On the occasion of the visit to the U.S. of China's president Hu, and the focus on trade/economics, it might be worth reading the China - Amnesty International summary report from 2004.
China's record on human rights is abysmal of course, on the plus side they have cheap labor and provide cheap goods for us to consume. How those two things balance out is something you will have to work out for yourself.
If you read many of the reports of human rights abuses it's easy to imagine what it might be like to live in such a place. You would be afraid to make a peep. People are put in prisons for what would be considered minor expressions of free speech in a democratic country.
We are ready to embrace China for the sake of trade/economics, and we can't afford, or won't take the risk, of making our relationship contingent on respect for human rights and human dignity, freedoms we hold dear.
Some assume that industrialization and capitalism brings with it freedom, and respect for humanity. That doesn't always turn out to be the case if we consider Germany from 1933 to 1945. A case can be made that communism is the outgrowth of a poor society where the have-nots are many and are glad to get a little, and fascism is the outgrowth of a rich society where those who have - want more, and will do almost anything to get it. The point being that assuming that a country will automatically embrace democratic principles and respect for human dignity, as a result of economic growth, is a fallacy.
There's a big piece of the puzzle missing in the "World is Flat" discussion brought on by Thomas Friedman and others - his point is that China is a worthy global competitor because they value education, particularly technical education and are willing to work hard to ensure their people are educated. That may be true, but one of the prime reasons China is competitive globally is they have no labor protections or any of the social contracts that we expect in civilized countries.
If a U.S. company could work people as many hours as they wanted, for whatever wages they wanted to pay, and not provide unemployment insurance, medical benefits, follow EEOC or OSHA rules, contribute to social security, or anything else we expect as part of our social contract, and if anyone who disagreed ran the risk of being thrown in prison - how competitive would they be?
So the point is - if we really want to believe the world is flat that we are on a "level the playing field" then we need to work globally, not just for economic gain but for the protection of human rights and respect for the human dignity of all people.
It's important that we leave the affairs of the state to the state - for example balance of trade. But it's equally important that we bring the affairs of people to the forefront and not go to sleep thinking that corporations and governments are looking out for human rights.
Whatever organization or church you choose to support, I'd recommend thoughtful consideration and if you decide to, speak out, and act out, to work for not for a balance of trade but a balance of respect for basic human dignity - for humanity everywhere.
