photo: Marthijn Uittenbogaard
News Biography Publications Links Contact search

Rampant capitalism is comparable with communism

© 29 August 2016 Marthijn Uittenbogaard
In all communistic states we have seen so far that the power is in the hand of the one and only communist party. Every society where power is in the hands of the few is a bad one. It leads to terror: terror to minorities, to people with different opinions and it leads to hypocrisy on a huge scale. It also leads to a police state where all citizens must and will be monitored in almost everything they say and do in life. So capitalism is the answer, because it is the opposite of communism. Is it? Well, that depends on the definition of capitalism.

When you own the toy shops Toys "R" Us (in the Netherlands we have Intertoys) then you can easily destroy toy shops owned by one or two people. How? Well, you can advertise your products on national television. When the local toy shop sells a toy for a reduces price to attract costumers you can sell that same toy for an ever lower price. You can even sell all your toys for a price so that the shop does not make profit for one or two years until your local concurrent is bankrupt. And you can buy your products cheaper because you can make good deals with large toy making companies. Ten percent discount if you buy many of our products. How can a small toy shop stay alive in such a climate? The answer is: it cannot. We see this everywhere. In the end we only have Intertoys left in The Netherlands and Toys "R" Us in the United States. On a larger scale also Intertoys will go down: it will be swallowed by a larger company. World wide we will have one or two major players in the field. The multinationals have so much money - and because of that - power, that they even can make deals with politicians that eat out of their hands. They make secret deals with the Dutch government so that they almost pay no taxes at all! Instead of paying a higher percentage which would be fair to smaller businesses they pay less, much less, almost nothing at all!

This example shows that the power in our society is shifting from the people that vote for politicians to the multinationals that indirect buy politics and they buy mass media influence. In such a way that the citizens will not stand up against this system. Until it goes too far and people will become angry. In that case they can correct the way we are going, but usually, people are dumb and they get angry and they need scapegoats. Politicians can easily go on for many more years with their policy, good for the multinationals only, if they give the people their scapegoats. Pedophiles are for many years the number one scapegoats but Muslims are almost taking over poll position.

In our capitalist society, where multinationals are in power, there is less place for free thinking people. These people are repressed. And when everyone is using Google, Microsoft and Facebook then minority views will be washed away totally. Nudity, for instance, is forbidden on Facebook. In the end everyone must walk in line and consume the products of the big companies without questioning the status quo.

Artists usually are unique persons with an unique product. They don't make one million of the same paintings like a factory could do. An artist, who for instance makes nude photographs of people, is having difficulties when he or she places some of their work on Facebook (especially if it concerns photographs of children). The power of an artist, that often also has interesting things to say about society is declined in our capitalist society.

When you let the big companies do whatever they please without much regulation, then our society will become the same sort of society that the Soviet Union was: a totalitarian state with many violations of human rights. And with the mass media not covering these violations or lying about them. Too much power in the hands of few.

Do big companies care for privacy? Well they want to make money, so if they can make a good deal with NSA that will give them financial gain, then they do not care about privacy at all.

It is already difficult for people who think independently to reach a large audience. I have a handful of Twitter followers. People are afraid to follow my account. When a pedophile activist like Tom O'Carroll once reached a larger audience, because he appeared in a television interview (not live because otherwise they could not manipulate the interview) then people started to complain about his twitter account and his account was suspended immediately. Tom complained and months later his account is still suspended. Twitter has one goal, it's the same goal Facebook has, and Microsoft and all other multinationals: making as much money as possible! Billions for the few. Bill Gates from Microsoft needs more millions, Mark Zuckerberg from Facebook needs more millions. They are so rich that it's not fair anymore: they are filthy thieves. They steal from us. We have not enough money for our elderly people, for our schools, et cetera. And everyone working for them is not allowed to have a different opinion in public on let's say our age of consent laws. That's bad for the 'good name' of the company. So everyone is in the end a slave of our system or a total outsider. The choice is yours. I choose for a society where I can keep my opinions and be no outcast anymore. A free society.
Does the above text accidentally contain a typing, spelling, grammatical or factual error?
Or do you want to react to it? Then I hope you will get in touch.
"Wees eerlijk en laat zien wie je bent."
"Kinderen moeten veel meer zeggenschap krijgen."
"Alle zedenwetten moeten weg."
"Pedohaat heeft niets met seks te maken."
"We gaan verkeerd met seksualiteit om."
"Hoe zinniger wat je zegt, hoe bozer men wordt."
"Zonder pedofilie zou de wereld veel armer zijn."