You [Jason] conclude:

"If our goal is to spread democracy in China the quickest way to do that is to make some short-term compromises. Drawing a hard line is the easy, intellectual route to take, but it's hopelessly naive. Rolling up your sleeves and investing in a market that could collapse or kick you out is, in fact, the courageous route."

It's not naive. To date, no major US company has seemed willing to say no to China, because they so want that market.

Google doesn't need that market. Google will survive and thrive if it doesn't earn in China. Google will remain available to those in China as it was before, and they can complain to their government if an important service to them is being blocked. But a real major short term change would have been for Google to have said no to China. No, we won't do this censorship. We'd rather not enter the market. That would have put much more pressure on other US companies to make changes or pull out in the short term, which in turn might have put real short term pressure on the Chinese government to back off.

Instead, by complying, Google helps ensure that change will be a nice, slow long-term process, if it really comes at all.

Finally, as you note, it is Google that has the motto of "Don't Be Evil." They themselves set up that high moral ground. The type of censorship they are asked to do, they are actually doing, simply is evil to a wide number of people -- including yourself. So if you're going to do it, at least at the same time drop the motto.