
U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence” - ilamont
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-barr/attorney-general-barr-takes-aim-at-hollywood-disney-for-censoring-films-to-appease-china-idUSKCN24H2JT
======
ineedasername
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.

~~~
Aunche
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.

~~~
godmode2019
Is believe MacDonald's China its owned by China, they sold all their assets a
few years ago because their business model is largely real estate and you can
only lease hold land for 99 years in China.

------
cowmoo728
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_Re...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%93China_Relations_Act_of_2000)

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...](https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-probes-hundreds-of-china-spy-
cases)

Chinese military groups also hacked into the employee database for the US
federal government.

[https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-25-million-affected-
opm-...](https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-25-million-affected-opm-hack-
sources/story?id=32332731)

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.

~~~
jerrac
> 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.

~~~
thephyber
> Outsourcing ethics to Government regulation is just plain wrong.

This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase
profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing anything
less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics is far
lower.

> is just plain wrong

What is the consequence? Does anyone in the USA strictly avoid buying anything
from any company with dubious ethics?

We all have knee-jerk reactions to outrage, but where we either (1) don't have
enough transparency to know or (2) don't have reasonable alternatives, there
is no ability for individual non-governmental entities to shape those
incentives. The closest we get are internet mobs organizing boycotts, but lots
of people reject that method for completely rational reasons.

~~~
jerrac
> This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase
> profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing
> anything less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics
> is far lower.

Holding firm to a strong sense of ethics and morals is a risky thing to do.
Whether you're representing a company, or just acting as an individual. But
that risk does not justify NOT holding firm.

So, if you run a company, and you're afraid of getting sued by your
shareholders for not pursuing profit at the expense of your ethics and morals,
I'd suggest finding a new job. Or, just maybe, your shareholders aren't so
blinded by greed that they would not support your company doing what is right.

~~~
usefulcat
> So, if you run a company, and you're afraid of getting sued by your
> shareholders for not pursuing profit at the expense of your ethics and
> morals, I'd suggest finding a new job.

Who’s to say that’s not exactly what normally happens? In which case it should
surprise no one that those who remain are disproportionately lacking in ethics
and morals.

------
vmception
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
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.

~~~
nostrademons
I think one point the grandparent is alluding to is that _there are more than
two ways to slice up the world_. Cold-War thinking assumes a bipolar world -
Allied vs. Axis, U.S. vs. Russia, NATO vs. Warsaw Pact, now U.S. vs. China.

But that's not the only way to look at the world. Even restricting yourself to
dualities, you could also view it as Commerce vs. Guardians [1], people who
think for themselves vs. people whose opinions come from those around them
[2], zero-sum thinking vs. positive-sum thinking, or those who divide people
into two groups vs. those who don't. With many of those lenses the nation-
state as a social organizing principle is obsolete: people look out for their
own interests and make contracts with each other when it's mutually
beneficial.

I think this is a particularly useful worldview when it comes to large mega-
corps. Apple is on Apple's side, and to some extent on their customer's side;
_both_ the CCP and the AG dislike them.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_of_Survival](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_of_Survival)

[2] [http://paulgraham.com/orth.html](http://paulgraham.com/orth.html)

~~~
vmception
Grandparent poster here, this is exactly what I was aiming to say regarding
the nation-state as a social organizing principle being obsolete and the
dualities being equally irrelevant.

The final thing I would say is that communism _lost_ , except in name alone,
so that makes this perspective so much easier! All major powers reformed to
market based economies and dropped the strict marxist ideologies, even if some
teach it and don't point out the contradictions.

~~~
tkinom
"communism lost, except in name alone" \- unfortunately not according the CCP
/ Xi.

They/He still thinks China are winning according the Communism/Socialism
principals and not before the Deng's market reform 30/40 years ago.

~~~
vmception
that's exactly what I am referring to, they do teach marxist ideals but they
don't teach the contradictions to their populace while their free trade zones
and market based reforms grow and grow and are wildly popular

this is very easy to integrate into, compared to not having 7 special economic
zones and administrative regions, and massive metropolitan areas supporting
those zones.

~~~
T-A
> market based reforms grow and grow

[https://www.ft.com/content/3e37af94-17f8-11e9-b191-175523b59...](https://www.ft.com/content/3e37af94-17f8-11e9-b191-175523b59d1d)

~~~
vmception
if “the people’s Congress” wants to shut off all markets as handicap non-state
owned enterprises, they have the power and ideology to do so

there is no assurance of private enterprise there

regardless, it is possible to operate in the here and now and stash resources
and titles in the caymans as fast as you can

------
softwaredoug
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

~~~
blisseyGo
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-
consul...](https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/health-alert-u-s-consulate-
general-guangzhou-peoples-republic-of-china/)

> 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
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
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>

~~~
dang
> _FYI, if you stand up two false straw men, you look like a collaborator with
> the CCP. <joke> You communist. </joke>_

This breaks the site guidelines—quite badly actually. Insinuating that someone
is a "collaborator" is...well, it's hard to believe that we've returned to an
age where people do this kind of thing, however trivially on the internet.
Adding joke tags doesn't help much, and it's notable that you didn't wrap your
entire insinuation in them anyhow.

Would you mind reading
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
and using HN in the intended spirit? Note that they include:

 _Assume good faith._

" _Please don 't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading,
foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken.
If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the
data._"

Edit: so far, every comment your account has posted has been using HN for
political/ideological/national battle. That's not what this site is for, and
we ban accounts that do this, so please don't misuse HN this way. No, that's
not because we're communist collaborators—it's because we're trying to protect
HN from flamewar, regardless of which angle the flamebait flies in from.

~~~
ra1n85
It's clearly tongue in cheek, how can you not see that? I mean there are joke
tags!

~~~
dang
" _Adding joke tags doesn 't help much, and it's notable that you didn't wrap
your entire insinuation in them anyhow._"

~~~
ra1n85
[edit] Retracting my unnecessary jab around the moderator's comments being
modified several times and their moderation leaving a lot to be desired. The
latter was rude and uncalled for.

~~~
Bud
I'll refrain from commenting on you personally, but I will say that I've been
here for around a decade and dang's moderation has been _excellent_ over that
entire period.

Sometimes it has even been aimed at my comments, and I cannot really cite a
single example where I feel dang has been unfair.

I would also note that you failed to even attempt to say _why_ you think
dang's moderation was lacking, here.

------
Shivetya
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
What is the difference between virtue signaling and marketing when a
corporation is doing it?

~~~
dx87
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
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-
stakeholde...](https://www.inc.com/maureen-kline/why-debate-over-stakeholder-
value-vs-shareholder-value-is-all-wrong.html)

~~~
bryanrasmussen
It depends on the company - Disney needs to signal virtue because virtue is
part of their brand and everyone knows who they are, Thomson Reuters is not
that well known and only need to signal virtue to their valuable employees who
might not want to stay at some place they found too scummy (but who knows,
money is a great persuader), Monsanto - I don't know, I somehow feel virtue is
not on-brand where they're concerned and signalling would make people uneasy.

~~~
scarface74
Yet Disney celebrated Pride month even though they had to know that it would
cause criticism from the “Focus on the Family” crowd.

[https://disneyparks.disney.go.com/blog/2020/06/recognize-
pri...](https://disneyparks.disney.go.com/blog/2020/06/recognize-pride-
month-2020-with-the-new-rainbow-disney-collection/)

~~~
pwillia7
I think you could argue this is also about money. Disney parks have already
won nearly every family in America. Most families would like to take their
kids to Disney. Pride month probably only minorly affects that. Now how will
Disney Parks keep showing a healthy growth rate? Well, they'll need to tap
into new markets. What kind of tactics can they use to lure those new markets
to the parks?

I just don't believe altruism or pure evil exists in these large orgs. I'm
sure there are exceptions to prove the rule, but it's rare you'll see an
action by a large corporation that can't be explained by money and growth.

------
DevKoala
> 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.

------
smileypete
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.

------
threatofrain
> 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.”

~~~
mikece
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.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
Bingo. It's worthwhile to ask to what degree U.S. corporations should be doing
business in Chinese markets, but it's also worthwhile keeping in mind that no
U.S. administration is a purely disinterested party when they're raising these
criticisms -- and this administration in particular, and this U.S. attorney
general in particular, has a pretty strong track record of deliberately
stoking partisan flames and finding "enemies" both within and without. China
is the chosen foreign enemy, but tech companies are increasingly the chosen
_domestic_ enemy.

~~~
xbar
At least he complained that there was a double-standard where the CCP gets the
data and the US doesn't.

We know he wants the US to get the data, too. We know that neither should.

------
awinder
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.

------
pnathan
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. ;)

------
TazeTSchnitzel
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
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
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.

------
ideals
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-c...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/earn-it-act-violates-
constitution)

------
ralmidani
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
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
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.

~~~
stx
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.

------
justinzollars
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
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
> 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
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
True, the individuals that stopped dragonfly are commendable. However, that
was not all of Google.

~~~
price
The parent is referring to when Google pulled out of China in 2010, after
having actually operated a google.cn for several years:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora)

~~~
DevKoala
That was in 2010. Then in 2018 Google was caught building dragonfly which was
a CCP requirement compatible version of their search engine.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonfly_(search_engine)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonfly_\(search_engine\))

Google is a big organization. There is clearly tons of employees there
protecting free speech, but there are also other people who are okay just
taking the cash. It’s hard to treat Google as an entity only on one side of
the fence.

------
mips_avatar
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.

------
okareaman
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
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.

~~~
cscurmudgeon
The opposite is true if we look at data.

[https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/19/business/china-capital-
flight...](https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/19/business/china-capital-flight-trade-
war-us/index.html)

[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-11/china-
hid...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-11/china-hidden-
capital-flight-at-a-record-in-2019-iif-says)

------
boznz
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.

------
Aunche
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.

------
pstuart
Funny how Barr doesn't mention Russia.

[https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-
funded-f...](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-funded-
facebook-twitter-investments-kushner-investor)

~~~
javajosh
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)

------
paxys
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?

~~~
medium_burrito
Because they have inordinate influence, same as with all the movie studios
that are now heavily reliant on China for money. Most countries don't do great
stuff constantly, but China is definitely outdoing itself the last few years:
\- Hong Kong \- Organ harvesting \- Enslave/sterilize Muslim minorities \-
Sinking Vietnamese fishing boats \- Killing Indian soldiers \- Coverup of the
whole virus situation until it was too late \- Constantly threatening invasion
of Taiwan (likely to happen this decade)

Saying "but muh business" is wrong. Either you think these actions are fine,
or you think they are wrong and you can see the clear path where these are
leading. Last time we kept on appeasing a dictatorial ethnostate the world
took a while to recover.

~~~
thethethethe
Ehh you could say the same about the US.

The US is currently: bombing several countries, putting asylum seekers in high
density prisons, blatantly ignoring a global pandemic, assassinating foreign
leaders, disproportionately killing and imprisoning black people, using its
currency to maintain global hegemony, starting trade wars with pretty much
everyone, allies included, spying on the entire world, allies included,
emitting a disproportionate amount of carbon, actively rolling back
environmental protections, etc etc

The US isn’t that different than China, some might consider US imperialism to
be a greater evil. If it is wrong for companies to operate in China, how can
you justify them operating in the United States?

------
bediger4000
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?

------
thephyber
> 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)

------
watertom
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/n...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htm)

~~~
jbob2000
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.

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

~~~
blaser-waffle
He's not wrong.

But it also doesn't make him any less of an asshole -- Barr is a shady
character.

~~~
xbar
This.

------
jhpriestley
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
Those allegations turned out to be false.

~~~
scarface74
Flynn admitted lying.

[https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/defense/4217...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/defense/421780-turkey-
and-michael-flynn-five-things-to-know%3famp)

~~~
cpr
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.

~~~
scarface74
It’s amazing how the law and order types who are always standing up for law
enforcement are the first to say that the justice system unfairly pressures
defendants when its one of their own.....

Oh and by the way, “The Hill” is definitely not part of the “liberal media.”

~~~
atomi
According to his bio, he's a Harvard graduate.

I don't see how someone with that kind of education could be so easily
mislead.

------
loldk
Our "intelligence" and leadership groups in this country are nothing more than
a farce.

This is comical.

------
tw04
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...

~~~
refurb
Based on your sources and thorough analysis, ok, I’ll take your word on it.

~~~
tw04
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-
russia...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-russia-putin-
trump/)

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-
ru...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-russia-
afghanistan-us-soliders-bounty)

[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-
putin-g...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-
putin-g7.html)

[https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-
putin-h...](https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-
helsinki-summit/index.html)

Ignoring the whole Roger Stone + wikileaks, Flynn, Manafort, etc.

The list goes on, and on, and on. But you already knew that.

~~~
refurb
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
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”.

~~~
refurb
It’s an opinion piece from one person who worked at the CIA and just is “don’t
bother working with Russia, they aren’t interest”.

Clear proof of Trumps collusion with Russia!

Let me guess, you think the secret Russian dossier is real?

~~~
tw04
Third time not addressing the arrests, convenient.

Also have yet to explain why the president is asking the CIA to share intel
with an enemy.

------
quattrofan
Trump has become a pawn of Russian influence.

~~~
pstuart
He's been groomed for decades.

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

