Getting off the subject of Katrina for a moment (and by the way, DONATE, DONATE, DONATE!!!), let’s talk shortly about globalization and corporate collusion in repression.

Before I babble, let me offer the (limited) caveat that I’m not exactly opposed to the superficial characteristics of globalization. I support the erosion of borders, the expansion of businesses, particularly numerous, unmonopolisitc businesses, and I sort of like extremely regulated versions of capitalism (which probably makes me in reality more of a socialist, but that’s a wirty dord these days).

What I’m opposed to is feudalism, and that’s what globalization is. It allows business, specifically corporate entities, to expand worldwide, effectively evading any and all inconvenient regulations. This renders any laws designed for the benefit of average citizens moot. Worse, because these businesses can simply leave a country that requires too much inconvenient “respect” for consumers and employees, their natural tendency is to seek out places that let them get away with anything. There is no penalty for hurting people, so long as the company in question finds a place where it’s legal, and has a sufficiently adept legal and PR team back in the states.

The places where immoral behavior in pursuit of money is legal are, almost without exception, nations who treat their citizens as badly as these businesses wish to treat their employees. The result is generally a scary collusion between oppressive states and corporations. You know, SYNERGY! Just like when they open a restaurant that sells both KFC and Pizza Hut, only with executions, wrongful imprisonment, and stock options for party leaders.

Of course, the people running the companies don’t actually have to live under these repressive regimes, nor would they ever subject themselves to the conditions they’re only too happy to support for other, lesser people. But as we’ve seen in our own country, money means the power to protect from almost anything. That’s what makes this so dangerous. It concentrates wealth in very few hands while at the same time both enhancing nagative political power, and dilluting positive political power.

Now I realize I’m probably preaching to the choir. The reason I’ve brought this up is because it’s going to start affecting all of us very soon. Case in point, Yahoo has apparently sold its soul. Welcome to BigBrother.com:

Internet giant Yahoo has been accused of supplying information to China which led to the jailing of a journalist for “divulging state secrets”.

Reporters Without Borders said Yahoo’s Hong Kong arm helped China link Shi Tao’s e-mail account and computer to a message containing the information.

The media watchdog accused Yahoo of becoming a “police informant” in order to further its business ambitions.

A Yahoo spokeswoman, Pauline Wong, said the company had no immediate comment.

Translation: “Yahoo wishes to remain silent, until we can figure out how to deny this without springing a perjury trap.”

Shi Tao, 37, worked for the Contemporary Business News in Hunan province, before he was arrested and sentenced in April to 10 years in prison.

According to a translation of his conviction, reproduced by Reporters Without Borders, he was found guilty of sending foreign-based websites the text of an internal Communist Party message.

Reporters Without Borders said the message warned journalists of the dangers of social unrest resulting from the return of dissidents on the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, in June 2004.

Of course, Yahoo isn’t the only offendor:

Western internet companies have regularly been criticised for agreeing to China’s strict rules governing the internet, which Communist Party leaders fear could be a tool to spread dissent.

Microsoft was criticised in June for censoring what bloggers write.

The companies say they have to abide by local regulations, and point out that since China is set to be the world’s biggest internet market, they cannot ignore it.

Say, am I the only one here reminded of “I was only doing my duty”?