes to softer areas like western ideas about civil liberties? That in no way means I agree with their view --I'm just asking are the two not different sides of the same coin and we (the "west") pretty much fully accepted the one side a long time ago.

mooreds 9y ago
I remember reading about this decades ago in "One World, Ready or Not" by Greider: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/285435.One_World_Ready_or_Not https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/285435.One_World_Ready_o... Well worth the read to understand the different forces tugging on global corporations.

madeofpalk 9y ago

Maybe there's a middleground? You've still got to pick your battles and understand the scope of them. It's also entirely reasonable for a company to not to choose to follow a particular fight because it's too expensive or would have to much of an impact on the strategy of the company. If a company decides to not fund healthcare for everyone in the US, even if that aligned with their values and CSR, there's no need to take a cynical look at that.

QAPereo 9y ago
Definitely a middle ground but that's not what is being occupied here.
jjoonathan 9y ago
Aiding Chinese censorship for a quick buck is your idea of a "reasonable middleground"?
- Steko 9y ago
  Apple's been 'aiding Chinese censorship' in hundreds of ways to the tune of billions of dollars for well over a decade and you were ok with it all until they took VPN's off the app store? Lol.
  - evanlivingston 9y ago
    If increased awareness isn't a reason to change our minds and we stubbornly stick to ideas we had a decade ago we're in trouble.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      "We're" already in trouble. Just like HN commenters wisely advise not to build your company on top of someone else's service, the entire planet has built their service on China's manufacturing. The thinking (if there even was any, I personally doubt it) was that we'd just use them for labor intensive but low intellectual assembly work, but it seems no one considered if China was happy to continue being the servant of the West indefinitely. China seems like a country happy to play the long game, but I don't think they're even going to have to.
      - sangnoir 9y ago
        Amazon's Cloud services aren't made in China - it's the Chinese market they want, not Chinese factories. China depends on foreign markets for its factories output, but generally isn't as keen on having its (huge) market buying foreign goods and services. Having saturated their other markets, Western companies are desperate to tap into China to keep their growth numbers.

l04m33 9y ago

Agreed. In China, the government controls the flow of money. Sadly, there's a saying among us Chinese netizens: "China is now powerful/rich enough, that no one can actually save us from it."

ttflee 9y ago
China is a giant corporation-like kleptocracy, the product of which is the labour of Chinese people. Now that the population that output cheap labour wanes as the demographic data deteriorates. Situations will change.
- adventured 9y ago
  Unlikely. Even now China has a surplus of 300 to 400 million people that work as subsistence farmers. There's nothing else for them to do. China's manufacturing is no longer expanding meaningfully. They have a truly massive supply of inexpensive labor still accordingly; however those people working as impoverished farmers have nowhere to go, and are held in place by the government, with no rights to property ownership of the farming land (which is also why China's farming productivity is so horrendous, it's intentional). They have hundreds of millions of people living on less than $5 per day still. It's one of the greatest supplies of available cheap labor on the planet, and it's not disappearing any time soon. Now that China has built up immense wealth domestically (along with the productivity, economic capability and infrastructure linked to that step-up), which is very tightly contained within its borders by law, the Communist Party's position is cemented. They have unlimited reach within their borders, they can use any of their industrial might for anything they want at any time, and they can seize any assets they want to at any time. That wealth isn't going away, and their ability to use/abuse it at will is also not going away. Their eventual population decline will do nothing more than than raise the median standard of living.
  - xor1 9y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system
  - 9y ago

jaggajasoos33 9y ago

Are you suggesting that a corporation should not obey local laws ? China's laws might be bad but I am not sure how Americans benefit by not providing a service. If China wanted access to servers in USA then it will be a different story (which I believe US government is already doing through backdoors). Let Chinese government hurt their own pace of innovation by putting politics before the market and let American stock market benefit from the access to such large market. It is going to be fun watching how it all unravels.