Four decades ago Richard Nixon, a once famously hawkish Republican president, cut a deal with the Communist overlords of China to reshape the world. The result was a transformation of the global economy in ways that we are only now, with the sharp critiques of Apple's China operation, beginning to fully comprehend.
At the heart of the deal was a rejection of the basic moral claim of both egalitarian socialism and free market capitalism, the rival ideologies of the Cold War, to empower the individual as the center of decision-making. Instead, the fate of the citizen would come to be determined by an alliance between huge multinational corporations and government elites with scant reference to the needs of ordinary working folk.
It was understood by both parties to this grand concord that monopoly capitalism could be constructed in China to be consistent with the continuance in power of a Communist hierarchy, just as in the West capitalism was consistent with the enrichment of an ostensibly democratic ruling class. Sharp income inequality, the bane of genuine reform movements bearing the names populist, socialist and democratic, came to be the defining mark of the new international order.
The current controversy over Apple's treatment of its 700,000 foreign workers, mostly in China, is a manifestation of that cross-ideological betrayal. The ironies are manifest. Not the least of which is that businessmen from Taiwan, the bastion of anti-Communist Chinese during the Cold War and still the pretend reason for a U.S. military presence in the region, are the essential organizers of mainland China's workforce. But in the pursuit of profit, and at a time when the startling success of China's hybrid communist-capitalist model keeps the U.S. Treasury afloat, few questions are asked.
Indeed, the pressure is now on to better emulate that model within the United States, to keep still more jobs from being shipped abroad. The human rights concerns of the U.S. have by now been opportunistically tailored to exclude any serious concern about the rights of workers to organize unions to make their job conditions more humane. China's labor practices are now to be admired rather than scorned, lest the American economy decline further in the new world order.
As the New York Times pointed out last month in its devastating overview of Apple's shift from its once proud claim of making its products in the USA to near total dependence on China:
It isn't just that workers are cheaper abroad. Rather, Apple's executives believe the vast scale of overseas factories as well as the flexibility, diligence and industrial skills of foreign workers have so outpaced their American counterparts that 'Made in the U.S.A.' is no longer a viable option for most Apple products.Parse that language to find the excuse to run roughshod over environmental protections, workers' rights and occupational safety standards in order to allow "flexibility" at the massive Foxconn and other plants in China where robotic work is performed by humans under conditions that even Apple has conceded in an internal audit are unacceptable under modern industrial standards.
In reality the multinational corporations prefer China's state-sponsored model of capitalism, which assures them an endless supply of docile workers unprotected by those pesky unions and restrictive government regulations. As Steve Jobs told President Obama last year, "Those jobs aren't coming back." The reason that Jobs supplied in his 2011 approved biography is that the Chinese government is so wonderfully acquiescent to the development plans of foreign corporations. Not as in the U.S., where, Jobs claimed, "regulations and unnecessary costs" make it difficult for companies to operate. That the result of China's deregulation is poisoned air, worker suicide and a massive waste of resources is deemed to be beside the point.
Oddly enough, Jobs, who succeeded in business without attending more than part of a single college semester, also blamed a U.S. educational system "crippled by union work rules" for what he proclaimed to be the sorry state of our domestic labor force. One of the basic human rights being violated by the Chinese government is that of workers to organize unions responsive to their needs; rather, they are at the mercy of phony organizations tolerated by the Communist government. It is sad, and not encouraging, that Jobs endorsed a blatantly anti-union position by claiming that until the teachers' unions were broken, there would be almost no hope for education reform.
Considering the workforce employed by Apple, one has to question what sort of properly trained graduates Jobs had in mind. If the habits required of Apple's workforce in China are to be emulated, the U.S. military, or perhaps our outsized prison system, should become the essential schooling system for American workers to better compete with the properly disciplined assemblers of iPhones in China.
If you a union fan, then you are not likely to ever think so but many people do see that as an issue.
Unions have power, unlike any others in the work force. Union dues elect politicians who change our laws to favor them.
The economy right now is a mess. Many workers have had to take reductions in pay and benefits but I don't see nearly so much of that with unions. It seems that only happens when a company is facing bankruptcy.
Housing prices are overinflated and I suspect wages, as a whole are, too. With so many people unemployed, that will correct itself whether we like it or not. It's simply supply and demand and we have an oversupply of workers so maybe that will result in some jobs coming back here but I am not holding my breath because we also have a few regulation issues.
Not looking for an argument with anyone but I do think we should seriously consider unions and some regulations as a part of our problem. Believe as you wish.
Peeps, get informed, research what you are buying and ask yourself if you really need it. We say we want change, but yet a lot of people do nothing to make it change.
Get rid of the outsourcers by not buying their products that are overpriced and are not protecting their workforce. Quit being sheeple/consumers.
Typically outsourced products are cheaper, not overpriced. Protecting their workforce? How many third world countries can afford to protect their workforce to the same level as the developed countries? Be realistic and logical, don't be emotional
Unrealistic? Not! But in a world run by corporate$$$$, no one gets fair treatment.
How many of YOUR kids want to do that?
It sits on a piles of cash that could buy Greece and still pay a dividend.
The huge profits show they could build or simply assemble iPads in America and still make a decent profit.
In NYC where I live Apple is the major player in notebooks and iPhones and of course tablets. They should lead not descend to DELLs level.
You have to buy a new one?
Why is iTunes so restrictive, why can't I use mp3 with iTunes?
It's time to come down from the Apple Cloud to the real world of Apple products.
Their IPADs look no more than a giant telephone/GPS with toy apps to play with.
AppleCloud?
NO.
AppleFraud.
Apple is creating a chic hip device that locks you into their technology and restricts your ability to use a 3rd party source for options or accessories.
Once people realize the lie of Apple, they will come down off their "creative perches" and switch to a less restrictive device.
In the "PC world" people complain about Windows. How would you like it if you had to buy a Microsoft computer, with Microsoft Windows OS, and Microsoft applications and had to call Microsoft for hardware or software support. Seems kinda restrictive when you can buy an HP PC, Install Windows 7, and run Adobe Photoshop. Food for thought....
f&f
:-)
Come on, do you honestly believe that when a company that produces a product is successful, that is indicative of their quality, and not their sellability?
Apple presents a perfectly clear example of a monopoly and "big business" letting money cloud ethical issues. Just because they managed to make themselves uber-popular and "cool" does not undo that information. It just speaks to how easy it is to manipulate consumers.
He went from an engineering-nerd who wanted things that were cool, well designed, and innovative, to a financial-marketing-money-man who only cared about the bottom-line, customers and workers-be-damned.
Now, with his death, Disney has placed two executives on the Apple board, and you can kiss all innovation at Apple goodby as they begin to squeeze the company (and it's customers) for profit and sue everybody in sight to protect their business model.
Just. Like. Disney.
By refusing to kill these trade deals, Obama is knowingly and willingly bringing that slavery to America. This is fact, it is reality and it can no longer be spun by status-quo intellectual dishonesty and voodoo faux economists with creative vocabulary.
If those in government don't stop this slavery-based trade dumping, WE have to. In that case, we better start learning from our Arab distant neighbors.
Foxconn makes 40% of all consumer electronics (wikipedia).