7 ms·
The Chinese Threat to American Speech
- 100011 7y agoTrump supporters obviously unavailable for comment, due to suppression by local Red Guard.
- dang 7y agoPlease don't post unsubstantive comments or flamebait here.
- okasaki 7y ago>American companies have an obligation to defend the freedom of expression, even at the risk of angering China. No they don't, nor have they ever?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- Waterluvian 7y agoIt feels too obvious to bother saying, but companies jobs are to be on a one track mind: making money. The government's role is to legislate detours to that track, overriding anything important enough but that capitalism doesn't naturally deal with. This might be one of those detours: go make money but bam tarrifs or some other mechanism to chill overreaching foreign influences.
- EliRivers 7y agoMany businesses appear to disagree; "they must also invest in their employees, protect the environment and deal fairly and ethically with their suppliers" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/business/business-roundtable-ceos-corporations.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/business/business-roundta... Maybe it's just lip-service, but the cancer of "shareholder value" above all else, that grew so strong that people even believe it's a legal obligation, is not so strong as it once was.
- Udik 7y ago>American companies have an obligation to defend the freedom of expression, even at the risk of angering China. It's interesting to mull over this concept in the light of all the "free speech only means that the government can't imprison you, but companies are perfectly free to fire you if they don't like what you say" discourse.
- eth0up 7y agoThe existence of debate on this subject worries me more than China itself. It signifies the threat is within. To many, the 1st or any amendment to the Bill of Rights is modifiable at the whim of each meandering generation or trend. We've steadily watched them erode, most notably for me, Habeas corpus and number 4. I don't want to start an argument here, but it seems that rights modifiable through caprice are doomed. Some things (but few) ought be impervious.
- Coffeewine 7y agoIt’s slightly ironic that were even having this conversation because the Chinese government is a (for all but a few) safe topic for Americans to criticize. There is no shortage of companies within the United States were criticizing say, Christianity would result in censure, but we don’t see that as a first amendment violation in the same way.
- kolanos 7y ago> It’s slightly ironic that were even having this conversation because the Chinese government is a (for all but a few) safe topic for Americans to criticize. Those unsafe topics are multiplying and the distinction is that China is attempting to suppress speech in the United States. Any examples of the U.S. suppressing speech in China? > There is no shortage of companies within the United States were criticizing say, Christianity would result in censure, but we don’t see that as a first amendment violation in the same way. Don't follow. Christianity is openly criticized in the U.S., such as by media companies. See the Catholic Church pedophilia scandals for examples. Then imagine a similar scandal implicating the powerful being openly discussed in China... If the Catholic Church was compelling the U.S. government to suppress speech in regards to its numerous scandals, you better believe that'd be a first amendment issue.
- rhoyerboat 7y agoWhen considering to open my mouth a little about free speech and China, I think of all the human-rights negative consumerism I partake of with or without much guilt. Stomach-shuddering just a little bit, I probably keep my mouth mostly shut.
- woodandsteel 7y agoThe Chinese government's position is that it has the right to criticize any other country, but no one inside or outside China has a right to criticize it. Now the above statement is not completely true, but it is pretty close.