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.
The profit made from every Big Mac is money that leaves China and goes into the pocket of a foreign investor. This is infinitely more valuable than McDonalds making a tweet that supports Hong Kong. China knows this, which is why it's so hard for a foreign company to do business there even if you don't consider all the censorship laws.
>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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
> Virtually every large american company needs clear laws on working with China.
I partially agree. Yes, the Federal government should heavily regulate trade with China.
But companies don't need to wait on the Government to do what is right. Companies could have ignored any Government push to do business in China.
Outsourcing ethics to Government regulation is just plain wrong.
There's broader context to all this. The central banks knew that their system would break down eventually due to inflation, and so one way to extend its life was to offshore manufacturing to make products cheaper and more affordable on a weaker dollar.
To keep everything from imploding on America, manufacturing had to be wrested from China at the same time the Federal Reserve was shut down.
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.
It's relevant to understand that China's government/business relationship and their IP enforcement + state-sponsored hacking is considered the normal course of business in their (current?) value system. In the USA, the government/business relationship is (ostensibly) very different (although campaign finance + lobbying makes this claim dubious), so the US could easily misinterpret Chinese actions in this new "5th domain" as an act of war. When one of two actors believe that they are both at war, it doesn't take much for both actors to believe they are at war.
Also, I suspect with the 4 simultaneous crises (disease outbreak, economic depression, civil unrest, political loggerheads during this election year) the USA is having right now, China may well be able to outlast us and might end up the only "superpower" in a decade or two. A significant portion of the US population still thinks we are the "greatest nation" while our world rankings continue to slip below other OECD nations in {literacy, education, health, longevity, happiness, affordability, etc}. I suspect the "new cold war" is actually between two tribes in the USA. China just has to outlast our simmering civil war without galvanizing the two American factions together against them in battle.
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
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
> 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.”
Meanwhile Barr is insisting that all encryption tools, in order to be legal in the US, need to give copies of the keys to the government... you know to keep us safe from terrorists. And tax cheats. And pirated movie bootleggers.
IIRC, last year Apple setup a server within China for holding the iCloud security keys for the Chinese-owned iPhones? Definitely some collaboration there..
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.
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. ;)
Multinational corporations have no loyalty to anything except their shareholders. Politicians should not feign surprise when they do not align with national interest.
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.
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.
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.
>> he regime in China represents evil on a scale that is probably unprecedented in Earth's history
Yeah, Nazi is now the cute one in the room, given China is here, right? At least the Nazis are white.
I don't know, maybe killing Native Americans for their land, enslaving the black, and selling opium to weaken a whole nation for their silver are all less evil than what the Chinese are now doing. But who knows, people have forgotten those deeds haven't they?
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
[+] [-] ineedasername|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] Aunche|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway0a5e|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] baddox|5 years ago|reply
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?
[+] [-] lacker|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cowmoo728|5 years ago|reply
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_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-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-...
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.
[+] [-] muleroid|5 years ago|reply
I'm sure the upcoming elections also play a part in this. The article briefly mentions that as well.
[+] [-] jerrac|5 years ago|reply
But companies don't need to wait on the Government to do what is right. Companies could have ignored any Government push to do business in China.
Outsourcing ethics to Government regulation is just plain wrong.
[+] [-] reaperducer|5 years ago|reply
Things change. The world has changed since 1997. China has changed since 1997.
In 1942 Germany was the enemy. Today, Germany is our friend.
[+] [-] cheaprentalyeti|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Fjolsvith|5 years ago|reply
To keep everything from imploding on America, manufacturing had to be wrested from China at the same time the Federal Reserve was shut down.
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] vmception|5 years ago|reply
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|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thephyber|5 years ago|reply
It's relevant to understand that China's government/business relationship and their IP enforcement + state-sponsored hacking is considered the normal course of business in their (current?) value system. In the USA, the government/business relationship is (ostensibly) very different (although campaign finance + lobbying makes this claim dubious), so the US could easily misinterpret Chinese actions in this new "5th domain" as an act of war. When one of two actors believe that they are both at war, it doesn't take much for both actors to believe they are at war.
Also, I suspect with the 4 simultaneous crises (disease outbreak, economic depression, civil unrest, political loggerheads during this election year) the USA is having right now, China may well be able to outlast us and might end up the only "superpower" in a decade or two. A significant portion of the US population still thinks we are the "greatest nation" while our world rankings continue to slip below other OECD nations in {literacy, education, health, longevity, happiness, affordability, etc}. I suspect the "new cold war" is actually between two tribes in the USA. China just has to outlast our simmering civil war without galvanizing the two American factions together against them in battle.
[+] [-] softwaredoug|5 years ago|reply
Just shows you how genuine their motives are, in case you had any doubts
[+] [-] blisseyGo|5 years ago|reply
> China McDonald's apologises for Guangzhou ban on black people
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52274326
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.
[+] [-] gundmc|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] supernova87a|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] xbar|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Shivetya|5 years ago|reply
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|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RcouF1uZ4gsC|5 years ago|reply
"Silence is not an option" and
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"
While happily doing business with the CCP, and keeping mum about Chinese human rights abuses.
[+] [-] scarface74|5 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics
I’ll take virtue signaling over dog whistling any day.
I bet he doesn’t call out Apple after Cook kissed the golden ring during the photo op last year.
[+] [-] DevKoala|5 years ago|reply
He has a point there, but I am not sure I’d want to support Apple opening up to government authorities here.
[+] [-] smileypete|5 years ago|reply
US foreign policy often turns out to be short sighted.
[+] [-] threatofrain|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikece|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fouc|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] awinder|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pnathan|5 years ago|reply
- 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. ;)
[+] [-] TazeTSchnitzel|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unethical_ban|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] ideals|5 years ago|reply
For reference EARNIT act
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-c...
[+] [-] ralmidani|5 years ago|reply
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|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] echaozh|5 years ago|reply
Yeah, Nazi is now the cute one in the room, given China is here, right? At least the Nazis are white.
I don't know, maybe killing Native Americans for their land, enslaving the black, and selling opium to weaken a whole nation for their silver are all less evil than what the Chinese are now doing. But who knows, people have forgotten those deeds haven't they?
[+] [-] hungryhobo|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] justinzollars|5 years ago|reply
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|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] mips_avatar|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] okareaman|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mooseburger|5 years ago|reply
> 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.
[+] [-] boznz|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Aunche|5 years ago|reply