More on the reactions stimulated by the news, to which I blinked below, that a Chinese oil concern is going after Unocal. And recall that IBM sold its PC division to a Chinese buyer and that China’s largest apppliance manufacturer is going after Maytag. The columnist explains China’s lust for American brand names not just as blind reverence for American capitalism, of course, but as an efficient means of boosting global sales and distribution capabilities in a rapidly expanding economy and, especially, gaining entry points into the U.S. market. Pressuring the Chinese to let its currency rise will only make that easier. Trade barriers erected by the West to address the growing trade imbalance may further encourage Chinese firms to do an end-around and invest directly in the West. (Bloomberg)

Is our reaction to the threat of Chinese takeovers based on a security concern or plain old American jingoism and xenophobia, shades of the ’80’s fears that the US was being bought up by Japan? Contrast the nonplussed reaction that T.R. Reid, writing about the ‘United States of Europe’, has been getting on the talk show circuit when he runs down the extent of European corporate ownership of familiar American brands; he means to dramatize the hidden economic contention of the EU, not raise the hue and cry about a covert hostile takeover. My guess is that, similarly, most Americans wouldn’t notice any difference after a Chinese takeover of one of their trusty brand names, and after all, globalization is equally an issue whether the CEOs are Asians or Caucasians. The author does observe however, that “…(i)t would be a mistake for U.S. politicians to fall into the same kind of xenophobia they exhibited with Japan,” but his reasoning is that struggling American firms might be rejuvenated by a Chinese partner. He concludes that America should get ready for the arrival of Corporate China. But Corporate America remains by far the greater threat to our security and freedom, IMHO.