Apple is NOT the People’s Hero!

But a a free internet is still at stake. And free people need complex strategies in these times.

Here’s my rundown of events of the last few days, including big tech companies piling on in support of Apple:

Many issues billow in the smoke, such as the fact that the county owned the phone or that Apple has sometimes complied in the past, to say nothing of the blame circus around which government employee was responsible for dealing with the phone such that data became irrecoverable. Politicians are weighing in, for current advantage. A decade from now, none of that will matter. But this will:

“What happens so often is we do something that’s justified for terrorism, but it’s going to get used in regular, run-of-the-mill cases.” That might be better news for some than for others. On a global basis, what is a “case”? Child porn rings? People providing support networks for abused women in countries where women have few civil rights? Christians operating an underground church? Apple’s CEO Tim Cook insists, “This case is not about one phone. This case is about the future,” and he is surely correct. More.

Cook’s correct but, as the the Animal wrote recently to complain, Apple has profited handsomely from authoritarian rule in China. Cook is not some force for righteousness. Consider:

The years-long strategy in China is paying off at a crucial time. While sales of Apple products have flatlined or declined in the U.S., Europe and Japan, business in the company’s greater China region continues to soar — to a record $59 billion last year. The Asian giant surpassed the U.S. last year as the No. 1 buyer of iPhones and could one day be the largest market for Apple Pay, the mobile payment platform that was rolled out for Chinese consumers last week.

But there’s no guarantee the good times will continue rolling for Apple. Beijing is increasingly tightening the screws on foreign technology companies, having introduced strict laws aimed at policing the Internet and digital hardware.

The environment will get even tougher, Apple says, if the FBI prevails in seeking a so-called backdoor to Farook’s phone. That could set a precedent for China’s authoritarian leaders to demand the same in a country where Apple has never publicly defied orders. More.

So, yes, Apple sings a different tune in China. And in the Middle East:

Here:

Apple operates in 17 nations in which homosexual activity is illegal. In four of those, it is punishable by death. Women have almost no rights in numerous countries in which Apple does business. A female could not even drive a shipment of iPhones to Apple’s sales location in Saudi Arabia, or work there without a male’s permission.

Apple CEO Tim Cook emerged as a civil rights activist in the spring of 2015, writing an op-ed in the Washington Post, saying he did so, on Apple’s behalf, in “the hopes that many more will join this movement” against discrimination.

“At Apple,” Cook added, “we are in business to empower and enrich our customers’ lives. We strive to do business in a way that is just and fair.” More.

Sure.

But none of this means that Apple is not serious about the tune it is singing here. North Americans do not need to buy Apple. And often they haven’t. That matters.

The feminist movement has signed onto multiculti oppression of women, but women can still drive and deliver phones here, whether Tim Cook makes money or not. That is part of what we must protect.

So I told the Animal, who is sure to weigh in for us on the next round of US Prez nomination votes: To me, Apple is like Trump. I don’t like him but if I were an American, I’d prefer him to the Donor Class’s boys. See, I’m in this for my own freedoms and opportunities.

In Apple vs. FBI, we otherwise doomed average North Americans should back the technocrats just for now, not the progressicrats. Smaller and threatened groups must often make these decisions.

Once we get the progressicrats off our backs, we can start dictating terms to the technocrats, for our dollars that the bank will accept at face value. Not before.

The Animal agreed it makes sense. Thoughts?

See also: Apple vs. FBI: Free internet is at stake Few analysts agree with the FBI that it would end with just this one case. It can’t.

Share