International Giant vs. Local Laws

Yahoo! executives defended their company's role in China's usual antics of jailing people with vocal "dissenting" opinions. I'm pretty much against China's regime (communism in general, really), but I find that things become a bit complicated on the smaller scale:

He reiterated that regret Tuesday and contended that Yahoo employees in China had little choice but to comply with the government's demands.

"I cannot ask our local employees to resist lawful demands and put their own freedom at risk, even if, in my personal view, the local laws are overbroad," Callahan said.

Lantos rejected that argument.

"I do not believe that America's best and brightest companies should be playing integral roles in China's notorious and brutal political repression apparatus," he said.

Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., compared Yahoo's cooperation with the Chinese governnment to companies that cooperated with Nazi Germany during World War II.

Comparing China to Nazi Germany is a bit overboard I would say, and I have a pet peeve against having atrocities committed at that time leveled down to suit whatever with lesser degrees of genocide ("Bush is Hitler," for instance, makes me want to both laugh and punch the speaker).

Aside from that, I have to say I would agree that companies, particularly international ones, do need to comply with local laws. Think about it, no company should be above laws set by the government it set roots in. This is unfortunate, to say the least, if the government is like that of China, but what if something similar happens in America?

Imagine a foreign company that might prove a real threat to America's security and whose employees have the right to refuse subpoenas to turn over information.

I might be biased on how much power monster companies can wield against certain governments, but the thought of having this power turned against America is unsettling.

As for Yahoo! and Google China rolling over for China, if they really cared about freedom of speech, in its entirety, they should take their business elsewhere. I believe their defense is that more information provided to the masses is better than none at all--but I disagree in a case such as China. Handing out seemingly free roam of the internet to their people is just a placating tactic while the Chinese government asserts control behind the curtains.

Keep your oppressed people content and comfortable enough and they'll less likely rebel.