18 ms·

U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

228 points by ilamont 6y ago

garraeth 6y ago
Original title: "Attorney General Barr accuses Hollywood, Big Tech of collaborating with China"
- blaser-waffle 6y ago
  He's not wrong. But it also doesn't make him any less of an asshole -- Barr is a shady character.
  - cpr 6y ago
    Sure, if you only pay attention to the MSM...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - xbar 6y ago
    This.
- dang 6y ago
  I reverted it, but then reverted my reversion. The submitted title is marginally less baity, so I'm thinking ilamont did a good job of following the guideline: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    Hmm, perhaps the URL title would be better? > Attorney General Barr Takes Aim at Hollywood, Disney For Censoring Films to Appease China
    - dang 6y ago
      Good point, but then the tech cos are left out. I've squeezed Hollywood in instead.
tehjoker 6y ago
The USG is crazy. It's another red scare. Ofc, as a promoter of global capitalism, it's hilarious to see the government complaining that the multinationals that they cultivated are doing business internationally. For those of you downvoting, explain to me how language like "pawns of Chinese influence" isn't just insane propaganda? EDIT2: For what it's worth, I do have a bone to pick with China over their treatment of Xinjiang province, but lol if you think the USG ever uses human rights as anything other than a stick to beat enemy countries over. Put another way: CIA guy whose ex-OSS dad gave Jeffery Epstein his first fake job teaching math is now ginning up fake nationalism. News at 11.
- entropea 6y ago
  We opened completely free trade to China so businesses could cut labor costs decades ago. It's just built into our system. What did everyone expect? You're absolutely right that this is another red scare. It's honestly reminiscent of post 9/11 domestic support of the majority of USA population to bomb the middle east. You're not even allowed to talk about China in US society anymore unless you're furious with rage for them.
  - Consultant32452 6y ago
    I'd like to try an experiment where China ends the ongoing slavery and genocides within its borders and let's see if there's less rage.
    - tehjoker 6y ago
      I'd like to see an experiment where the united states stops killing people at the border, just letting people in prison die from COVID, and attacking peaceful protestors with military equipment. See how that works? Let us not forget the founding of the country was based on genocide and slavery. We ally with regressive states like Saudi Arabia and formerly places like nuclear apartheid South Africa. Only protests and rebellions move the needle on how shitty the government is here.
      - 6y ago
Shivetya 6y ago
They need to be called out. The amount of virtue signaling these companies do in the US does not excuse their actions elsewhere. This is not confined to the US either, countries in other parts of the world will engage in actions for the Chinese government they would not do at home or without great public fanfare about how they are against it.
- birken 6y ago
  What is the difference between virtue signaling and marketing when a corporation is doing it?
  - MR4D 6y ago
    Virtue signaling implies morals. Marketing doesn't.
    - brighton36 6y ago
      I used to think that. Marketing is all about moralizing the product.
  - dx87 6y ago
    I think virtue signaling would be saying something to stave off public criticism with no direct monetary benefit, and marketing would be like companies that support gay rights because it means they can sell a bunch of rainbow colored merchandise during pride month.
    - pwillia7 6y ago
      What motive would a company (of sufficient size) have to signal virtue if not in pursuit of profits? Companies without an all powerful strongman on top are amoral, and primarily in the U.S. are only concerned with their shareholders as opposed to all stake holders in the chain's long term value and health. https://www.inc.com/maureen-kline/why-debate-over-stakeholder-value-vs-shareholder-value-is-all-wrong.html https://www.inc.com/maureen-kline/why-debate-over-stakeholde...
threatofrain 6y ago
> Barr suggested that Apple iPhones “wouldn’t be sold (in China) if they were impervious to penetration by Chinese authorities.” He suggested American tech companies were imposing a “double standard.”
- fouc 6y ago
  IIRC, last year Apple setup a server within China for holding the iCloud security keys for the Chinese-owned iPhones? Definitely some collaboration there..
  - filoleg 6y ago
    Well, that just makes it sound like iPhones sold in China were vulnerable for penetration by Chinese authorities because the decryption keys for those were stored in China, not that iPhones overall were vulnerable. Which makes that whole argument by Barr very weak.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    iCloud in China is operated by Guizhou-Cloud Big Data Industry Co Ltd, which is owned by the Guizhou provincial government. As I understand, it isn't Apple's servers at all. China has some strict protectionist policies for a fairly decent list industries, not just tech. Many foreign companies that operate in China have to do so through joint ventures or other partnerships with domestic Chinese companies. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208351 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208351 http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201801/11/WS5a56a3cca3102e5b17374107.html http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201801/11/WS5a56a3cca3102e5b1...
    - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
      The list of sectors that require joint ventures and majority Chinese ownership has been decreasing over time. Most sectors do not have such restrictions nowadays. For several decades, there has been a general trend - which was greatly accelerated by China's WTO accession - of barriers to trade decreasing in China. In popular discussions of China's trade and economic policies in the West, there's rarely any recognition of this fact. Average tariffs have been reduced to about 3.4%, which is about the same level as the US applied as recently as the mid-1990s. Much of the state sector was privatized and the majority of the economy is now private. Intellectual property enforcement is way up - it's been completely overhauled in just the last 6 years, with specialized courts set up and a very large volume of IP cases being heard every year now. There have been huge changes, which most of the public in the West has little to no idea bout, and which find no reflection in the popular discussion.
vmception 6y ago
What it really comes down to is determining if we are doing the Cold War thing or not. To many of us, the cold war is over, and the other 300 years of rolling the nation state concept across the world is over too. As it is very easy to operate in a borderless global economy - at least between major economic unions - if you are privileged enough. If you absolutely need people to pick a side again, just say so. Otherwise you need to realize that its all in your head, not everyone is looking at the world the same way, both/all major countries are very similar and this will always be a "trigger" for you when people point it out. But if this is really so irreconcilable and necessary for people to pick a side because we're doing the cold war thing again, then you need to say so. Americans will pick America if thats what its coming down to. But just assuming we are in that state and that everyone else is assuming the same thing, thats just going to go nowhere.
- tomp 6y ago
  The problem is, if you think you’re not in a Cold War while the other guy thinks you are. Before you realize it, it’s already too late.
  - blaser-waffle 6y ago
    To be clear, the Chinese plainly think the US is a rival, and have been pushing on things harder than usual to test what the global response is.
    - vmception 6y ago
      US leaders need to make it clear how they expect Americans and American countries (edit: I meant companies) to act, via new and existing legislation and orders. Absent that, the incentives just aren't there. There is a way to do business/life in China where you aren’t exposed to the things we disagree about with China, and its also now a very large market based economy with all the trappings and comforts of being rich in the west....
      - user555555555 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ideals 6y ago
This about the USG not having as many spying capabilities as China, not about shoring up spying capabilities of China. For reference EARNIT act https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-constitution https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-c...
paxys 6y ago
Conveniently left out are all the Republican-friendly companies and industries which do the same (and more). Automobile, equipment manufacturers, aircrafts, fast food, clothing, sports leagues...everyone bows down to money. This is the obvious result of our capitalist system. What's the point in calling out a handful of tech companies?
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  Critiques of the “capitalist system” would be better if you articulated a system that worked better on balance. In other words, a system that solves for these problems, but which introduces many other, worse problems (e.g., famine, ethnic cleansing, imprisonment/execution of political dissenters, etc) is not a better system on balance. If we struggle to find such an improved system, it probably means that the current capitalist system simply needs some reform in order to optimize it—perhaps this means better regulation of the markets, more socialization in a few key areas (e.g., healthcare, etc), or reducing government corruption. This would make for a much improved conversation, IMHO. EDIT: a lot of people seem to be taking issue with this comment, but I don’t understand the gripe. Presumably the logic is sound that critiques are more interesting if they discuss tradeoffs? Or maybe there is some obvious system that lacks all of the problems of our current system and introduces none of its own? Surely no one is downvoting this because they don’t like our current system but can’t identify a better one...
  - e5india 6y ago
    No it would not necessarily be better, on balance. A critique of a system is not meant to be an attack on it nor an argument that there is necessarily some other better system. In fact, I would argue that the difficulty with having these conversations nowadays is precisely your response. In the American context at least, most of the time when people point out the failures in Capitalism people mean it more in the way that you might point out edge cases that need to be accounted for. The problem in having these conversations is people take it as some rhetorical device meant to actually promote Communism or some other philosophy. The point OP is making here, as I understand it, is that there is a paradox in a Capitalist system in that if self-interest and profit are at it's core, then by definition that self-interest will override any other consideration to the point that any company will be more than willing to sacrifice any other concern for the possibility of making money. We have known for the past 30 years at least that China is on a trajectory to surpass or challenge American supremacy and yet corp after corp was willing to send them technical knowledge and jobs that grew their economy to the point that they can build artificial islands in the South China Sea. Let me remind you that we won WW2 primarily on the strength of being able to outproduce our adversaries, not on technological superiority. So now though, we're super concerned about Chinese influence in the tech industry, specifically. I am worried too, of course you have to be. But it's tremendously silly to act like now it's suddenly a concern and single out one sector or company (e.g. NBA) as if the sacrifice of values in order to make money is not an inherent characteristic of Capitalism.
justinzollars 6y ago
I'm not sure this is true. Many tech companies I've worked for in the past have had a lot of trouble operating in China. Some don't even try. The NBA on the other hand. I love Steve Kerr. He tweets daily about Trump and how he abuses human rights, but ask him about HK and he gets quite really quick. If a man that rich is afraid to say something - thats a tremendous amount of power. I just don't see this type influence on the tech industry.
- realmod 6y ago
  Employing your line of thought - noone should condemn anything unless they condemn everything antithetical to their principals/views. Furthermore, Kerr is an employee and whatever statement he makes on HK would be inconsequential but also extremely harmful to his employer and co-workers. If actual change is wanted then we should divert our attention to the government where the real change happen.
  - DevKoala 6y ago
    > Employing your line of thought - noone should condemn anything unless they condemn everything antithetical to their principals/views. Yes, it is called hypocrisy. The individual in question has a powerful speech platform due to his role. Such power should be used responsibly. Moreover, why aren’t statements against the USA government harmful to businesses? Because we have free speech. We should protect it, and denounce the actors in the world trying to censor us.
    - justinzollars 6y ago
      Steering this back to Google's decision to pull out of China after exploits - the Tech Industry has expressed views that have cost it significant amounts of revenue. We've fought back unlike other industries.
      - DevKoala 6y ago
        True, the individuals that stopped dragonfly are commendable. However, that was not all of Google.
throwaway3426 6y ago
What are the "influences" though? What are some examples of positive impressions of CCP that people possess now, but not before the tech companies started working with China? It seems in US at least, more people are hating China. More people protest against CCP. If China is actually trying to exert influence, their exertion seems to be quite counter-productive.
jhpriestley 6y ago
Barr didn't seem too concerned about foreign influence when it came to a national security advisor lying to the government about cash payments from Turkey and illegal coordination with Russia.
- ghthor 6y ago
  Those allegations turned out to be false.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Flynn admitted lying. https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/defense/421780-turkey-and-michael-flynn-five-things-to-know%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/defense/4217...
    - cpr 6y ago
      Only because he was pressured to, to save himself and his son financially. This is an incredible scandal which didn't come to light since the DOJ dropped the case against him. The prosecutors colluded with his own law firm to deny him justice. This has all come out since Syndey Powell took his case.
      - falcolas 6y ago
        Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Any citations?
      - atomi 6y ago
        Do you have a reference to your claims? According to this, Judge Sullivan rejected the assertions of FBI entrapment and prosecutorial malfeasance: > Similar to Horowitz’s findings, the court ruling undercut arguments that the FBI investigation or Justice Department prosecution of Flynn was unjustified or improperly handled. > Refuting Flynn’s claims that he was misled into unwittingly pleading guilty to charges, Sullivan wrote that it was undisputed that Flynn told the same lies to the FBI, Vice President Pence and senior White House officials, who repeated them to the American public, leading to his firing in February 2017. > “The sworn statements of Mr. Flynn and his former counsel belie his new claims of innocence and his new assertions that he was pressured into pleading guilty to making materially false statements to the FBI,” Sullivan wrote. ... > “Arguably, you sold your country out,” Sullivan told Flynn during Flynn’s initially scheduled sentencing hearing, on Dec. 18, 2018. Sullivan cited Flynn’s admissions that he hid the substance of talks with Kislyak and lied when he said he did not know the extent of the Turkish government's involvement in work his firm had obtained and when he claimed an op-ed he wrote for the Turkish president’s benefit was done at his own initiative. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/michael-flynns-sentencing-set-for-jan-28-after-judge-rejects-his-attacks-on-the-fbi-justice-department/2019/12/16/269ae816-f4dd-11e9-a285-882a8e386a96_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/michael-fl...
Petrova 6y ago
The same xenophobic rhetoric repeated ad naseum. It's only natural that US industries would work with the second largest economy in the world.
watertom 6y ago
Most of these are publicly traded companies. They aren't owned by the U.S. government. Companies will act in the best interests of the company and only it's largest shareholders. U.S. citizens need to get it through their heads that they can't count on companies to be patriotic. Republicans are selling out the U.S. to corporations, but they have this false notion that corporations are loyal to a government for some stupid reason. We'll unless they are Chinese companies, because all Chinese companies are partially owned by the Chinese Government so they are loyal to China, or else. IBM cooperated with Nazi Germany, as did GM, Ford and dupont, etc. GM and Ford were dragging their feet converting factories in the U.S. for war production, but they did so willingly in Germany. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/n...
- jbob2000 6y ago
  Publicly traded companies wouldn't exist given Chinese government rule. It is a short term interest to support that government, when long term, it could ultimately lead to the shareholder's removal or dilution by the government.
okareaman 6y ago
I see the East Coast power centers having waning influence on the Pacific Rim states of the West Coast, who are uniquely positioned to work with Asian countries
- mooseburger 6y ago
  I see that the global center of capital is continuing its millenia long westward migration. Past the US west coast, and into China. From Prometheus Rising: > Brooks Adams also noted that centralized capital (the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few inter-related families) seems to have been moving steadily West throughout recorded history. The first major accumulations are to be found in Sumer; the center of money-power then shifted to Egypt, to Greece, to the Italian peninsula, to various parts of Germany, and then to London. At the time Brooks Adams was writing (c. 1900) he saw the balance teetering between London and New York, and he predicted that the decline of the English Empire would shift the balance to New York within the first half of the 20th Century. He seems to have been right. Brooks Adams had no theory as to why this Westward movement of wealth had been going on for 6000 years. He merely observed the pattern. The shift is still continuing, in the opinion of many. For instance, Carl Oglesby in The Cowboy vs. Yankee War, sees American politics since 1950 dominated by a struggle between “old Yankee wealth” (the New York-Boston axis, which replaced London after 1900) and “new Cowboy wealth” (Texas-California oil-and-aerospace billionaires). As of 1997, it looks like the Cowboys are winning; which is what one would expect if there were a real “law” behind Adams’ East-West migration of capital. Californication has come and gone.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    I think the mechanism behind that is a sort of "colonial expansion" essentially where the newer area of development and wealth have less legacy, regulatory capture, and less sunk costs into the status quo similar to general anti-cannabalization of old and large companies falling behind. That and other forms of consolidation of power to slow the overall systems down.
  - cscurmudgeon 6y ago
    The opposite is true if we look at data. https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/19/business/china-capital-flight-trade-war-us/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/19/business/china-capital-flight... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-11/china-hidden-capital-flight-at-a-record-in-2019-iif-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-11/china-hid...
Aunche 6y ago
It should be very clear that the US government wants to manufacture consent towards a trade war or cold war rather than actually care about human rights or national security. They’re so quick to pull the trigger to ruin Hong Kong’s economy, but they have yet to do anything to support asylum seekers.
draw_down 6y ago
Capitalism is a real bitch when it doesn't go your way!
DevKoala 6y ago
> Barr suggested that Apple iPhones “wouldn’t be sold (in China) if they were impervious to penetration by Chinese authorities.” He suggested American tech companies were imposing a “double standard.” He has a point there, but I am not sure I’d want to support Apple opening up to government authorities here.
ralmidani 6y ago
I detest Trump (voted for Clinton) and most, if not all, senior members of his administration, including Barr. But that doesn't prevent me from ultimately being OK with some of their statements/actions, even if they're all for the wrong reasons. The regime in China represents evil on a scale that is probably unprecedented in Earth's history, and anything that can stop or slow its world domination should be welcomed or at the very least acquiesced to. That regime is bad for the overwhelming majority of Chinese people (regardless of race and religion), bad for everyone else, and bad for the planet. The above paragraph risks triggering some knee-jerk "what about the US/NATO?" responses. Let me save you the trouble: the West is guilty of countless crimes, especially against non-White people. But at least for some periods in history, most citizens of most Western countries were not systematically disenfranchised, monitored, disappeared, tortured, and killed. Yes, living in America while being Black, Hispanic, Arab (that's me), Muslim (ditto), etc. there's still a lot of anxiety, discrimination, and even danger. But it's incredibly naive to think the people of China are not orders of magnitude more oppressed and in constant fear for their livelihoods, lives, and loved ones.
- DevKoala 6y ago
  I feel the same as you. I am also an immigrant that came to the USA escaping a country where people were suffering after decades of oppression and a string of socialist dictatorships. Seeing the actions of the CCP being normalized and defended in the USA concerns me a lot.
  - ralmidani 6y ago
    I didn't immigrate to the US, my parents did. From Syria. I lived there for a few years, and it's absolutely infuriating how some Americans equate their government with Assad, CCP, Khamenei, Putin, Kim, Duterte, etc.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - stx 6y ago
      Exactly its not as if we do not have issue in the USA and we did have a dark history (slavery for example). I think many Americans do not know how good we have it. In some ways our worst enemy is ourselves.
softwaredoug 6y ago
The same companies (rightfully) saying “Black Lives Matter” are willing to suspend Hong Kong protestors to appease the CCP. Just shows you how genuine their motives are, in case you had any doubts
- gundmc 6y ago
  Unless you're referring to something else, I think you misunderstood the quote from the article. These companies suspended response to _government requests for user data_ in Hong Kong, not the accounts of Hong Kong protestors. That is, they are refusing to hand information to the CCP. Barr is actually praising this action and saying they should unite to resist in more ways.
- blisseyGo 6y ago
  Top athletes, celebrities from Hollywood etc all virtue signal while ignoring the problems going on in China and are willing to sell out to China. Since the COVID, China has been blatantly racist towards blacks and the US embassy had to notify people about the "Discrimination against African-Americans". Yet this got ZERO attention: > China McDonald's apologises for Guangzhou ban on black people https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52274326 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52274326 https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/health-alert-u-s-consulate-general-guangzhou-peoples-republic-of-china/ https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/health-alert-u-s-consul... > In response to an increase in COVID-19 infections, officials in the Guangzhou metropolitan area escalated scrutiny of foreign nationals. As part of this campaign, police ordered bars and restaurants not to serve clients who appear to be of African origin. Moreover, local officials launched a round of mandatory tests for COVID-19, followed by mandatory self-quarantine, for anyone with “African contacts,” regardless of recent travel history or previous quarantine completion. African-Americans have also reported that some businesses and hotels refuse to do business with them. The U.S. Consulate General advises African-Americans or those who believe Chinese officials may suspect them of having contact with nationals of African countries to avoid the Guangzhou metropolitan area until further notice. Without advance warning, officials might require such individuals to submit to a COVID-19 test and undergo 14 days of supervised quarantine at their own expense. > All U.S. citizens in China are subject to local law. If you violate Chinese laws, even unknowingly, you may be arrested, expelled, or imprisoned. The Chinese legal system can be opaque, and the interpretation and enforcement of local laws may be arbitrary. The judiciary does not enjoy independence from political influence. U.S. citizens traveling or residing in China may be subject to heightened scrutiny by Chinese local law enforcement and state security. They should carry identity documents at all times.
supernova87a 6y ago
What's the concern that's being identified in all these stories? It would be good to have an enumeration of clear concerns. Is it that: 1) the companies are letting Americans' hardware be controlled / data escape and be monitored in China, or 2) that people in China subject to their laws (un-American as those laws may be) are being monitored (and worse)? Because if it's the first topic, how do we not manage to buy/require/put in technical safeguards against our own people being monitored, or our equipment being taken over remotely? If we can't even do that, then how is any equipment we buy safe? But if we do, then is the argument that we're helping China get stronger by contributing to their economy or technological dominance? And that's undesirable to have a power shift that decreases our standing? Who's responsible for deciding what standing we want to have in the world? Who's guiding that steering wheel and what's the destination? I daresay it's odd for the administration to be speaking up about this one thing, when it's mute on so many other factors that set our technological dominance. Or if the 2nd argument, how far do our laws extend? Is that a principle to be applied to all countries by us, that they should not do things to their own citizens that would be illegal here? If we want universally respected laws to apply to other countries, I would think we could do ourselves a favor by respecting other laws and organizations that we currently choose to say are not in our convenience to follow. Or is it something else? If you want me to be patriotic, tell me what I'm signing up for.
- xbar 6y ago
  The specific concern here is cultural manipulation by the CCP with far-future-looking roadmaps to undermine and dominate their economic rivals. For example, Disney as a Yuan-focused propaganda engine for CCP values cannot produce a remake of Robin Hood, which is a strongly indvidualistic narrative. Driving a generation of strongly "powerful, central government is the best way to solve problems" values to children and young people paves they way for teens and twentysomethings to adopt CCP-sympathetic narratives in media and social media. FYI, if you stand up two false straw men, you look like a collaborator with the CCP. <joke> You communist. </joke>
  - supernova87a 6y ago
    So, if I were being sarcastic/cynical -- I would say, "so we object to China trying to become a global superpower by investing in the arts, media, technology, and a slew of other things that cause economic gains for their people?" How dare they stoop to such tactics. I would actually feel more in earnest about the above joke if it didn't come with (or was trying to mask) the torture, economic espionage, etc.
TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
Multinational corporations have no loyalty to anything except their shareholders. Politicians should not feign surprise when they do not align with national interest.
- unethical_ban 6y ago
  That's only because they choose to. The "Fiduciary obligation to shareholders" thing is not only wrong, but it isn't the way a system needs to work. A corporation, which is a legal entity that owns capital, production and services, is composed of people. Those people could use the powers of the corporation to advance the well being of its community.
  - droopyEyelids 6y ago
    Too often people skim over the fact that the corporation is a legal entity, and its nature is defined by the laws that sanction it. A corporate charter can be revoked, and the laws of the corporation can be modified. We don't have to be fatalistic about this.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
    A corporation can go against the grain. But what incentive would it have to do so? It's not coincidence that corporations tend to aggressively pursue profit, it is the intentional structure of capitalism.
smileypete 6y ago
The best defence for Taiwan against China is to be an indispensible trading partner. Once China is self sufficient in IC fab. then increasingly aggressive moves against Taiwan could be more likely. I fear for Taiwan in the long term. US foreign policy often turns out to be short sighted.
bediger4000 6y ago
The US Attorney General gives a lot of indicators of corruption. At the very least, the current US Presidential administration gives a lot of indications of unfairly favoring some companies over others. Why should we believe the US Attorney General on this?
ineedasername 6y ago
I'm not sure any major company has either 1) not done business with China or 2) not seriously tried to do business with China. The massive emerging market there was too much of a $$$ opportunity for them to ignore. Yes, there's a difference between, say, a fast food chain that tries to get a foot hold in China and a technology company that helps provide tools used to limit rights of free speech etc. However, this is a matter of degree, not kind. All business with China that helps advance their economy helps to legitimize their regime, and also gives China a significant bit of influence over even companies' non-China businesses. When a company's business is China is so critical to lose that it will subject itself to China's will even outside of China, that company is complicit in the same way, just to a lesser degree, as these tech companies providing more direct support.
- baddox 6y ago
  > However, this is a matter of degree, not kind. But it sounds like you think that the bad things about China (you specified limiting free speech) differ not in degree but in kind from bad things about other countries. Is that the case?
  - ineedasername 6y ago
    I wasn't at all making a comment on bad things done by other countries. The topic of "bad things that countries do" is a bit too broad to tackle in a single comment.
    - baddox 6y ago
      I meant that presumably you don’t advocate a total refusal of all economic participation with most other countries like you are recommending with China.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >Yes, there's a difference between, say, a fast food chain that tries to get a foot hold in China and a technology company that helps provide tools used to limit rights of free speech etc. However, this is a matter of degree, not kind. I disagree. Giving bad people money in exchange for hamburgers is different in kind than giving them the tools they need to continue doing bad things. Hamburgers are a commodity they can get from anyone. Tools are not.
cowmoo728 6y ago
There is so much to unpack here that it's difficult to even get started. The US government has encouraged companies to work with China for decades. I remember it being big news when GM opened a joint venture in China in 1997. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC-GM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC-GM The Clinton administration pushed hard to increase trade with China and make it easier for American companies to outsource manufacturing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%93China_Relations_Act_of_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%93China_Re... This continued unabated through the Bush and Obama presidencies, even as it became increasingly clear that US relations with China were going off the rails. There were significant signs that the Chinese government was not playing fair, particularly around IP theft, but the legislative and executive branches did nothing visible about it. Hundreds or thousands of American companies (including google) were hacked into or had intellectual property stolen with no legal recourse. https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-probes-hundreds-of-china-spy-cases https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-probes-hundreds-of-china-s... Chinese military groups also hacked into the employee database for the US federal government. https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-25-million-affected-opm-hack-sources/story?id=32332731 https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-25-million-affected-opm-... Tech companies, like google, are acutely aware that the current Chinese government is extremely capricious and will block an entire company from the country to incubate their own competitor. Many tech companies want to work in china, but of major american companies, they seem to be the most cautious. Given all this context, for Barr to turn around and say that US tech companies are "pawns" is infuriating. Virtually every large american company needs clear laws on working with China. They are not getting those laws out of Congress or the Justice Department, and everyone is the worse for it.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- muleroid 6y ago
  Historically the US trade relationship with China was based on a principal that doing so would encourage the adoption of democracy there. Seeing as how that hasn't happened, this kind of rhetoric could just be an attempt to course correct (maybe overly so). I'm sure the upcoming elections also play a part in this. The article briefly mentions that as well.
mips_avatar 6y ago
The Chinese have definitely asked the emperor about the size of his cauldron. I would be shocked if Xi isn't regretting his change in stance the last ten years.
tw04 6y ago
And the republican leadership all the way to the top have become "pawns of Russian influence" - I can tell you which is more damaging to the sovereignty of this nation...
- devmunchies 6y ago
  And both sides are pawns of Israeli influence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Wadi#Multinational_technology_companies_operating_in_Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Wadi#Multinational_tec...
- refurb 6y ago
  Based on your sources and thorough analysis, ok, I’ll take your word on it.
  - tw04 6y ago
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-russia-putin-trump/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-russia... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-russia-afghanistan-us-soliders-bounty https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-ru... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-putin-g7.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-putin-g... https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-h... Ignoring the whole Roger Stone + wikileaks, Flynn, Manafort, etc. The list goes on, and on, and on. But you already knew that.
    - refurb 6y ago
      1. Opinion piece 2. Lots of “allegedly” 3. Trump favors Russia in G7, apparently that means our leadership is under Russian influence 4. Trumps denial of influence Not too convincing so far.
      - tw04 6y ago
        Lol, intelligence from CIA sources is an opinion piece? Let me guess, Trump is the best president of your lifetime? I notice you failed to address manafort, stone, and Flynn. None of which was “allegedly”.
quattrofan 6y ago
Trump has become a pawn of Russian influence.
- pstuart 6y ago
  He's been groomed for decades.
awinder 6y ago
This is like pitching feature requests during a sev-1 call. It’s an election year (nothing will be done on this), there’s a raging pandemic (nothing will be done on this). I know we’ve all interviewed for other places while still employed but damn I usually do it with less gusto and publicity.
loldk 6y ago
Our "intelligence" and leadership groups in this country are nothing more than a farce. This is comical.
boznz 6y ago
I would only manufacture something in china if there is a part of the stack that is essential and cannot be copied. There again I would do this for any external manufacturer because you can guarantee that if your product is ever a success it will be copied somewhere.
loldk 6y ago
Our "intelligence" and leadership groups in this country are nothing more than a farce. This is comical. They thought China was full of idiots they could take advantage of and treat like dirt. They got so cocky they didn't even see this coming lol. Holy shit they are dumb, that or even more dumb thinking this is going anywhere they want it to.
- dang 6y ago
  Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. We're trying for a bit better than this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
thephyber 6y ago
> He added that Hollywood has routinely caved into pressure and censored their films “to appease the Chinese Communist Party.” First point: it's the Chinese government. In China, the government has the ability to shape business actions far more than in the US, because sovereignty. Calling it "CCP" feels political, even if it is accurate. Hypocrisy, coming from the federal government of the USA, who does the exact same thing when Hollywood wants to use any part of the DoD[1]. It shouldn't happen in either case, but it does. And this US Attorney General isn't a relevant neutral source for this message. It just looks like he's making a political statement from a White House that is in the middle of a multi-faceted trade war negotiation with the same entities being criticized here. Also note that this US Attorney General's office is the one which is seeking extradition of the CFO of Huawei[2] from Canada which has been verbally acknowledged by Barr's boss as negotiation leverage in the trade war. > I suspect Walt Disney would be disheartened to see how the company he founded deals with the foreign dictatorships of our day Walt Disney was politically hard right after the US entered WW2 and joined the Second Red Scare on the side of Senator McCarthy. I honestly don't care what he would say today. Also worth nothing that Ronald Reagan was also a movie propagandist for the US Army in WW2 and was another loud voice like Senator McCarthy during the Second Red Scare. It was the moral panic / cancel culture of its day. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-entertainment_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-entertainment_complex [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou#Detention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou#Detention [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney
pstuart 6y ago
Funny how Barr doesn't mention Russia. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-funded-facebook-twitter-investments-kushner-investor https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-funded-f...
- javajosh 6y ago
  Indeed. It seems pretty clear that Russia will want another Crimea style victory, and with an extraordinarily strong ally in the Whitehouse it makes sense to lay the groundwork for that now. (I'm not exactly sure how this will work since this time both sides have strategic nukes.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict
pnathan 6y ago
This has to be considered in a nuanced way. Note that I'm calling "China" the country's leadership as expressed by their official stance, not the individuals or the general population. - China does pressure operations with other countries. - China does not have a USA aligned value system - China is getting quite successful - parity with the US is either here or not far off. - China is influencing tech companies in a steak-dinner sort of way. - China does certain things that verge on, or simply are, sleazy. I would suggest the thing to get excited about, and appropriate boundary setting, would be the sleaze. I look forward to a friendly competition with the Chinese system, where we're both competing to be excellent and trading top places. That seems to be something the AG is concerned about- I don't mind being in second place, if the race is adequately fair. ;)
bobmarleythecat 6y ago
And the US President is a pawn of the Russians! Here come the "free" elections my Comrades!

228 points by ilamont 6y ago

garraeth 6y ago

Original title: "Attorney General Barr accuses Hollywood, Big Tech of collaborating with China"

blaser-waffle 6y ago
He's not wrong. But it also doesn't make him any less of an asshole -- Barr is a shady character.
- cpr 6y ago
  Sure, if you only pay attention to the MSM...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- xbar 6y ago
  This.
dang 6y ago
I reverted it, but then reverted my reversion. The submitted title is marginally less baity, so I'm thinking ilamont did a good job of following the guideline: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  Hmm, perhaps the URL title would be better? > Attorney General Barr Takes Aim at Hollywood, Disney For Censoring Films to Appease China
  - dang 6y ago
    Good point, but then the tech cos are left out. I've squeezed Hollywood in instead.

tehjoker 6y ago

The USG is crazy. It's another red scare. Ofc, as a promoter of global capitalism, it's hilarious to see the government complaining that the multinationals that they cultivated are doing business internationally. For those of you downvoting, explain to me how language like "pawns of Chinese influence" isn't just insane propaganda? EDIT2: For what it's worth, I do have a bone to pick with China over their treatment of Xinjiang province, but lol if you think the USG ever uses human rights as anything other than a stick to beat enemy countries over. Put another way: CIA guy whose ex-OSS dad gave Jeffery Epstein his first fake job teaching math is now ginning up fake nationalism. News at 11.

entropea 6y ago
We opened completely free trade to China so businesses could cut labor costs decades ago. It's just built into our system. What did everyone expect? You're absolutely right that this is another red scare. It's honestly reminiscent of post 9/11 domestic support of the majority of USA population to bomb the middle east. You're not even allowed to talk about China in US society anymore unless you're furious with rage for them.
- Consultant32452 6y ago
  I'd like to try an experiment where China ends the ongoing slavery and genocides within its borders and let's see if there's less rage.
  - tehjoker 6y ago
    I'd like to see an experiment where the united states stops killing people at the border, just letting people in prison die from COVID, and attacking peaceful protestors with military equipment. See how that works? Let us not forget the founding of the country was based on genocide and slavery. We ally with regressive states like Saudi Arabia and formerly places like nuclear apartheid South Africa. Only protests and rebellions move the needle on how shitty the government is here.
    - 6y ago

Shivetya 6y ago

They need to be called out. The amount of virtue signaling these companies do in the US does not excuse their actions elsewhere. This is not confined to the US either, countries in other parts of the world will engage in actions for the Chinese government they would not do at home or without great public fanfare about how they are against it.

birken 6y ago
What is the difference between virtue signaling and marketing when a corporation is doing it?
- MR4D 6y ago
  Virtue signaling implies morals. Marketing doesn't.
  - brighton36 6y ago
    I used to think that. Marketing is all about moralizing the product.
- dx87 6y ago
  I think virtue signaling would be saying something to stave off public criticism with no direct monetary benefit, and marketing would be like companies that support gay rights because it means they can sell a bunch of rainbow colored merchandise during pride month.
  - pwillia7 6y ago
    What motive would a company (of sufficient size) have to signal virtue if not in pursuit of profits? Companies without an all powerful strongman on top are amoral, and primarily in the U.S. are only concerned with their shareholders as opposed to all stake holders in the chain's long term value and health. https://www.inc.com/maureen-kline/why-debate-over-stakeholder-value-vs-shareholder-value-is-all-wrong.html https://www.inc.com/maureen-kline/why-debate-over-stakeholde...

threatofrain 6y ago

fouc 6y ago
IIRC, last year Apple setup a server within China for holding the iCloud security keys for the Chinese-owned iPhones? Definitely some collaboration there..
- filoleg 6y ago
  Well, that just makes it sound like iPhones sold in China were vulnerable for penetration by Chinese authorities because the decryption keys for those were stored in China, not that iPhones overall were vulnerable. Which makes that whole argument by Barr very weak.
- kube-system 6y ago
  iCloud in China is operated by Guizhou-Cloud Big Data Industry Co Ltd, which is owned by the Guizhou provincial government. As I understand, it isn't Apple's servers at all. China has some strict protectionist policies for a fairly decent list industries, not just tech. Many foreign companies that operate in China have to do so through joint ventures or other partnerships with domestic Chinese companies. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208351 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208351 http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201801/11/WS5a56a3cca3102e5b17374107.html http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201801/11/WS5a56a3cca3102e5b1...
  - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
    The list of sectors that require joint ventures and majority Chinese ownership has been decreasing over time. Most sectors do not have such restrictions nowadays. For several decades, there has been a general trend - which was greatly accelerated by China's WTO accession - of barriers to trade decreasing in China. In popular discussions of China's trade and economic policies in the West, there's rarely any recognition of this fact. Average tariffs have been reduced to about 3.4%, which is about the same level as the US applied as recently as the mid-1990s. Much of the state sector was privatized and the majority of the economy is now private. Intellectual property enforcement is way up - it's been completely overhauled in just the last 6 years, with specialized courts set up and a very large volume of IP cases being heard every year now. There have been huge changes, which most of the public in the West has little to no idea bout, and which find no reflection in the popular discussion.

vmception 6y ago

What it really comes down to is determining if we are doing the Cold War thing or not. To many of us, the cold war is over, and the other 300 years of rolling the nation state concept across the world is over too. As it is very easy to operate in a borderless global economy - at least between major economic unions - if you are privileged enough. If you absolutely need people to pick a side again, just say so. Otherwise you need to realize that its all in your head, not everyone is looking at the world the same way, both/all major countries are very similar and this will always be a "trigger" for you when people point it out. But if this is really so irreconcilable and necessary for people to pick a side because we're doing the cold war thing again, then you need to say so. Americans will pick America if thats what its coming down to. But just assuming we are in that state and that everyone else is assuming the same thing, thats just going to go nowhere.

tomp 6y ago
The problem is, if you think you’re not in a Cold War while the other guy thinks you are. Before you realize it, it’s already too late.
- blaser-waffle 6y ago
  To be clear, the Chinese plainly think the US is a rival, and have been pushing on things harder than usual to test what the global response is.
  - vmception 6y ago
    US leaders need to make it clear how they expect Americans and American countries (edit: I meant companies) to act, via new and existing legislation and orders. Absent that, the incentives just aren't there. There is a way to do business/life in China where you aren’t exposed to the things we disagree about with China, and its also now a very large market based economy with all the trappings and comforts of being rich in the west....
    - user555555555 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ideals 6y ago

This about the USG not having as many spying capabilities as China, not about shoring up spying capabilities of China. For reference EARNIT act https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-constitution https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-c...

paxys 6y ago

Conveniently left out are all the Republican-friendly companies and industries which do the same (and more). Automobile, equipment manufacturers, aircrafts, fast food, clothing, sports leagues...everyone bows down to money. This is the obvious result of our capitalist system. What's the point in calling out a handful of tech companies?

throwaway894345 6y ago
Critiques of the “capitalist system” would be better if you articulated a system that worked better on balance. In other words, a system that solves for these problems, but which introduces many other, worse problems (e.g., famine, ethnic cleansing, imprisonment/execution of political dissenters, etc) is not a better system on balance. If we struggle to find such an improved system, it probably means that the current capitalist system simply needs some reform in order to optimize it—perhaps this means better regulation of the markets, more socialization in a few key areas (e.g., healthcare, etc), or reducing government corruption. This would make for a much improved conversation, IMHO. EDIT: a lot of people seem to be taking issue with this comment, but I don’t understand the gripe. Presumably the logic is sound that critiques are more interesting if they discuss tradeoffs? Or maybe there is some obvious system that lacks all of the problems of our current system and introduces none of its own? Surely no one is downvoting this because they don’t like our current system but can’t identify a better one...
- e5india 6y ago
  No it would not necessarily be better, on balance. A critique of a system is not meant to be an attack on it nor an argument that there is necessarily some other better system. In fact, I would argue that the difficulty with having these conversations nowadays is precisely your response. In the American context at least, most of the time when people point out the failures in Capitalism people mean it more in the way that you might point out edge cases that need to be accounted for. The problem in having these conversations is people take it as some rhetorical device meant to actually promote Communism or some other philosophy. The point OP is making here, as I understand it, is that there is a paradox in a Capitalist system in that if self-interest and profit are at it's core, then by definition that self-interest will override any other consideration to the point that any company will be more than willing to sacrifice any other concern for the possibility of making money. We have known for the past 30 years at least that China is on a trajectory to surpass or challenge American supremacy and yet corp after corp was willing to send them technical knowledge and jobs that grew their economy to the point that they can build artificial islands in the South China Sea. Let me remind you that we won WW2 primarily on the strength of being able to outproduce our adversaries, not on technological superiority. So now though, we're super concerned about Chinese influence in the tech industry, specifically. I am worried too, of course you have to be. But it's tremendously silly to act like now it's suddenly a concern and single out one sector or company (e.g. NBA) as if the sacrifice of values in order to make money is not an inherent characteristic of Capitalism.

justinzollars 6y ago

I'm not sure this is true. Many tech companies I've worked for in the past have had a lot of trouble operating in China. Some don't even try. The NBA on the other hand. I love Steve Kerr. He tweets daily about Trump and how he abuses human rights, but ask him about HK and he gets quite really quick. If a man that rich is afraid to say something - thats a tremendous amount of power. I just don't see this type influence on the tech industry.

realmod 6y ago
Employing your line of thought - noone should condemn anything unless they condemn everything antithetical to their principals/views. Furthermore, Kerr is an employee and whatever statement he makes on HK would be inconsequential but also extremely harmful to his employer and co-workers. If actual change is wanted then we should divert our attention to the government where the real change happen.
- DevKoala 6y ago
  > Employing your line of thought - noone should condemn anything unless they condemn everything antithetical to their principals/views. Yes, it is called hypocrisy. The individual in question has a powerful speech platform due to his role. Such power should be used responsibly. Moreover, why aren’t statements against the USA government harmful to businesses? Because we have free speech. We should protect it, and denounce the actors in the world trying to censor us.
  - justinzollars 6y ago
    Steering this back to Google's decision to pull out of China after exploits - the Tech Industry has expressed views that have cost it significant amounts of revenue. We've fought back unlike other industries.
    - DevKoala 6y ago
      True, the individuals that stopped dragonfly are commendable. However, that was not all of Google.

throwaway3426 6y ago

What are the "influences" though? What are some examples of positive impressions of CCP that people possess now, but not before the tech companies started working with China? It seems in US at least, more people are hating China. More people protest against CCP. If China is actually trying to exert influence, their exertion seems to be quite counter-productive.

jhpriestley 6y ago

Barr didn't seem too concerned about foreign influence when it came to a national security advisor lying to the government about cash payments from Turkey and illegal coordination with Russia.

ghthor 6y ago
Those allegations turned out to be false.
- scarface74 6y ago
  Flynn admitted lying. https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/defense/421780-turkey-and-michael-flynn-five-things-to-know%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/defense/4217...
  - cpr 6y ago
    Only because he was pressured to, to save himself and his son financially. This is an incredible scandal which didn't come to light since the DOJ dropped the case against him. The prosecutors colluded with his own law firm to deny him justice. This has all come out since Syndey Powell took his case.
    - falcolas 6y ago
      Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Any citations?
    - atomi 6y ago
      Do you have a reference to your claims? According to this, Judge Sullivan rejected the assertions of FBI entrapment and prosecutorial malfeasance: > Similar to Horowitz’s findings, the court ruling undercut arguments that the FBI investigation or Justice Department prosecution of Flynn was unjustified or improperly handled. > Refuting Flynn’s claims that he was misled into unwittingly pleading guilty to charges, Sullivan wrote that it was undisputed that Flynn told the same lies to the FBI, Vice President Pence and senior White House officials, who repeated them to the American public, leading to his firing in February 2017. > “The sworn statements of Mr. Flynn and his former counsel belie his new claims of innocence and his new assertions that he was pressured into pleading guilty to making materially false statements to the FBI,” Sullivan wrote. ... > “Arguably, you sold your country out,” Sullivan told Flynn during Flynn’s initially scheduled sentencing hearing, on Dec. 18, 2018. Sullivan cited Flynn’s admissions that he hid the substance of talks with Kislyak and lied when he said he did not know the extent of the Turkish government's involvement in work his firm had obtained and when he claimed an op-ed he wrote for the Turkish president’s benefit was done at his own initiative. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/michael-flynns-sentencing-set-for-jan-28-after-judge-rejects-his-attacks-on-the-fbi-justice-department/2019/12/16/269ae816-f4dd-11e9-a285-882a8e386a96_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/michael-fl...

Petrova 6y ago

The same xenophobic rhetoric repeated ad naseum. It's only natural that US industries would work with the second largest economy in the world.

watertom 6y ago

Most of these are publicly traded companies. They aren't owned by the U.S. government. Companies will act in the best interests of the company and only it's largest shareholders. U.S. citizens need to get it through their heads that they can't count on companies to be patriotic. Republicans are selling out the U.S. to corporations, but they have this false notion that corporations are loyal to a government for some stupid reason. We'll unless they are Chinese companies, because all Chinese companies are partially owned by the Chinese Government so they are loyal to China, or else. IBM cooperated with Nazi Germany, as did GM, Ford and dupont, etc. GM and Ford were dragging their feet converting factories in the U.S. for war production, but they did so willingly in Germany. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/n...

jbob2000 6y ago
Publicly traded companies wouldn't exist given Chinese government rule. It is a short term interest to support that government, when long term, it could ultimately lead to the shareholder's removal or dilution by the government.

okareaman 6y ago

I see the East Coast power centers having waning influence on the Pacific Rim states of the West Coast, who are uniquely positioned to work with Asian countries

mooseburger 6y ago
I see that the global center of capital is continuing its millenia long westward migration. Past the US west coast, and into China. From Prometheus Rising: > Brooks Adams also noted that centralized capital (the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few inter-related families) seems to have been moving steadily West throughout recorded history. The first major accumulations are to be found in Sumer; the center of money-power then shifted to Egypt, to Greece, to the Italian peninsula, to various parts of Germany, and then to London. At the time Brooks Adams was writing (c. 1900) he saw the balance teetering between London and New York, and he predicted that the decline of the English Empire would shift the balance to New York within the first half of the 20th Century. He seems to have been right. Brooks Adams had no theory as to why this Westward movement of wealth had been going on for 6000 years. He merely observed the pattern. The shift is still continuing, in the opinion of many. For instance, Carl Oglesby in The Cowboy vs. Yankee War, sees American politics since 1950 dominated by a struggle between “old Yankee wealth” (the New York-Boston axis, which replaced London after 1900) and “new Cowboy wealth” (Texas-California oil-and-aerospace billionaires). As of 1997, it looks like the Cowboys are winning; which is what one would expect if there were a real “law” behind Adams’ East-West migration of capital. Californication has come and gone.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  I think the mechanism behind that is a sort of "colonial expansion" essentially where the newer area of development and wealth have less legacy, regulatory capture, and less sunk costs into the status quo similar to general anti-cannabalization of old and large companies falling behind. That and other forms of consolidation of power to slow the overall systems down.
- cscurmudgeon 6y ago
  The opposite is true if we look at data. https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/19/business/china-capital-flight-trade-war-us/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/19/business/china-capital-flight... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-11/china-hidden-capital-flight-at-a-record-in-2019-iif-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-11/china-hid...

Aunche 6y ago

It should be very clear that the US government wants to manufacture consent towards a trade war or cold war rather than actually care about human rights or national security. They’re so quick to pull the trigger to ruin Hong Kong’s economy, but they have yet to do anything to support asylum seekers.

draw_down 6y ago

Capitalism is a real bitch when it doesn't go your way!

DevKoala 6y ago

> Barr suggested that Apple iPhones “wouldn’t be sold (in China) if they were impervious to penetration by Chinese authorities.” He suggested American tech companies were imposing a “double standard.” He has a point there, but I am not sure I’d want to support Apple opening up to government authorities here.

ralmidani 6y ago

I detest Trump (voted for Clinton) and most, if not all, senior members of his administration, including Barr. But that doesn't prevent me from ultimately being OK with some of their statements/actions, even if they're all for the wrong reasons. The regime in China represents evil on a scale that is probably unprecedented in Earth's history, and anything that can stop or slow its world domination should be welcomed or at the very least acquiesced to. That regime is bad for the overwhelming majority of Chinese people (regardless of race and religion), bad for everyone else, and bad for the planet. The above paragraph risks triggering some knee-jerk "what about the US/NATO?" responses. Let me save you the trouble: the West is guilty of countless crimes, especially against non-White people. But at least for some periods in history, most citizens of most Western countries were not systematically disenfranchised, monitored, disappeared, tortured, and killed. Yes, living in America while being Black, Hispanic, Arab (that's me), Muslim (ditto), etc. there's still a lot of anxiety, discrimination, and even danger. But it's incredibly naive to think the people of China are not orders of magnitude more oppressed and in constant fear for their livelihoods, lives, and loved ones.

DevKoala 6y ago
I feel the same as you. I am also an immigrant that came to the USA escaping a country where people were suffering after decades of oppression and a string of socialist dictatorships. Seeing the actions of the CCP being normalized and defended in the USA concerns me a lot.
- ralmidani 6y ago
  I didn't immigrate to the US, my parents did. From Syria. I lived there for a few years, and it's absolutely infuriating how some Americans equate their government with Assad, CCP, Khamenei, Putin, Kim, Duterte, etc.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - stx 6y ago
    Exactly its not as if we do not have issue in the USA and we did have a dark history (slavery for example). I think many Americans do not know how good we have it. In some ways our worst enemy is ourselves.

softwaredoug 6y ago

The same companies (rightfully) saying “Black Lives Matter” are willing to suspend Hong Kong protestors to appease the CCP. Just shows you how genuine their motives are, in case you had any doubts

gundmc 6y ago
Unless you're referring to something else, I think you misunderstood the quote from the article. These companies suspended response to _government requests for user data_ in Hong Kong, not the accounts of Hong Kong protestors. That is, they are refusing to hand information to the CCP. Barr is actually praising this action and saying they should unite to resist in more ways.
blisseyGo 6y ago
Top athletes, celebrities from Hollywood etc all virtue signal while ignoring the problems going on in China and are willing to sell out to China. Since the COVID, China has been blatantly racist towards blacks and the US embassy had to notify people about the "Discrimination against African-Americans". Yet this got ZERO attention: > China McDonald's apologises for Guangzhou ban on black people https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52274326 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52274326 https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/health-alert-u-s-consulate-general-guangzhou-peoples-republic-of-china/ https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/health-alert-u-s-consul... > In response to an increase in COVID-19 infections, officials in the Guangzhou metropolitan area escalated scrutiny of foreign nationals. As part of this campaign, police ordered bars and restaurants not to serve clients who appear to be of African origin. Moreover, local officials launched a round of mandatory tests for COVID-19, followed by mandatory self-quarantine, for anyone with “African contacts,” regardless of recent travel history or previous quarantine completion. African-Americans have also reported that some businesses and hotels refuse to do business with them. The U.S. Consulate General advises African-Americans or those who believe Chinese officials may suspect them of having contact with nationals of African countries to avoid the Guangzhou metropolitan area until further notice. Without advance warning, officials might require such individuals to submit to a COVID-19 test and undergo 14 days of supervised quarantine at their own expense. > All U.S. citizens in China are subject to local law. If you violate Chinese laws, even unknowingly, you may be arrested, expelled, or imprisoned. The Chinese legal system can be opaque, and the interpretation and enforcement of local laws may be arbitrary. The judiciary does not enjoy independence from political influence. U.S. citizens traveling or residing in China may be subject to heightened scrutiny by Chinese local law enforcement and state security. They should carry identity documents at all times.

supernova87a 6y ago

What's the concern that's being identified in all these stories? It would be good to have an enumeration of clear concerns. Is it that: 1) the companies are letting Americans' hardware be controlled / data escape and be monitored in China, or 2) that people in China subject to their laws (un-American as those laws may be) are being monitored (and worse)? Because if it's the first topic, how do we not manage to buy/require/put in technical safeguards against our own people being monitored, or our equipment being taken over remotely? If we can't even do that, then how is any equipment we buy safe? But if we do, then is the argument that we're helping China get stronger by contributing to their economy or technological dominance? And that's undesirable to have a power shift that decreases our standing? Who's responsible for deciding what standing we want to have in the world? Who's guiding that steering wheel and what's the destination? I daresay it's odd for the administration to be speaking up about this one thing, when it's mute on so many other factors that set our technological dominance. Or if the 2nd argument, how far do our laws extend? Is that a principle to be applied to all countries by us, that they should not do things to their own citizens that would be illegal here? If we want universally respected laws to apply to other countries, I would think we could do ourselves a favor by respecting other laws and organizations that we currently choose to say are not in our convenience to follow. Or is it something else? If you want me to be patriotic, tell me what I'm signing up for.

xbar 6y ago
The specific concern here is cultural manipulation by the CCP with far-future-looking roadmaps to undermine and dominate their economic rivals. For example, Disney as a Yuan-focused propaganda engine for CCP values cannot produce a remake of Robin Hood, which is a strongly indvidualistic narrative. Driving a generation of strongly "powerful, central government is the best way to solve problems" values to children and young people paves they way for teens and twentysomethings to adopt CCP-sympathetic narratives in media and social media. FYI, if you stand up two false straw men, you look like a collaborator with the CCP. <joke> You communist. </joke>
- supernova87a 6y ago
  So, if I were being sarcastic/cynical -- I would say, "so we object to China trying to become a global superpower by investing in the arts, media, technology, and a slew of other things that cause economic gains for their people?" How dare they stoop to such tactics. I would actually feel more in earnest about the above joke if it didn't come with (or was trying to mask) the torture, economic espionage, etc.

TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago

Multinational corporations have no loyalty to anything except their shareholders. Politicians should not feign surprise when they do not align with national interest.

unethical_ban 6y ago
That's only because they choose to. The "Fiduciary obligation to shareholders" thing is not only wrong, but it isn't the way a system needs to work. A corporation, which is a legal entity that owns capital, production and services, is composed of people. Those people could use the powers of the corporation to advance the well being of its community.
- droopyEyelids 6y ago
  Too often people skim over the fact that the corporation is a legal entity, and its nature is defined by the laws that sanction it. A corporate charter can be revoked, and the laws of the corporation can be modified. We don't have to be fatalistic about this.
- TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
  A corporation can go against the grain. But what incentive would it have to do so? It's not coincidence that corporations tend to aggressively pursue profit, it is the intentional structure of capitalism.

smileypete 6y ago

The best defence for Taiwan against China is to be an indispensible trading partner. Once China is self sufficient in IC fab. then increasingly aggressive moves against Taiwan could be more likely. I fear for Taiwan in the long term. US foreign policy often turns out to be short sighted.

bediger4000 6y ago

The US Attorney General gives a lot of indicators of corruption. At the very least, the current US Presidential administration gives a lot of indications of unfairly favoring some companies over others. Why should we believe the US Attorney General on this?

ineedasername 6y ago

I'm not sure any major company has either 1) not done business with China or 2) not seriously tried to do business with China. The massive emerging market there was too much of a $$$ opportunity for them to ignore. Yes, there's a difference between, say, a fast food chain that tries to get a foot hold in China and a technology company that helps provide tools used to limit rights of free speech etc. However, this is a matter of degree, not kind. All business with China that helps advance their economy helps to legitimize their regime, and also gives China a significant bit of influence over even companies' non-China businesses. When a company's business is China is so critical to lose that it will subject itself to China's will even outside of China, that company is complicit in the same way, just to a lesser degree, as these tech companies providing more direct support.

baddox 6y ago
> However, this is a matter of degree, not kind. But it sounds like you think that the bad things about China (you specified limiting free speech) differ not in degree but in kind from bad things about other countries. Is that the case?
- ineedasername 6y ago
  I wasn't at all making a comment on bad things done by other countries. The topic of "bad things that countries do" is a bit too broad to tackle in a single comment.
  - baddox 6y ago
    I meant that presumably you don’t advocate a total refusal of all economic participation with most other countries like you are recommending with China.
throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>Yes, there's a difference between, say, a fast food chain that tries to get a foot hold in China and a technology company that helps provide tools used to limit rights of free speech etc. However, this is a matter of degree, not kind. I disagree. Giving bad people money in exchange for hamburgers is different in kind than giving them the tools they need to continue doing bad things. Hamburgers are a commodity they can get from anyone. Tools are not.

cowmoo728 6y ago

There is so much to unpack here that it's difficult to even get started. The US government has encouraged companies to work with China for decades. I remember it being big news when GM opened a joint venture in China in 1997. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC-GM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC-GM The Clinton administration pushed hard to increase trade with China and make it easier for American companies to outsource manufacturing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%93China_Relations_Act_of_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%93China_Re... This continued unabated through the Bush and Obama presidencies, even as it became increasingly clear that US relations with China were going off the rails. There were significant signs that the Chinese government was not playing fair, particularly around IP theft, but the legislative and executive branches did nothing visible about it. Hundreds or thousands of American companies (including google) were hacked into or had intellectual property stolen with no legal recourse. https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-probes-hundreds-of-china-spy-cases https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-probes-hundreds-of-china-s... Chinese military groups also hacked into the employee database for the US federal government. https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-25-million-affected-opm-hack-sources/story?id=32332731 https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-25-million-affected-opm-... Tech companies, like google, are acutely aware that the current Chinese government is extremely capricious and will block an entire company from the country to incubate their own competitor. Many tech companies want to work in china, but of major american companies, they seem to be the most cautious. Given all this context, for Barr to turn around and say that US tech companies are "pawns" is infuriating. Virtually every large american company needs clear laws on working with China. They are not getting those laws out of Congress or the Justice Department, and everyone is the worse for it.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
muleroid 6y ago
Historically the US trade relationship with China was based on a principal that doing so would encourage the adoption of democracy there. Seeing as how that hasn't happened, this kind of rhetoric could just be an attempt to course correct (maybe overly so). I'm sure the upcoming elections also play a part in this. The article briefly mentions that as well.

mips_avatar 6y ago

The Chinese have definitely asked the emperor about the size of his cauldron. I would be shocked if Xi isn't regretting his change in stance the last ten years.

tw04 6y ago

And the republican leadership all the way to the top have become "pawns of Russian influence" - I can tell you which is more damaging to the sovereignty of this nation...

devmunchies 6y ago
And both sides are pawns of Israeli influence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Wadi#Multinational_technology_companies_operating_in_Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Wadi#Multinational_tec...
refurb 6y ago
Based on your sources and thorough analysis, ok, I’ll take your word on it.
- tw04 6y ago
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-russia-putin-trump/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-russia... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-russia-afghanistan-us-soliders-bounty https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-ru... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-putin-g7.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-putin-g... https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-h... Ignoring the whole Roger Stone + wikileaks, Flynn, Manafort, etc. The list goes on, and on, and on. But you already knew that.
  - refurb 6y ago
    1. Opinion piece 2. Lots of “allegedly” 3. Trump favors Russia in G7, apparently that means our leadership is under Russian influence 4. Trumps denial of influence Not too convincing so far.
    - tw04 6y ago
      Lol, intelligence from CIA sources is an opinion piece? Let me guess, Trump is the best president of your lifetime? I notice you failed to address manafort, stone, and Flynn. None of which was “allegedly”.

quattrofan 6y ago

Trump has become a pawn of Russian influence.

pstuart 6y ago
He's been groomed for decades.

awinder 6y ago

This is like pitching feature requests during a sev-1 call. It’s an election year (nothing will be done on this), there’s a raging pandemic (nothing will be done on this). I know we’ve all interviewed for other places while still employed but damn I usually do it with less gusto and publicity.

loldk 6y ago

Our "intelligence" and leadership groups in this country are nothing more than a farce. This is comical.

boznz 6y ago

I would only manufacture something in china if there is a part of the stack that is essential and cannot be copied. There again I would do this for any external manufacturer because you can guarantee that if your product is ever a success it will be copied somewhere.

loldk 6y ago

Our "intelligence" and leadership groups in this country are nothing more than a farce. This is comical. They thought China was full of idiots they could take advantage of and treat like dirt. They got so cocky they didn't even see this coming lol. Holy shit they are dumb, that or even more dumb thinking this is going anywhere they want it to.

dang 6y ago
Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. We're trying for a bit better than this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

thephyber 6y ago

> He added that Hollywood has routinely caved into pressure and censored their films “to appease the Chinese Communist Party.” First point: it's the Chinese government. In China, the government has the ability to shape business actions far more than in the US, because sovereignty. Calling it "CCP" feels political, even if it is accurate. Hypocrisy, coming from the federal government of the USA, who does the exact same thing when Hollywood wants to use any part of the DoD[1]. It shouldn't happen in either case, but it does. And this US Attorney General isn't a relevant neutral source for this message. It just looks like he's making a political statement from a White House that is in the middle of a multi-faceted trade war negotiation with the same entities being criticized here. Also note that this US Attorney General's office is the one which is seeking extradition of the CFO of Huawei[2] from Canada which has been verbally acknowledged by Barr's boss as negotiation leverage in the trade war. > I suspect Walt Disney would be disheartened to see how the company he founded deals with the foreign dictatorships of our day Walt Disney was politically hard right after the US entered WW2 and joined the Second Red Scare on the side of Senator McCarthy. I honestly don't care what he would say today. Also worth nothing that Ronald Reagan was also a movie propagandist for the US Army in WW2 and was another loud voice like Senator McCarthy during the Second Red Scare. It was the moral panic / cancel culture of its day. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-entertainment_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-entertainment_complex [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou#Detention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou#Detention [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney

pstuart 6y ago

Funny how Barr doesn't mention Russia. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-funded-facebook-twitter-investments-kushner-investor https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-funded-f...

javajosh 6y ago
Indeed. It seems pretty clear that Russia will want another Crimea style victory, and with an extraordinarily strong ally in the Whitehouse it makes sense to lay the groundwork for that now. (I'm not exactly sure how this will work since this time both sides have strategic nukes.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict

pnathan 6y ago

This has to be considered in a nuanced way. Note that I'm calling "China" the country's leadership as expressed by their official stance, not the individuals or the general population. - China does pressure operations with other countries. - China does not have a USA aligned value system - China is getting quite successful - parity with the US is either here or not far off. - China is influencing tech companies in a steak-dinner sort of way. - China does certain things that verge on, or simply are, sleazy. I would suggest the thing to get excited about, and appropriate boundary setting, would be the sleaze. I look forward to a friendly competition with the Chinese system, where we're both competing to be excellent and trading top places. That seems to be something the AG is concerned about- I don't mind being in second place, if the race is adequately fair. ;)

bobmarleythecat 6y ago

And the US President is a pawn of the Russians! Here come the "free" elections my Comrades!