8 ms·

China unveils draft law to allow fully foreign-owned enterprises

142 points by beefman 8y ago

walrus01 8y ago
Foreign Owned Enterprises, like the one Erik Prince is setting up to help train armed government law enforcement authorities in Xinjiang province? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/business/erik-prince-xinjiang-china-fsg-blackwater.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/business/erik-prince-xinj...
toxik 8y ago
The recent press release of Ai Weiwei comes to mind, perhaps particularly this: > There are no clear laws, only interpretations of the law based on the Party’s interests. China is not a nation under the rule of law. China is a nation under the rule of the Party. https://www.gardinermuseum.on.ca/ai-weiwei-releases-statement-response-tensions-canada-china-ahead-exhibition-gardiner-museum/ https://www.gardinermuseum.on.ca/ai-weiwei-releases-statemen...
- TazeTSchnitzel 8y ago
  The Constitution of the Soviet Union guaranteed, among other things, freedom of speech.
  - pas 8y ago
    Maybe the PRC's constitution does the same, but there are always exceptions, for example for national security.
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      Any garauntee in the constitution is meaningless since the judiciary in China is not allowed to use it as a way to invalidate law. The party itself gets to decide whether they are following the constitution or not, imagine if Trump could make his executive orders without worrying about federal judges throwing them out.
      - duxup 8y ago
        Heck even the party has had issues with the judiciary at lower levels (things that didn't involve the party) where they found judges with limited education making strange decisions based on flawed logic, and of course low level corruption. While I'm sure they don't have any intention of making the judiciary independent, there were signs that even party members were a bit dismayed by some of the decisions if only because they were worried about public perception. I belive they talked about launching some educational efforts.
        seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        Judges aren’t really that prestigious in China because they are dwarfed in power and influence by officials, so as a result it doesn’t attract the best people.
        duxup 8y ago
        Yeah that is the impression I got too. Just another job to get if you're connected, but not really a good one. The result is a bit predictable.
    - jorblumesea 8y ago
      The point is it doesn't matter what is on paper, it's enforcement that matters. China can write whatever it wants, but it's actions that count. They are implementing a social credit system and actively censoring all communication platforms, who cares what their constitution says? It clearly doesn't matter what is written down. To go back to the original quote: > There are no clear laws, only interpretations of the law based on the Party’s interests. China is not a nation under the rule of law. China is a nation under the rule of the Party.
    - schuke 8y ago
      In reality national security is interpreted and enforced in such way that all free speech is a threat.
      - vivekd 8y ago
        Not defending China's level of freedom here, but our system in the West is increasingly moving in that direction. Our governments increasingly interpret national security and public safety unreasonably broadly to curtail basic freedoms
        shhehebehdh 8y ago
        No, it is not, at least if by West you mean to include the United States. There has never been a point in US history where we have been more free to say anything and everything.
        schuke 8y ago
        Certainly there have been cases in the West where free speech are curtailed due to concern or anxiety over national security. But while you guys are traveling north from Hawaii , we are already in the Arctic.
  - Pharmakon 8y ago
    As the Radio Yerevan jokes went: Radio Yerevan was asked: "Is it true that there is freedom of speech in the Soviet Union the same as there is the USA?" Radio Yerevan answered: "In principle, yes. In the USA, you can stand in front of the Washington Monument in Washington, DC, and yell, ´Down with Reagan!´, and you will not be punished. In the Soviet Union, you can stand in the Red Square in Moscow and yell, ´Down with Reagan!´, and you will not be punished. And Q: What is the difference between the Constitutions of the USA and USSR? Both guarantee freedom of speech. A: Yes, and the US Constitution also guarantees freedom after speech.
- awakeasleep 8y ago
  It's frustrating to consider how that same standard applies to the USA. We certainly have enough laws that everyone is a criminal and selective enforcement perverts the idea of justice. Of course, I'm not saying things are equally as corrupt as they are in China, but we're definitely on the same spectrum. Maybe the difference is, in the USA, "The Party" includes both big business AND the government.
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    It is always a spectrum. America is hardly perfect, but rule of law in the states is much more developed than in China. Especially constitutional law, which the CCP sees as a western abomination (so the Chinese constitution garauntees freedom of speech, religion, and so on, but is meaningless because the judiciary is not a check on the party).
    - threeseed 8y ago
      You only have to look at China's religious "re-education" camps to know that the government in no way defers to the Constitution or any other laws.
    - logicchains 8y ago
      "Article 51. Non-infringement of rights Citizens of the People's Republic of China, in exercising their freedoms and rights, may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society or of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens." So the constitution, even if followed perfectly, technically only guarantees such rights when they don't interfere with the interests of the state.
      - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        Sure. It basically means “the right is guaranteed, unless we don’t want to”. Which makes it meaningless in practice.
  - toxik 8y ago
    The US has an independent and democratic justice system. They are not on the same spectrum.
- hitsholy 8y ago
  Chinese constitution: "No state organization, social group or individual may force a citizen to accept or not to accept a religious faith, nor can they discriminate against either religious or non-religious citizens." Chinese government has - placed 1M muslims into internment camp - forced muslims to eat pork and drink alcohol - arrested muslims observing Ramedan - placed muslims in "re-education centers" to forcefully convert them. I don't trust anything this evil government says.
  - dkural 8y ago
    Here's some journalism on the matter: Washington Post: "China is creating concentration camps in Xinjiang. Here’s how we hold it accountable.": https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/china-is-creating-concentration-camps-in-xinjiang-heres-how-we-hold-it-accountable/2018/11/23/93dd8c34-e9d6-11e8-bbdb-72fdbf9d4fed_story.html?utm_term=.bd6d4e5dd86a https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/china-is-creating-co... NYTimes: "China Is Detaining Muslims in Vast Numbers. The Goal: ‘Transformation.’" https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/world/asia/china-uighur-muslim-detention-camp.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/world/asia/china-uighur-m... "China’s Detention Camps for Muslims Turn to Forced Labor" https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/world/asia/xinjiang-china-forced-labor-camps-uighurs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/world/asia/xinjiang-china... https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2019/02/07/reeducating-xinjiangs-muslims/ https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2019/02/07/reeducating-xinj... The parent comment calls this evil. Whole-scale internment of an entire population without any legal due process; resulting in deaths of those who resist; does fit the bill.
  - logicchains 8y ago
    If you read the two paragraphs after that: "The state protects normal religious activities. No one may make use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt public order, impair the health of citizens or interfere with the educational system of the state. Religious bodies and religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination." The Chinese government justifies their actions in Xinjiang as an attempt to prevent extremism (terrorists disrupting public order) and prevent foreign extremist influence, so technically the government could claim its actions in Xinjiang are "protecting normal religious activities". The statement that "religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination" could allow it to argue that it's free to define Islam however it sees fit, such that it could claim things like Ramedan are artifacts of foreign domination. Note that the government is not arbitrarily oppressing muslims; the muslim Hui minority are not being locked up, as they haven't been pressing for independence. The Chinese government doesn't care about religion, what it cares about is stopping anyone who tries to resist it, such as separatists, and the separatists in Xinjiang just happen to be muslims, and the government sees their religion as a motivating factor behind their separatism. Of course, this doesn't make it any more acceptable, I'm just pointing out that the Constitution as written gives the government a lot of leeway to do such things without technically breaching it. Another line: "Article 51. Non-infringement of rights Citizens of the People's Republic of China, in exercising their freedoms and rights, may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society or of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens." So the government could justify pretty much anything in the name of not allowing people to "infringe upon the interests of the state".
- vinceguidry 8y ago
  He's... not wrong. But it's important to realize that rule of law is an Anglo legal and cultural invention. Rule by humans is the default, 'natural' way of organizing human behavior, and innovations over that have to be iterated slowly. We simply cannot expect Western philosophical concepts, as great as they are, to simply be transplantable in other parts of the world just cuz it worked so great for us. Or does Mr. Weiwei expect the Chinese Communist Party to willfully give up power in order to put itself under a legal regime? Even Europe has moving slowly away from rule of law towards rule by international technocratic bureaucracy, borne out of the need to make a historically extremely heterogenous landmass peaceful. The UK was never going to be part of that tribe, it's fine with its rule of law.
  - barry-cotter 8y ago
    > He's... not wrong. But it's important to realize that rule of law is an Anglo legal and cultural invention. And Dutch, Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, German (speaking), Finnish, Latvian, Estonian at a minimum. The rule of law is very much not an Anglo thing. Outside North(Western) Europe where the rule of law absolutely was a thing you’d be pretty hard pressed to deny that it was never present in Iberia, particularly Aragon, Italy or the entirety of both Latin and Orthodox Christendom. Hell, the Ottoman Empire’s kanun law was based on... canon law. A government of laws, not men was an ideal dating back to Rome and indeed much earlier. But Christianity preserved Roman law. There were clearly areas that approached rule of law more and less closely but the idea that it’s an Anglo thing is historically ignorant to a ridiculous degree. How closely any particular state approached it varied a great deal, France and Hungary weren’t Prussia or Russia but they certainly weren’t England or Holland either. If you want to learn more about the various ways premodern societies ordered themselves Francis Fukuyama, Origins of Political Order, is a great place to start.
    - vinceguidry 8y ago
      Having laws, is not the same thing as having the rule of law. Rule of law refers to something quite specific. That at the very precipice of organizing principles of society, the people at that precipice, are themselves governed by law. Rule of law means we don't have to worry about Trump turning America into a dictatorship. If you have to worry about your leaders running away with power, then you don't have rule of law. The idea that Germany, of all countries, has the rule of law is absolutely laughable. This is the country that started WW2 for lebensraum. Everything Hitler did was totally legal. But he still was an autocrat. This is because Germany did not have the rule of law. Maybe after WW2 Germany figured out how to make sure their leaders can't seize total political control. I'd have to go look. But there's no way under the sun they had it before.
- webmobdev 8y ago
  It's easy to make laws, it's the interpretation and implementation that's the real test.
crazy5sheep 8y ago
And the Chinese govt can also have a thousand different ways other than law to harass foreign-owned companies. that said these law means nothing to real business in long-run, but just a response which attempts to fool the US govt for stopping the trade war.
- dmortin 8y ago
  If a company is in China then I assume most of the employees will be Chinese as before.
- DeonPenny 8y ago
  This time though the US plan on having a mechanism to allow them to swiftly punish china for using those abilities unlike before. Quartley reviews and what not with mandatory tariffs.
forkLding 8y ago
Ironically it seems in the comments that making this law means no difference, if so whats the point of a trade war.
- gred 8y ago
  Great question. My own reactions over the past months have been something along the lines of (1) "Not the best execution, but maybe we'll see some positive change..." -> (2) "Cool, looks like things may actually change!" -> (3) "Wait a minute, I don't trust that this is real... so what's the end game??"
- adventured 8y ago
  If the trade war concludes in a deal, more realistically there will likely be some improvement, while abuses in the national interest will also continue. Let's assume the worst case scenario however, that there is an expectation and result of zero improvement. The goal would be to push supply chains out of China by increasing political concerns and costs. Business hates chaos and risk in the supply chain. Whether some of that shift ends up being back to North America and Europe, or all of it goes to other nations in Asia that will never be the potential threat that China is, it's all a net gain strategically for the US and Europe. Indonesia + Vietnam + Bangladesh + Philippines = ~620 million people. Brazil + Mexico have 340 million (larger than the US). India has 1.3 billion. Nigeria has 190 million people. There are plenty of other places to consider when it comes to allocating investment for overseas manufacturing (depending on what you're making). It will take time and cost money to alter supply chains, however that is always an inevitability. Every few decades supply chains get remade due to cost changes, political issues, and so on.
starpucks 8y ago
And.... would you believe them? Would a corporation sink billions into there knowing full well they can come up with arbitrary laws to get their way? How about if there is a war fought, would you believe that they won’t sieze all the assets? How about getting money out of their country? And how about subjecting your company to the inevitable corporate espionage that will happen? Would their court system actually protect your company? Hmmmmmmm
- chrischen 8y ago
  Yes they already do that. Even Taiwanese companies like foxconn and HTC.
  - mistermann 8y ago
    The China of today seems less safe than the China of ten years ago though. Are foreign companies making big investments lately?
    - chrischen 8y ago
      Yes, Apple had done as well as an investment into Didi. You'll notice a lot of western brands in China from Mars (M&M), Nestle, General Motors, etc.
      - mistermann 8y ago
        The Apple investment was almost three years ago, were the others more recent? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-china/apple-invests-1-billion-in-chinese-ride-hailing-service-didi-chuxing-idUSKCN0Y404W https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-china/apple-invests...
        chrischen 8y ago
        Probably, but I’m not Google. Feel free to research yourself.
jorblumesea 8y ago
Why would you ever believe anything China says? Their game is clear and obvious at this point. Avoid that country like the plague if you care about the longevity of your business.
mrtweetyhack 8y ago
Now that the US is cracking down of IP theft and espionage, China's new method is to invite companies to come over and bring their tech to "share".
sonnyblarney 8y ago
Here's another gem of a 'law', Constitutional no less: "Article 35 of the 1982 State Constitution proclaims that "citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession, and of demonstration."" [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s...
- logicchains 8y ago
  "Article 51. Non-infringement of rights Citizens of the People's Republic of China, in exercising their freedoms and rights, may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society or of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens." So technically those rights may only be exercised when they don't "infringe upon the interests of the state".
uhrlocher 8y ago
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-silicon-valley-so-awful-to-women/517788/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-... https://www.newsweek.com/2016/06/17/silicon-valley-takeover-468182.html https://www.newsweek.com/2016/06/17/silicon-valley-takeover-... https://medium.com/@preethikasireddy/why-im-leaving-silicon-valley-72919edb3297 https://medium.com/@preethikasireddy/why-im-leaving-silicon-... https://getlighthouse.com/blog/silicon-valley-bad-managers/ https://getlighthouse.com/blog/silicon-valley-bad-managers/ https://www.philanthropy.com/article/A-Star-Performer-Created-a/243159 https://www.philanthropy.com/article/A-Star-Performer-Create... https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/a-valley-too-far-is-the-toxic-culture-of-the-tech-world-beyond-repair/article35610645/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/internati... https://www.geekwire.com/2018/emily-chang-brotopia-silicon-valley-companies-can-tackle-toxic-culture/ https://www.geekwire.com/2018/emily-chang-brotopia-silicon-v... https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/297481 https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/297481 https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/03/11/bro-culture-poisoning-silicon-valley/ https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/03/11/bro-culture-poison... https://www.quora.com/Is-the-culture-in-the-Silicon-Valley-becoming-increasingly-toxic?share=1 https://www.quora.com/Is-the-culture-in-the-Silicon-Valley-b... https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/ellen-pao-memoir-silicon-valley-toxic-culture https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/ellen-pao-memoir-sil... https://www.recode.net/2018/2/5/16972096/emily-chang-brotopia-book-bloomberg-technology-culture-silicon-valley-kara-swisher-decode-podcast https://www.recode.net/2018/2/5/16972096/emily-chang-brotopi... https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Silicon-Valley-Community-Foundation-Reviews-E331546.htm https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Silicon-Valley-Community-F... https://www.wired.com/story/everyone-hates-silicon-valley-except-its-imitators/ https://www.wired.com/story/everyone-hates-silicon-valley-ex... https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/silicon-valley-has-lost-its-soul https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/silicon-valley... https://yourstory.com/2017/07/silicon-valley-bro-culture/ https://yourstory.com/2017/07/silicon-valley-bro-culture/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-quiet-efforts-to-battle-silicon-valleys-bro-culture-1541943938 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-quiet-efforts-to-battle-sil... https://thebolditalic.com/a-source-of-sorrow-in-silicon-valley-1a81ccd80ac2?gi=bc741a45779e https://thebolditalic.com/a-source-of-sorrow-in-silicon-vall... https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2019/01/25/is-silicon-valley-the-real-villain-in-the-theranos.html https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2019/01/25/is-... https://www.rawstory.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-become-next-detroit-struggles-survive-toxic-mess-created/ https://www.rawstory.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-become-next-... https://builttoadapt.io/so-you-want-to-build-a-silicon-valley-like-software-developer-culture-focus-on-the-people-809ddf4c426a?gi=af0b0c66fd4f https://builttoadapt.io/so-you-want-to-build-a-silicon-valle... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3-bMDaMhLg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3-bMDaMhLg https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/01/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-startups https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/01/silicon-valley... https://www.indiewire.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-actress-alice-wetterlund-t-j-miller-co-stars-enabled-bullying-1201985168/# https://www.indiewire.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-actress-ali...! https://www.theneweconomy.com/technology/silicons-sexist-brogrammer-culture-is-locking-women-out-of-tech https://www.theneweconomy.com/technology/silicons-sexist-bro... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17051800 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17051800 https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/sections/schools/210-school-features/55819- https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/sections/schools/210-sch...
rhegart 8y ago
Good work Trump. The one thing I absolutely love about his administration is the pressure on China. Didn’t back down from all the pressure from literally every group. His method works, he’s getting concessions. The TPP at its best would be 1/100th as effective and would have taken 20+ years to implement. Our cyberwar truce was a joke policy.
- NicoJuicy 8y ago
  No, he is not. He's still getting an empty hand dealed by the dealer.
- justaguyhere 8y ago
  His method works Okay, can you list real, permanent, verifiable changes as a result of his "method" (whatever that is)? Anyone can get empty promises, empty laws that have no teeth etc for PR purposes...
dbuder 8y ago
This is great, why is this thread so negative? Doesn't anyone here want to go and do business in China? The previous setup led to so many scams and ripoffs. Get in now before they ban it bc Chinese people will attribute foreign owned companies as having better quality.
Proven 8y ago
The China government actually needs US$. Most foreign-owned enterprises would continue operate in a non-free environment where everything is tilted against them. Investing in China used to be a great idea for the management who'd sell China growth story to cash out on stock options, but on the whole it did little for the shareholders. I would say the great majority of investments either lost money or had enough IP stolen to outweigh any meager profits that were made operating there.
mmwelt 8y ago
So what's the difference between WFOE's (Wholly Foreign-Owned Enterprises[1]) and the new fully foreign-owned enterprises? WFOE's have existed for a while. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterpris...
baybal2 8y ago
Misnomer here, wholly foreign owned companies were there there for more than a decade. What the law is said to do is to remove "qualitative distinctions" in between 3 foreign owned company types. It will not end the prohibition on foreign ownership in restricted industries. What it will do is that the state will not be allowed to say "you can't do that, but we will let you do it in a joint venture" Now, the question in between doing a JV and setting up an own company is up to an applicant in every industry.

142 points by beefman 8y ago

Foreign Owned Enterprises, like the one Erik Prince is setting up to help train armed government law enforcement authorities in Xinjiang province? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/business/erik-prince-xinjiang-china-fsg-blackwater.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/business/erik-prince-xinj...

toxik 8y ago

The recent press release of Ai Weiwei comes to mind, perhaps particularly this: > There are no clear laws, only interpretations of the law based on the Party’s interests. China is not a nation under the rule of law. China is a nation under the rule of the Party. https://www.gardinermuseum.on.ca/ai-weiwei-releases-statement-response-tensions-canada-china-ahead-exhibition-gardiner-museum/ https://www.gardinermuseum.on.ca/ai-weiwei-releases-statemen...

TazeTSchnitzel 8y ago
The Constitution of the Soviet Union guaranteed, among other things, freedom of speech.
- pas 8y ago
  Maybe the PRC's constitution does the same, but there are always exceptions, for example for national security.
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    Any garauntee in the constitution is meaningless since the judiciary in China is not allowed to use it as a way to invalidate law. The party itself gets to decide whether they are following the constitution or not, imagine if Trump could make his executive orders without worrying about federal judges throwing them out.
    - duxup 8y ago
      Heck even the party has had issues with the judiciary at lower levels (things that didn't involve the party) where they found judges with limited education making strange decisions based on flawed logic, and of course low level corruption. While I'm sure they don't have any intention of making the judiciary independent, there were signs that even party members were a bit dismayed by some of the decisions if only because they were worried about public perception. I belive they talked about launching some educational efforts.
      - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        Judges aren’t really that prestigious in China because they are dwarfed in power and influence by officials, so as a result it doesn’t attract the best people.
        duxup 8y ago
        Yeah that is the impression I got too. Just another job to get if you're connected, but not really a good one. The result is a bit predictable.
  - jorblumesea 8y ago
    The point is it doesn't matter what is on paper, it's enforcement that matters. China can write whatever it wants, but it's actions that count. They are implementing a social credit system and actively censoring all communication platforms, who cares what their constitution says? It clearly doesn't matter what is written down. To go back to the original quote: > There are no clear laws, only interpretations of the law based on the Party’s interests. China is not a nation under the rule of law. China is a nation under the rule of the Party.
  - schuke 8y ago
    In reality national security is interpreted and enforced in such way that all free speech is a threat.
    - vivekd 8y ago
      Not defending China's level of freedom here, but our system in the West is increasingly moving in that direction. Our governments increasingly interpret national security and public safety unreasonably broadly to curtail basic freedoms
      - shhehebehdh 8y ago
        No, it is not, at least if by West you mean to include the United States. There has never been a point in US history where we have been more free to say anything and everything.
      - schuke 8y ago
        Certainly there have been cases in the West where free speech are curtailed due to concern or anxiety over national security. But while you guys are traveling north from Hawaii , we are already in the Arctic.
- Pharmakon 8y ago
  As the Radio Yerevan jokes went: Radio Yerevan was asked: "Is it true that there is freedom of speech in the Soviet Union the same as there is the USA?" Radio Yerevan answered: "In principle, yes. In the USA, you can stand in front of the Washington Monument in Washington, DC, and yell, ´Down with Reagan!´, and you will not be punished. In the Soviet Union, you can stand in the Red Square in Moscow and yell, ´Down with Reagan!´, and you will not be punished. And Q: What is the difference between the Constitutions of the USA and USSR? Both guarantee freedom of speech. A: Yes, and the US Constitution also guarantees freedom after speech.
awakeasleep 8y ago
It's frustrating to consider how that same standard applies to the USA. We certainly have enough laws that everyone is a criminal and selective enforcement perverts the idea of justice. Of course, I'm not saying things are equally as corrupt as they are in China, but we're definitely on the same spectrum. Maybe the difference is, in the USA, "The Party" includes both big business AND the government.
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  It is always a spectrum. America is hardly perfect, but rule of law in the states is much more developed than in China. Especially constitutional law, which the CCP sees as a western abomination (so the Chinese constitution garauntees freedom of speech, religion, and so on, but is meaningless because the judiciary is not a check on the party).
  - threeseed 8y ago
    You only have to look at China's religious "re-education" camps to know that the government in no way defers to the Constitution or any other laws.
  - logicchains 8y ago
    "Article 51. Non-infringement of rights Citizens of the People's Republic of China, in exercising their freedoms and rights, may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society or of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens." So the constitution, even if followed perfectly, technically only guarantees such rights when they don't interfere with the interests of the state.
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      Sure. It basically means “the right is guaranteed, unless we don’t want to”. Which makes it meaningless in practice.
- toxik 8y ago
  The US has an independent and democratic justice system. They are not on the same spectrum.
hitsholy 8y ago
Chinese constitution: "No state organization, social group or individual may force a citizen to accept or not to accept a religious faith, nor can they discriminate against either religious or non-religious citizens." Chinese government has - placed 1M muslims into internment camp - forced muslims to eat pork and drink alcohol - arrested muslims observing Ramedan - placed muslims in "re-education centers" to forcefully convert them. I don't trust anything this evil government says.
- dkural 8y ago
  Here's some journalism on the matter: Washington Post: "China is creating concentration camps in Xinjiang. Here’s how we hold it accountable.": https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/china-is-creating-concentration-camps-in-xinjiang-heres-how-we-hold-it-accountable/2018/11/23/93dd8c34-e9d6-11e8-bbdb-72fdbf9d4fed_story.html?utm_term=.bd6d4e5dd86a https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/china-is-creating-co... NYTimes: "China Is Detaining Muslims in Vast Numbers. The Goal: ‘Transformation.’" https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/world/asia/china-uighur-muslim-detention-camp.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/world/asia/china-uighur-m... "China’s Detention Camps for Muslims Turn to Forced Labor" https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/world/asia/xinjiang-china-forced-labor-camps-uighurs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/world/asia/xinjiang-china... https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2019/02/07/reeducating-xinjiangs-muslims/ https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2019/02/07/reeducating-xinj... The parent comment calls this evil. Whole-scale internment of an entire population without any legal due process; resulting in deaths of those who resist; does fit the bill.
- logicchains 8y ago
  If you read the two paragraphs after that: "The state protects normal religious activities. No one may make use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt public order, impair the health of citizens or interfere with the educational system of the state. Religious bodies and religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination." The Chinese government justifies their actions in Xinjiang as an attempt to prevent extremism (terrorists disrupting public order) and prevent foreign extremist influence, so technically the government could claim its actions in Xinjiang are "protecting normal religious activities". The statement that "religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination" could allow it to argue that it's free to define Islam however it sees fit, such that it could claim things like Ramedan are artifacts of foreign domination. Note that the government is not arbitrarily oppressing muslims; the muslim Hui minority are not being locked up, as they haven't been pressing for independence. The Chinese government doesn't care about religion, what it cares about is stopping anyone who tries to resist it, such as separatists, and the separatists in Xinjiang just happen to be muslims, and the government sees their religion as a motivating factor behind their separatism. Of course, this doesn't make it any more acceptable, I'm just pointing out that the Constitution as written gives the government a lot of leeway to do such things without technically breaching it. Another line: "Article 51. Non-infringement of rights Citizens of the People's Republic of China, in exercising their freedoms and rights, may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society or of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens." So the government could justify pretty much anything in the name of not allowing people to "infringe upon the interests of the state".
vinceguidry 8y ago
He's... not wrong. But it's important to realize that rule of law is an Anglo legal and cultural invention. Rule by humans is the default, 'natural' way of organizing human behavior, and innovations over that have to be iterated slowly. We simply cannot expect Western philosophical concepts, as great as they are, to simply be transplantable in other parts of the world just cuz it worked so great for us. Or does Mr. Weiwei expect the Chinese Communist Party to willfully give up power in order to put itself under a legal regime? Even Europe has moving slowly away from rule of law towards rule by international technocratic bureaucracy, borne out of the need to make a historically extremely heterogenous landmass peaceful. The UK was never going to be part of that tribe, it's fine with its rule of law.
- barry-cotter 8y ago
  > He's... not wrong. But it's important to realize that rule of law is an Anglo legal and cultural invention. And Dutch, Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, German (speaking), Finnish, Latvian, Estonian at a minimum. The rule of law is very much not an Anglo thing. Outside North(Western) Europe where the rule of law absolutely was a thing you’d be pretty hard pressed to deny that it was never present in Iberia, particularly Aragon, Italy or the entirety of both Latin and Orthodox Christendom. Hell, the Ottoman Empire’s kanun law was based on... canon law. A government of laws, not men was an ideal dating back to Rome and indeed much earlier. But Christianity preserved Roman law. There were clearly areas that approached rule of law more and less closely but the idea that it’s an Anglo thing is historically ignorant to a ridiculous degree. How closely any particular state approached it varied a great deal, France and Hungary weren’t Prussia or Russia but they certainly weren’t England or Holland either. If you want to learn more about the various ways premodern societies ordered themselves Francis Fukuyama, Origins of Political Order, is a great place to start.
  - vinceguidry 8y ago
    Having laws, is not the same thing as having the rule of law. Rule of law refers to something quite specific. That at the very precipice of organizing principles of society, the people at that precipice, are themselves governed by law. Rule of law means we don't have to worry about Trump turning America into a dictatorship. If you have to worry about your leaders running away with power, then you don't have rule of law. The idea that Germany, of all countries, has the rule of law is absolutely laughable. This is the country that started WW2 for lebensraum. Everything Hitler did was totally legal. But he still was an autocrat. This is because Germany did not have the rule of law. Maybe after WW2 Germany figured out how to make sure their leaders can't seize total political control. I'd have to go look. But there's no way under the sun they had it before.
webmobdev 8y ago
It's easy to make laws, it's the interpretation and implementation that's the real test.

crazy5sheep 8y ago

And the Chinese govt can also have a thousand different ways other than law to harass foreign-owned companies. that said these law means nothing to real business in long-run, but just a response which attempts to fool the US govt for stopping the trade war.

dmortin 8y ago
If a company is in China then I assume most of the employees will be Chinese as before.
DeonPenny 8y ago
This time though the US plan on having a mechanism to allow them to swiftly punish china for using those abilities unlike before. Quartley reviews and what not with mandatory tariffs.

forkLding 8y ago

Ironically it seems in the comments that making this law means no difference, if so whats the point of a trade war.

gred 8y ago
Great question. My own reactions over the past months have been something along the lines of (1) "Not the best execution, but maybe we'll see some positive change..." -> (2) "Cool, looks like things may actually change!" -> (3) "Wait a minute, I don't trust that this is real... so what's the end game??"
adventured 8y ago
If the trade war concludes in a deal, more realistically there will likely be some improvement, while abuses in the national interest will also continue. Let's assume the worst case scenario however, that there is an expectation and result of zero improvement. The goal would be to push supply chains out of China by increasing political concerns and costs. Business hates chaos and risk in the supply chain. Whether some of that shift ends up being back to North America and Europe, or all of it goes to other nations in Asia that will never be the potential threat that China is, it's all a net gain strategically for the US and Europe. Indonesia + Vietnam + Bangladesh + Philippines = ~620 million people. Brazil + Mexico have 340 million (larger than the US). India has 1.3 billion. Nigeria has 190 million people. There are plenty of other places to consider when it comes to allocating investment for overseas manufacturing (depending on what you're making). It will take time and cost money to alter supply chains, however that is always an inevitability. Every few decades supply chains get remade due to cost changes, political issues, and so on.

starpucks 8y ago

And.... would you believe them? Would a corporation sink billions into there knowing full well they can come up with arbitrary laws to get their way? How about if there is a war fought, would you believe that they won’t sieze all the assets? How about getting money out of their country? And how about subjecting your company to the inevitable corporate espionage that will happen? Would their court system actually protect your company? Hmmmmmmm

chrischen 8y ago
Yes they already do that. Even Taiwanese companies like foxconn and HTC.
- mistermann 8y ago
  The China of today seems less safe than the China of ten years ago though. Are foreign companies making big investments lately?
  - chrischen 8y ago
    Yes, Apple had done as well as an investment into Didi. You'll notice a lot of western brands in China from Mars (M&M), Nestle, General Motors, etc.
    - mistermann 8y ago
      The Apple investment was almost three years ago, were the others more recent? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-china/apple-invests-1-billion-in-chinese-ride-hailing-service-didi-chuxing-idUSKCN0Y404W https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-china/apple-invests...
      - chrischen 8y ago
        Probably, but I’m not Google. Feel free to research yourself.

jorblumesea 8y ago

Why would you ever believe anything China says? Their game is clear and obvious at this point. Avoid that country like the plague if you care about the longevity of your business.

mrtweetyhack 8y ago

Now that the US is cracking down of IP theft and espionage, China's new method is to invite companies to come over and bring their tech to "share".

sonnyblarney 8y ago

Here's another gem of a 'law', Constitutional no less: "Article 35 of the 1982 State Constitution proclaims that "citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession, and of demonstration."" [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s...

logicchains 8y ago
"Article 51. Non-infringement of rights Citizens of the People's Republic of China, in exercising their freedoms and rights, may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society or of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens." So technically those rights may only be exercised when they don't "infringe upon the interests of the state".

uhrlocher 8y ago

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-silicon-valley-so-awful-to-women/517788/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-... https://www.newsweek.com/2016/06/17/silicon-valley-takeover-468182.html https://www.newsweek.com/2016/06/17/silicon-valley-takeover-... https://medium.com/@preethikasireddy/why-im-leaving-silicon-valley-72919edb3297 https://medium.com/@preethikasireddy/why-im-leaving-silicon-... https://getlighthouse.com/blog/silicon-valley-bad-managers/ https://getlighthouse.com/blog/silicon-valley-bad-managers/ https://www.philanthropy.com/article/A-Star-Performer-Created-a/243159 https://www.philanthropy.com/article/A-Star-Performer-Create... https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/a-valley-too-far-is-the-toxic-culture-of-the-tech-world-beyond-repair/article35610645/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/internati... https://www.geekwire.com/2018/emily-chang-brotopia-silicon-valley-companies-can-tackle-toxic-culture/ https://www.geekwire.com/2018/emily-chang-brotopia-silicon-v... https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/297481 https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/297481 https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/03/11/bro-culture-poisoning-silicon-valley/ https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/03/11/bro-culture-poison... https://www.quora.com/Is-the-culture-in-the-Silicon-Valley-becoming-increasingly-toxic?share=1 https://www.quora.com/Is-the-culture-in-the-Silicon-Valley-b... https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/ellen-pao-memoir-silicon-valley-toxic-culture https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/ellen-pao-memoir-sil... https://www.recode.net/2018/2/5/16972096/emily-chang-brotopia-book-bloomberg-technology-culture-silicon-valley-kara-swisher-decode-podcast https://www.recode.net/2018/2/5/16972096/emily-chang-brotopi... https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Silicon-Valley-Community-Foundation-Reviews-E331546.htm https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Silicon-Valley-Community-F... https://www.wired.com/story/everyone-hates-silicon-valley-except-its-imitators/ https://www.wired.com/story/everyone-hates-silicon-valley-ex... https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/silicon-valley-has-lost-its-soul https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/silicon-valley... https://yourstory.com/2017/07/silicon-valley-bro-culture/ https://yourstory.com/2017/07/silicon-valley-bro-culture/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-quiet-efforts-to-battle-silicon-valleys-bro-culture-1541943938 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-quiet-efforts-to-battle-sil... https://thebolditalic.com/a-source-of-sorrow-in-silicon-valley-1a81ccd80ac2?gi=bc741a45779e https://thebolditalic.com/a-source-of-sorrow-in-silicon-vall... https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2019/01/25/is-silicon-valley-the-real-villain-in-the-theranos.html https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2019/01/25/is-... https://www.rawstory.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-become-next-detroit-struggles-survive-toxic-mess-created/ https://www.rawstory.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-become-next-... https://builttoadapt.io/so-you-want-to-build-a-silicon-valley-like-software-developer-culture-focus-on-the-people-809ddf4c426a?gi=af0b0c66fd4f https://builttoadapt.io/so-you-want-to-build-a-silicon-valle... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3-bMDaMhLg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3-bMDaMhLg https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/01/silicon-valley-sexual-harassment-startups https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/01/silicon-valley... https://www.indiewire.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-actress-alice-wetterlund-t-j-miller-co-stars-enabled-bullying-1201985168/# https://www.indiewire.com/2018/07/silicon-valley-actress-ali...! https://www.theneweconomy.com/technology/silicons-sexist-brogrammer-culture-is-locking-women-out-of-tech https://www.theneweconomy.com/technology/silicons-sexist-bro... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17051800 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17051800 https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/sections/schools/210-school-features/55819- https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/sections/schools/210-sch...

rhegart 8y ago

Good work Trump. The one thing I absolutely love about his administration is the pressure on China. Didn’t back down from all the pressure from literally every group. His method works, he’s getting concessions. The TPP at its best would be 1/100th as effective and would have taken 20+ years to implement. Our cyberwar truce was a joke policy.

NicoJuicy 8y ago
No, he is not. He's still getting an empty hand dealed by the dealer.
justaguyhere 8y ago
His method works Okay, can you list real, permanent, verifiable changes as a result of his "method" (whatever that is)? Anyone can get empty promises, empty laws that have no teeth etc for PR purposes...

dbuder 8y ago

This is great, why is this thread so negative? Doesn't anyone here want to go and do business in China? The previous setup led to so many scams and ripoffs. Get in now before they ban it bc Chinese people will attribute foreign owned companies as having better quality.

Proven 8y ago

The China government actually needs US$. Most foreign-owned enterprises would continue operate in a non-free environment where everything is tilted against them. Investing in China used to be a great idea for the management who'd sell China growth story to cash out on stock options, but on the whole it did little for the shareholders. I would say the great majority of investments either lost money or had enough IP stolen to outweigh any meager profits that were made operating there.

mmwelt 8y ago

So what's the difference between WFOE's (Wholly Foreign-Owned Enterprises[1]) and the new fully foreign-owned enterprises? WFOE's have existed for a while. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholly_Foreign-Owned_Enterpris...

baybal2 8y ago

Misnomer here, wholly foreign owned companies were there there for more than a decade. What the law is said to do is to remove "qualitative distinctions" in between 3 foreign owned company types. It will not end the prohibition on foreign ownership in restricted industries. What it will do is that the state will not be allowed to say "you can't do that, but we will let you do it in a joint venture" Now, the question in between doing a JV and setting up an own company is up to an applicant in every industry.