this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
5 points (61.9% liked)

United States | News & Politics

2718 readers
723 users here now

Welcome to [email protected], where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

Post anything related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Archived

A U.S. electric vehicle battery manufacturer with ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has suspended its permit application to build a plant near a Michigan National Guard base following fierce opposition.

Chuck Thelen, CEO of Gotion Inc. — a “wholly owned and controlled” subsidiary of Chinese company Hefei Gotion High-Tech Power Energy Co. Ltd. (Gotion High-Tech) — said the decision stemmed from the firm’s ongoing breach of contract lawsuit against Green Charter Township, according to the Big Rapids Pioneer. The township soured on the $2.4 billion project in November 2023 after voters recalled numerous officials following a series of reports revealing Gotion and its Chinese parent company’s ties to the CCP.

“I applaud the people of Mecosta County as Gotion pauses their permitting process, but their fight is not over,” Republican Michigan Rep. John Moolenaar, chair of the House Select Committee on the CCP, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Gotion must announce it will finally listen to the people, and end its projects for good.”

[...]

Questions about Gotion’s CCP-ties began to arise around March 2023 when The Midwesterner reported Gotion High-Tech’s “Articles of Association” required the firm to establish a “Party organization and carry out Party activities in accordance with the Constitution of the Communist Party of China.”

[...]

The House Select Committee on the CCP investigated Gotion High-Tech in 2024 and “found their supply chains are reliant on forced labor as part of the CCP’s ongoing genocide of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang Province,” Mooleenaar told the DCNF.

[...]

Meanwhile, Michigan residents — like Joseph Cella, the director of the Michigan-China Economic and Security Review Group — engaged in grassroots activism to oppose the CCP-tied company. Cella served as the U.S. Ambassador to Fiji during the first Trump administration.

[...]

“[They] refused to follow the directives given to state and local governments on dealings with China-based companies to exercise vigilance, conduct due diligence, and ensure transparency, integrity, and accountability are built into the partnership to guard against potential foreign government exploitation,” Cella said. “It is important that executive branch agencies, Congress, the Michigan Legislature, and citizens continue to scrutinize and investigate this ‘deal.’”

[...]

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is not anti-CCP rhetoric, the CCP's influence on private businesses is a simple fact that isn't even denied by the CCP.

For example, the party's infiltration of the private sector gained momentum already after then-president Jiang Zemin called in the early 2000s for the CCP to represent "the advanced productive force" and welcome China's emerging private entrepreneurs.

Since Xi Jinping came to power in 2014, the CCP's influence on private businesses have intensified (with the disappearance of entrepreneur Jack Ma after he criticized the CCP supposedly being the most prominent case).

You'll find ample evidence for the the systematic ways in which the Chinese party-state has been interfering in the private sector. So called "CCP branches" within private firms -meant as a potential lever of control, alongside regulatory tools - are a key of that effort. In recent years, the number of these "party units" has increased dramatically, and the CCP branches have strengthened their role in private companies' management.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is absolutely nationalist rhetoric from a conservative paper. Not only that, but the title is absolute nonsense. The CCP didn’t almost take over a town, and anyone who thinks they did is an idiot.

Oh, don’t get me wrong, they would love to control American towns, but they do not, nor have they come close to. You should be ashamed for even posting this tripe.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not 'nationalist rhetoric' to be wary of dictatorships. Nobody would care if this was a corporation from the Republic of China. That is the country and people that Americans were huge friends with during and before WWII.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 20 hours ago

Funny thing to say, considering Trump literally just put tarrifs on the Republic of China.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The propaganda on China is elsewhere. It seems unbiased information is not for you.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

What is a good source for China-related content?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Do you mean sources that are unbiased and focused on Asia, or unbiased sources that also cover Asia?

If you mean the former, then Asia Times is ranked as Least Biased, but there are some issues with stories being censored by the Chinese government since they are based in Hong Kong. Anything that embarrasses the CCP is not likely to show up here.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/asia-times/

For the latter, there's always Reuters, which is one of my favorites. They don't focus specifically on Asia, so you're going to miss out on some smaller regional news, but they are unbiased and highly factual in their reporting.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

These 'rating' sites may give you a hint, but we shouldn't solely rely on them.

What is a reliable source in your view?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I just said, Reuters. You won't find any articles there with an America First, anti-China skew to them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

I just said, Reuters. You won't find any articles there with an America First, anti-China skew to them.

I strongly disagree. Reuters -along with Associated Press (AP) and a few others- have what they call a 'business relationship' with China's propaganda agency Xinhua (basically Reuters, AP & others appear to make some reporting concession in exchange for their allowance to run offices in China).

So they have rather a skew toward the CCP.

The Politics Of Pure Business -- (July 2024)

The deal between Xinhua and AP, which involved cooperation on the distribution of photos, videos and press releases, was finalized with a handshake and the exchange of signed copies. It was covered enthusiastically by Xinhua. For AP, meanwhile, the story was apparently not news — no reporting was available. The same pattern held for Reuters and PA Media Group: enthusiastic coverage from Xinhua, silence from its partners [...]

These partnerships are part of a broader effort by Xinhua to deepen its global media influence, curtailing criticism of the Chinese government and shaping international discourse that portrays the CCP in a positive ligh [...]

AP’s relationship with Xinhua, in place since 1972, is not commercial at all — not really. Instead, it is the political foundation on which AP and other major news agencies, including Reuters, are able to operate in China [...]

The whole story makes a good read. It is essentially about totalitarian regimes' greatest fear: a well-informed public. Agencies like Reuters and a some others must decide whether they stand on the side of free media or authoritarian propaganda.

[Edit typo.]

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

This comment here is a prime example of not having issues with any of the actual problematic aspects and is instead entirely fueled by "fear of the other".

The #1 priority of any state is maintaining their power. I apologize for the highly reductionist argument but:

Within the USA the private sector is, de facto, the super-executive branch of the state. It has "systematic ways" that it "interferes" with what it's supposed to be a "democratic" state. Sure there's a couple hundred oligarchs who all have competing ideas and visions but they, generally, understand that #1 rule.

Within China the CCP is, de facto, the super-executive branch of the state. It has "systematic ways" that it "interferes" with what it's supposed to be a "democratic" state. Sure there's a couple hundred general committee members who all have competing ideas and visions but they, generally, understand that #1 rule.

Within the USA any attempts at pulling power out of the "private sector" is a direct threat and any ideas around a "strong public sector" are a direct threat which is meet with propaganda, repression and violence.

Within China any attempts at pulling power out of the "public sector" is a direct threat and any ideas around a "strong private sector" are a direct threat which is meet with propaganda, repression and violence.

If your argument is honestly one against repression then stop spreading USA propaganda. Everyone knows that's how the CCP works. If you're going to convince anybody you need to evaluate and explain why it works that way and why it's a "problem".

As an example, the Jack Ma example is a particularly salient one as it would be, imo, comparable to Elon Musk being disappeared not long after floating the idea of DOGE. However your attempt to invoke comparisons to protest movements in the US; IE Fred Hampton, the Furgeson 6, 2020 disappearances, Columbia U ICE raids etc. feels disingenuous to me. Could you expand on that?