Technicon

Jeffrey S. Young

Capitalism Gone Amok

By | April 25, 2006, 4:55pm PDT

Summary: The fawning and obsequious behavior of Bill Gates, the world’s most powerful businessman in the presence of China’s premier, and his deafening silence, was one of the most depressing displays of capitalist behavior I’ve seen in recent years.

I never would have believed that the day would come when I thought that Angelina Jolie, Tom Cruise, Sean Penn, even George Bush all showed more moral fiber than the leaders of the finest companies in the world’s greatest country.

However, judging by last week’s visit of China’s premier Hu Jintao to the United States, that day has come.  The fawning and obsequious behavior of the world’s most powerful businessman, Bill Gates, and his deafening silence was one of the most depressing displays of capitalist behavior I’ve seen in recent years.  Say what you will about Microsoft’s monopoly, but the reality is that if China wants to keep playing on the world stage it must have access to the Windows operating system.  China needs Microsoft more than Microsoft needs China.  This is an extraordinary position for a capitalist and a self-defined global health care crusader to find himself in.  Gates has a bully pulpit that he could use to make even mild comments about repressive countries, and intransigent leadership, and morally repulsive behaviors. 

Instead we are treated to goofy pictures of a silly looking Gates, and his bald-headed hulking sidekick Steve Ballmer, toasting the premier with Dom Perignon and making meaningless comments.  It’s not hard to imagine them sitting back in that $60 million  mansion afterwards, like Mr Burns and Waylon Smithers of The Simpsons who glory in selling nuclear power to the world for profits, rubbing their hands together in glee at the prospect of more millions pouring into their coffers as every PC sold in China now has to have a legal copy of Windows installed on it.  Think of it! A legal version.  This is so important a step forward that the premier has to fly over and announce it, and as a result Gates folds his tent, serves a fancy dinner, and conveniently forgets his moral courage. 

Isn’t there something very wrong with this tunnel-vision that lets great American companies focus on their self interest while ignoring the social realities that make their success possible?  Is making money the only answer, a la Ayn Rand?  Or is there a higher order, a moral commandment for those of us in the wealthy world to speak out about wrong wherever we see it?  And for those whose privilege and position gives them the power to do this without serious consequence, isn’t it an imperative?  And if it isn’t, shouldn’t we demand it of those we elevate to the pantheon?

The American love for the almighty dollar has blinded us to the realities of what is actually going on at the ground level in China. China may be a booming economy, and it may have more consumers than any place on earth, but it is still a repressive, totalitarian place where the government squelches dissent, where speeches by American notables are routinely sanitized of critical comments before being broadcast or reported locally, where  the average citizen has his Internet access edited and limited as a matter of course, where Tibet is under thumb, where the army is vast and on high alert, where secrecy and a lack of transparency are endemic, where American ideas and intellectual property are routinely stolen, where a handful of well-connected and corrupt people control much of the wealth, where bribery is commonplace for even the smallest mercantile exchange, where Iran and North Korea can find support for their nuclear ambitions, where female children are routinely aborted, where pollution that is truly toxic is countenanced, where religious freedom is non-existent if you’re part of the Falun Gong, and where dissidents are jailed under phony pretexts and then tried in kangaroo courts that are a throwback to the Manchurian Candidate.

At least our government was cool in its embrace of the Chinese premier, and Hollywood’s celebrities routinely point up issues they care about because they really have no risk once they’ve made it onto the cover of People magazine a few times—after all, Tom Cruise is still a movie star with big box office potential no matter what you think about his beliefs on motherhood and anti-depressant medication.

But don’t look for moral courage from Bill Gates.  Nor, for that matter, the leaders of Yahoo, which was implicated in fingering a Chinese dissident recently or Google, which jumps through whatever hoops the Chinese government demands, either.  Sure, you can tell me that laissez faire capitalism doesn’t make moral judgments about where it does business.  That same argument was prevalent among those doing business with Germany in the 1930s too, as American companies kept fueling the Nazi economy.  That abyss of business amorality, and the weakness of our business leaders in speaking out about what they see, is exactly what the Chinese government is counting on to weaken our resolve, hobble our response, and enthrall us to cheap labor and products. 

Business can change the world, but it only works when it is paired with a backbone of freedom that gives everyone the opportunity to succeed on their own blood, sweat, smarts, and tears. 

Where’s our high-tech Winston Churchill?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Biography

Jeffrey S. Young is the author of two books about Steve Jobs--iCon Steve Jobs and Steve Jobs The Journey is the Reward--as well as several others about science and technology. Along the way, Young has worked and written for many magazines and newspapers, including Forbes, Wired, The Hollywood Reporter, MacWorld, Esquire, and the San Jose Mercury News. He currently tends a small vineyard in Northern California.

18
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Wrong about Rand.
SteveWolfer 30th May 2006
You maligned Ayn Rand very badly with the statement, "Is making money the only answer, a la Ayn Rand?" No one, ever, has been clearer or more vocal on the evils of totalitarian government than Ms. Rand. She would not have shared drinks with the Chinese Premier for any amount of money.

I too would like to see business leaders speaking out and standing strong on fundamental political and economic principles. Perhap what is needed is an independent political standards group - a kind of Human Rights organization that would specify a bare minimun standard that governments must meet or their members won't do business with the country. If Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, et. al., would join that organization it would work to put the power of global business more in line with a drive for freedom.
0 Votes
+ -
his market power in China and being investigated. A totalitarian
regime is so much simpler to manage.

Why shouldn't Chinese consumers have the same right to be
abused as the rest of the world?
0 Votes
+ -
Bill "Tookie" Gates.
johnsmith222 25th Apr 2006
Stanley Williams was all too happy to write a few books to avoid his death sentence.

Gates is all for human rights (great excuse to bomb countries that do not submit to United States) and global healthcare (sick consumers do not consume as much as the healthy ones, except healthcare) where it serves his own ends. He obviously could care less about China's barbaric treatment of its own people as long as China is one of Microsoft's major customers, and there is no profit to be made in championing human rights in this case.
0 Votes
+ -
American morality
Bryn 26th Apr 2006
America showed its total lack of moral fibre in WW2. When France decided after its huge losses in WW1, to defend western civilisation again, by joining Britain and the commonwealth in opposing the Nazis. America responded by passing a law that any American citizen who joined another armed force to fight the Nazis would lose their citizenship. London burned while America partied, times change but people don?t. History is just repeating its self. America was quite happy to support the IRA terrorists allow them to collect money to make bombs and kill children but once again it wasn?t until America was attacked yet again that America grew some moral fortitude and backbone.
0 Votes
+ -
And this is different how?
ordaj@... 25th Apr 2006
"...where secrecy and a lack of transparency are endemic, where...ideas and intellectual property are routinely stolen, where a handful of well-connected and corrupt people control much of the wealth, where bribery is commonplace..."

This is prevalent in America.
0 Votes
+ -
agree
hillman.d@... 26th Apr 2006
The middle and lower class are being wiped out so that a select few can have all the wealth in America. We have high health care costs, high higher education costs, lots of bills to pay just to live, little vacation time, lots of distractions--soap operas, nascar, MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA, media conglomerates, larger-than-life sports stars, etc.
To top it all off, wages for executive types increase faster than teachers, engineers, even when companies don't do so well.
At least the Constitution is still around to protect the marginalized in America.
0 Votes
+ -
But there's a war on!
orange_z 27th Apr 2006
Our Commander-in-Chief assures us that the Constitution doesn't apply when there's a War on.

And as long as people buy that argument, there will always, conveniently, be a war on.
0 Votes
+ -
As usual, its all a bit more complicated
Roger Ramjet 26th Apr 2006
China is the largest buyer of USA bonds. They finance our debt (which we are SO fond of spending). Even though China KNOWS that the bonds will be worth less and less every day because of the falling dollar. They are willing to take a loss every single time they buy our bonds.

What would happen if they stopped buying them? What if the US held a bond auction and no one came? The results could be DISASTROUS - the US could raise bond yields to make them more attractive, which would kill the stock market (any yours and my 401k). This could trigger other interest rate hikes and could land us all into another 70's-style recession. What a conundrum!
0 Votes
+ -
OMIGOSH!
leindog 26th Apr 2006
I can't believe someone is actually talking about moral fiber and taking a stand. And here I thought that we can only worship the almighty dollar!

I couldn't agree more with the author - kudos to you for speaking out on this! May we have more articles like this one...
0 Votes
+ -
That's far from self-evident.

Among other things, Microsoft is extremely vulnerable in the sense that they must prevent any other platform from gaining critical mass. China, all by itself, could create enough of a market to break the monopoly -- and probably save money in the process.

That's a pretty serious gun to hold to Bill's head.
0 Votes
+ -
China needs Microsoft?
handydan918 26th Apr 2006
Earlier today, YBK deigned to enlighten us with the follwing pearls of wisdom:

Agreed! And if past performance is an indicator of future events, they will hold the gun to his head, get the deal they want, and then "crawfish, and drill that ol' devil in the AZZ." (To quote Curly Bill, "Tombstone").
IOW, They will likely get what they need, and then either pirate/allow-+sanction piracy, or continue to use OSS!
0 Votes
+ -
American Puritan Ethic and Politics
plumley@... 26th Apr 2006
The 1st tenet is "Somewhere, somehow, someone might be having fun, AND WE ARE AGAINST It!"

The 2nd is "No matter how bad your business is morally, ethically, legally, enviromentally if you are making money then 'God' approves of it!"

Give a politician money (campaign contributions) and he will like your company. Even if it relocates to foreign soil to avoid taxes, abuses the patent and copyright laws to prevent competition, transfers technology to inimical foreigh goverments, and dumps its retirees on the government to avoid contractural agreements. Moral bankruptcy is a fact in government and business.
0 Votes
+ -
"Resisitance is futile...you WILL be assimilated"
This "BORG-ian" statement WILL come to pass as "We the Sheeple" blindly concume ourselves into mind-altered submission...all for the hedonistic pleasures of "Babylon, the Harlot"!
The citizens of Rome were slaughtered by the "Barbarians at the Gates" (PUN intended!) and so will we! George Orwell, we are here.
0 Votes
+ -
All the pieces of the world domination jigsaw are coming together nicely.
And this surprises you? It's Bill Gates, not Linus Torvald or Steve Wozniak! I'm sure he found Hu simpatico and understanding of his problems with uppity peasants and workers who don't believe in paternalistic rulership.
0 Votes
+ -
wrong
evans_simon 30th Apr 2006
this is correct capitalism. is it correct that gates should profit as much as possible. it is correct that he should try to deal with piracy. that is the legal obligation.
as for propping up a currupt regime, what a joke. he is doing business, nothing more. he should not consider human rights or anything else, that is nothing to do with him or microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
Say what?
Sheeva 4th May 2006
So Enron, WorldCom, Exxon, Shell, Dupont, etc. should also not act ethically or responsibly while they rape and poison not only our environments, both human and nature, here and globally? But you're saying that capitalism MUST be this ignorant to all and everything except money monster . . . and to just chalk it up to "business as usual"? Can you say "Nuremberg"?

Are we to believe and accept that even capitalism cannot evolve, adapt and change? That as a business I must never worry about how it affects my environment?

I'm naively hoping that your statements in this post are not what you truly believe but are jsut made to be provocative.
0 Votes
+ -
The Simpsons
Claude Gelinas 24th May 2006
I love your analogy of the retreat in the 60 million dollar mansion
after the photo shoot to self-congratulate over... well, nothing!

The Simpsons paint a realistic picture of the rich, powerful and
wealthy because so many of them see the tree but not the forest.
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong about Rand.
SteveWolfer 30th May 2006
You maligned Ayn Rand very badly with the statement, "Is making money the only answer, a la Ayn Rand?" No one, ever, has been clearer or more vocal on the evils of totalitarian government than Ms. Rand. She would not have shared drinks with the Chinese Premier for any amount of money.

I too would like to see business leaders speaking out and standing strong on fundamental political and economic principles. Perhap what is needed is an independent political standards group - a kind of Human Rights organization that would specify a bare minimun standard that governments must meet or their members won't do business with the country. If Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, et. al., would join that organization it would work to put the power of global business more in line with a drive for freedom.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix