Is Apple Responsible for Social Justice?
Lots of U.S. employers - like Apple, for instance - make stuff overseas. People say that the workers who make the stuff aren't paid enough, that they're treated poorly. Others say that the workers would wallow in poverty if they didn't have these jobs, indeed many if not most are happy to have these jobs.
We could debate whether employers who make stuff overseas are being fair and just to their overseas employees. But there's more to the story of employers who make stuff overseas. And that's where the blind Chinese activist comes in.
You remember him, don't you? He's the Chinese guy who traveled across China protesting the Chinese "one-child" policy where you're punished if you have more than one child. He was invited to the U.S. and - after a dramatic interlude where the Chinese government didn't want to grant him permission to leave the country - wound up being allowed to go. But don't think he's just kicked up his feet and rested on his laurels now that he's in the Land of the Free. He's pressing forward with this latest effort:
"Chen Guangcheng, the Chinese pro-life activist, has urged executives at the Apple computer company to use their influence against China’s brutal one-child population policy."
Yes sir, he's gone after Apple - one of the biggest companies ever (as measured by market capitalization). Not only is Apple one of the biggest, it's easily one of the most, if not THE most recognizable companies in the world. This Chinese guy didn't waste any time and he doesn't fool around.
What he wants is for Apple to use its clout with the Chinese government, clout based on the fact that they employ thousands of Chinese. Chen knows the Chinese government is desperate to employ more Chinese and keep them employed. He knows the government dreads unemployment because it would lead to social unrest. And the still-Communist government of China wants nothing to do with social unrest, or with anything whatsoever that would threaten their continuing to rule China without competition or significant resistance.
Will Apple respond? We'll see. More importantly, should they respond? After all, Apple is a public company. The primary responsibility of a public company's management is to their shareholders. They have no legal of official responsibility to pursue the issue Chen raises, which is one of human and social justice.
But just because they don't have any legal or official responsibility doesn't mean they might not have a moral responsibility to say or do something. What do you think?
One thing I know is that the Chinese policy is an immoral one. The government doesn't just impose this arbitrary rule on families - that they can only have one child - but the enforcement of the policy involves force and corruption. Officials insist that someone who is pregnant with a second child have an abortion. If they don't, they force them to have one - unless that person pays them off. It's an awful, twisted, perverse situation.
Then again, the U.S. government allows its citizens to kill its unborn children. It doesn't force anyone, but it permits this evil. I'm guessing that the Chinese government's law counts as a "greater evil," but that doesn't let the U.S. government off the hook.
I wonder if Chen has thought about this? Perhaps he's so focused on his cause that it hasn't crossed his mind. Would he turn around and tell Apple that they should bear responsibility for pressing the U.S. government to reverse its policy of permitting the murder of innocents?
Interestingly, the late Steve Jobs, co-founder and former head of Apple, was adamant about making sure that Apple products could not be used to promote or distribute pornography. So, for example, as CEO he made sure that the Apps on the iPhone would not be in any way associated with pornography. So there's an example of Apple being responsible, right?
Of course, its not like companies don't pursue any socially responsible policies. It's just that the only two you usually hear about are "diversity" and anything related to the "green" movement.
I suppose human life doesn't cut it with a lot of companies.
We could debate whether employers who make stuff overseas are being fair and just to their overseas employees. But there's more to the story of employers who make stuff overseas. And that's where the blind Chinese activist comes in.
You remember him, don't you? He's the Chinese guy who traveled across China protesting the Chinese "one-child" policy where you're punished if you have more than one child. He was invited to the U.S. and - after a dramatic interlude where the Chinese government didn't want to grant him permission to leave the country - wound up being allowed to go. But don't think he's just kicked up his feet and rested on his laurels now that he's in the Land of the Free. He's pressing forward with this latest effort:
"Chen Guangcheng, the Chinese pro-life activist, has urged executives at the Apple computer company to use their influence against China’s brutal one-child population policy."
Yes sir, he's gone after Apple - one of the biggest companies ever (as measured by market capitalization). Not only is Apple one of the biggest, it's easily one of the most, if not THE most recognizable companies in the world. This Chinese guy didn't waste any time and he doesn't fool around.
What he wants is for Apple to use its clout with the Chinese government, clout based on the fact that they employ thousands of Chinese. Chen knows the Chinese government is desperate to employ more Chinese and keep them employed. He knows the government dreads unemployment because it would lead to social unrest. And the still-Communist government of China wants nothing to do with social unrest, or with anything whatsoever that would threaten their continuing to rule China without competition or significant resistance.
Will Apple respond? We'll see. More importantly, should they respond? After all, Apple is a public company. The primary responsibility of a public company's management is to their shareholders. They have no legal of official responsibility to pursue the issue Chen raises, which is one of human and social justice.
But just because they don't have any legal or official responsibility doesn't mean they might not have a moral responsibility to say or do something. What do you think?
One thing I know is that the Chinese policy is an immoral one. The government doesn't just impose this arbitrary rule on families - that they can only have one child - but the enforcement of the policy involves force and corruption. Officials insist that someone who is pregnant with a second child have an abortion. If they don't, they force them to have one - unless that person pays them off. It's an awful, twisted, perverse situation.
Then again, the U.S. government allows its citizens to kill its unborn children. It doesn't force anyone, but it permits this evil. I'm guessing that the Chinese government's law counts as a "greater evil," but that doesn't let the U.S. government off the hook.
I wonder if Chen has thought about this? Perhaps he's so focused on his cause that it hasn't crossed his mind. Would he turn around and tell Apple that they should bear responsibility for pressing the U.S. government to reverse its policy of permitting the murder of innocents?
Interestingly, the late Steve Jobs, co-founder and former head of Apple, was adamant about making sure that Apple products could not be used to promote or distribute pornography. So, for example, as CEO he made sure that the Apps on the iPhone would not be in any way associated with pornography. So there's an example of Apple being responsible, right?
Of course, its not like companies don't pursue any socially responsible policies. It's just that the only two you usually hear about are "diversity" and anything related to the "green" movement.
I suppose human life doesn't cut it with a lot of companies.
Comments