3 ms·
>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?
by 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.