an economics concept, is not understood by many "self-reliance" touting strongmen

What Amazon does is a textbook example of failed corporate social responsibility. It would be fair to give back to society by paying what is morally due, instead of (ab)using loopholes and sticking to the same societal obligations as everyone else. In Europe taxes funds health-care, social benefits and services and pensions. Those are benefits European states, including the UK, provide to Amazon's employees via our tax money. We're basically subsidizing Amazon. The amount they give back in charity is only a faction of what they owe society, and there's no democratic control over how Amazon allocates the little it gives back. Obviously, this is exactly what Amazon and its shareholders want.

It's a legal failure, but also a moral one on Amazon's side.

"People in this country have had enough of experts" (Michael Gove). The government really followed through on that promise at every step. "Promises kept"

While de-facto the Communist Party = the State, the Hammer and Sickle are the symbols of the Party, not the Chinese State (Maybe you are thinking of the Soviet Union instead?). Facebook would thus have to fly a flag with the GOP Elephant

The difference is that Facebook has bad oversight and bad company policies. Facebook's censorship problem is entirely with its own means to fix if the CEO and board wake up from their stupor. Whereas Tencent, who runs WeChat, has an official Communist Party cell in their company who has a say how the company is run (they even have a nice hammer-and-sickle adorned sculpture outside their HQ to suck up to the powers in charge). By law they are also required to hire staff for censoring, who take orders from the Chinese censorship administration, and not from the company. There's quite a difference in how the "censorship" regime works in the US and in China.
If Reddit and Co want to change, they can. Tencent, in comparison, is pretty much a state actor when it comes to content enforcement.

Google & Co have business in China despite their platforms being banned. They are the top platforms for Chinese businesses to advertise on when they want to reach customers in Africa, Asia, India, Latin America or any other place that is not China.

Management in games is a joke. It's either people who stuck around forever. They get promoted because of their "expertise" - usually not in management, but because they grew up writing assembler on their C64. Or people who get promoted to manage a team of 30 because they are gifted artists or programmers, not managers. Or people who don't fit anywhere else and who get equipped for the job by attending a weekend CSM training. Seeing people run projects who have proper qualification in running projects and managing people is pretty rare in games. What's worse, some are even proud of their lack of knowledge because "making games is different" and "we've always done it that way" and "traditional management won't work" excuses.

reading this whole victim blaming thread makes me sad.

I'm a white male, currently a technical director in video games, working for 20 years in the industry, and what she describes definitely rings true. The industry does have a bro-culture and maturity problem. Often Managers have barely any management training (unless you could a weekend Scrum course and a CSM adequate for managing 100 people). Toxic people do stay on the project because they are "essential" for launching that AAA title so your publisher pays your bills. The industry is very small and you do get hired by word of mouth. There is a tendency for cliques and nepotism because the industry is small and because it is just human when people prefer to work with someone "they know". There is also a tendency to excuse bad behavior as result of "passion" or a "fun work environment" or simply because of "crunch stress". There is also a notion that games are different. If tech in general doesn't have to behave like boring traditional companies, then this applies double for games. Most games people who manage to stay longer than 10 years have stories about genuine WTF?! moments that are about people, often managers, behaving in absolutely mind boggling immature ways, that would disqualify those people for even looking after your cat.

sounds like Taylorism, aka management by numbers, 2.0.

yep. they did a good job at containment, but a shit job at prevention.
Maybe next time don't arrest whistleblowers and don't have a 40.000 people public event one day before lockdown...

And that's the problem in China. People know they cannot trust the government and besides those rumors there is no alternative trustworthy news source, as all news are government controlled. Censorship is not the solution to rumors - it's the root cause of why people believe in them.

14 years in games and I haven't ever seen a contract where bonuses weren't capped. And not even all bonuses are monetary. Some are just better comp time arrangements.

says the guilt tripping game producer. Truth is, nobody gives a damn in hiring interviews if you left because of crunch. In fact, it's a good idea to mention that you weren't comfortable with crunch in your previous studio. Their reaction tells you right away if you're interviewing with a quality company or not.

The CCP is run by those people. Many of the people sitting in the national congress are billionaires. They make members of the US senate look poor.

You're both right and wrong here. China does have unions but they are part of the Chinese Communist Party and just enforce it's decisions. The logic here is: Communism is for the people and there is a union. If you are exploited, then either turn to the existing union or stfu, because Communism is supposed to be a workers' paradise! And forming unions that don't belong to the party isn't allowed because of that logic. Note that Jack Ma is a fairly important member of the CCP sitting in its national committee.