Sometimes people suggest that the People’s Republic of China is no threat beyond its borders.
You can’t reach this doctrine based on a thorough canvass of the evidence. From China’s perspective, though, it is true insofar as the Chinese government treats its borders as encompassing the entire earth and perhaps even the moon.
What is also true, though, is that not every person or organization outside of China that advances China’s totalitarian agenda is being threatened by China.
For example: the company Constant, which operates the hosting service Vultr. Based in Florida (a U.S. state), Constant has willingly cooperated with Beijing’s censorship agenda as promoted by the China-based conglomerate Tencent.
Tencent owns the social media platform WeChat. As the Chinese Communist Party demands of all such platforms within China, WeChat censors discussion of topics that the CCP dislikes, e.g., Tiananmen Square or Xi Jinping pictured as Winnie the Pooh.
An organization called GreatFire produces a Chinese-language website, freewechat.com, which archives many of the posts on taboo subjects that get censored on WeChat.
Since 2015, FreeWeChat had been hosted by Constant’s Vultr — until several months ago, when Vultr started receiving harrumphing letters from Tencent, demanding that it stop hosting FreeWeChat. Vultr obeyed; dropped FreeWeChat.
Which, fortunately, managed to transfer its site to another hosting service.
Tencent’s letters offered an array of specious claims that GreatFire refuted in detail. GreatFire’s attempts to communicate with inconstant Constant about the matter have had no effect. Nevertheless, FreeWeChat and its noble mission survive.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with Nano Banana and Firefly
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
One reply on “Constant Caved”
Well, if I ever migrate from my present hosting service, then I will make a point of avoiding Constant and Vultr, even if the latter changes hands. Routinely responding with forgiveness in cases of change-of-ownership results in higher selling prices.
I quit LinkedIn when Microsoft began censoring it on behalf of the PRC, and did not reverse myself when Microsoft reversed itself. Had I not already been avoiding Microsoft’s Windows and application programs, I would have quit them too.