mental health problems
more lord mcalpine
more jimmy savile
these babies can read
first contact alien ufo
free charles bronson
my windows 7 advert
november tipping point
sex offenders register
beyonces better place
i facebooked your mum
mice and snakes
forty years on
free social bookmarking
war criminals out
obama dont multitask
hes got herpes
hamster fight video
carradine dead
european socialism
hi de ho from moscow
hello sooty
institutional racism
child abuse
credit crunch teens
portsmouth fa cup
white star cider
war sex traffic
first black president
michael todds apology
jersey child abuse
prozac bebo internet
kate gerry maddy
tiger tia copland
crimes against poetry
god bless 511
celebrity doss house
ten years on
hamsters attack
angry nhs doctors
ive been stabbed
rosa parks day
slave trade
you need terror
she wants it
its a whitewash
the deal is
move along
pedo loving sluts
wot no asbestos
i am not spastic
my toothache
ten years on
my tooth hurts
child killer
stop the terror
israels jfk
are you terrorist
your government
the cast
came for the porn
paedos out
catholic bankruptcy
farewell fucktard
is it jesus
margaret hodge
new deal
blairs pedo sex rings
the brazilian
fuck id
its all over
cia car bomb
hilda murrell
newspaper spies
james rusbridger

Your Baby Can Read - Free Instant Download
name : email:



Looking at the world of business, we see the same structures emerging within the relationships pertaining to business. The business ethic itself, revolves around the principles of profit, and its acquisition, which comes by way of the simple high incomings / low outgoings equation.

Looking at the example of a theoretical business structure, we see the same pattern emerging with regards the control, and subsequent domination of those within such a structure. For example, in the following diagram, we see a business structure existing within a community, and its use with regards the control of a product or service, within that community:-

In the above diagram man A, the business man, controls the structure, and henceforth the product/service, man B is the worker, providing the day to day manufacture/provision of that product/service, and man C, the customer, paying the business mans maximum incomings in return for his minimum outgoings.

The principles of business, are those of profit. The manufacture, and distribution of whatever product that particular business makes its money from selling, are secondary to the principles of the acquisition of money. If the business has to develop any existing product in order to make it better and therefore a more attractive purchase far any prospective customer, then the business man, will indulge in such actions, though only when absolutely necessary. If the business man could get away with charging people vast sums of money, in return for little or nothing, as in the case of gangsters demanding protection money for example, then he would.

Taking a look at the business structure, and the manner in which the business man acquires his wealth, we see that it is entirely dependant upon the basis that the business man is able to control the supply of the product, or service to the customer. For example, there is no known way of charging people for the air that they breathe, on the grounds that it is everywhere for all to enjoy, free of charge. Therefore no such business exists. If and when such a time arises, whereby the air is so toxic, that prolonged exposure to it, would prove hazardous to ones health, then no doubt, a business man would put forward propositions whereby detoxified air was pumped to certain houses, whereby those homes, would pay for such a service, and, as is customary in such circumstances, the wages of all those concerned, the advertising to persuade more people to sacrifice themselves within the business structure, and last, but by no means least, the big fat profits that such a service would provide.

Unfortunately for the business men of the world such times are not yet upon us, and they're therefore left with the second best, yet equally repulsive choice of charging people for water; the source of life itself, the very soup from which all life upon the planet was ultimately born.

With that in mind, we can therefore see just exactly what it is that really annoys such dubious characters, when we se them bleating on about the refusal of some people to allow themselves to be forced to pay the business mans high incomings, in return for his low outgoings, i.e. to be ripped off.

With such principles of business being firmly grounded in the maximum incomings, minimum outgoings, side of things, the business man takes great pleasure in being able to control any product or service, whereby he stands strumming his fingers over his wallet, like a pervert strumming his fingers over his penis, stating "Yes, sure I can get you some water/power/food/housing/clothing/medicine (delete where applicable). What are you going to do for me?". Obviously, the last thing the business man wants to hear is "Absolutely nothing. I refuse to be abused in any way shape or form, and therefore shall take whatever I need without paying". Such a person would thereby refuse to accept any level of oppression, and subsequent abuse, taking what he needed, and even if he paid the real price for whatever it was he took, less profit and overindulgences, the business man would be left with nothing.

It is cases such as the above example, which lead to the business man in question punishing those that do accept abuse from him, in retaliation for the person who refused to allow himself to be abused. Leading to complaints from those within the business community along the lines of "Shoplifting/fare dodging/fraudulent claims etc. cost the shop/transport/insurance industry millions, leaving us no alternative but to put up our prices for our loyal customers". The fact is, they want to make a certain amount of money, and if somebody refuses to pay, and consequently refuses to line their pockets with their more than healthy profit margins, then they'll get that money from those that do partake within the structure. Much in the same manner as an abusive parent may well say to one of his children "So, your brother has decided to run off and hide somewhere has he? Well that's pretty unfortunate, especially for you. You see I expect to experience high levels of power within this relationship, so high in fact that I'm here to beat both you and your brother senseless. And seeing as your brother has decided not to allow himself to be abused, then I suppose I'll just have to abuse you twice as much". Which will more often than not, be followed by the obligatory "Incidentally, if you know where your brother is hiding, I would greatly appreciate you telling me. All information will be treated in the strictest of confidence".

However, there are certain products which the business man will encounter difficulties with, in that it may well be extremely difficult to control that product, and the subsequent people that either want or need that product. For example, a business man who lays claims to an orchard full of apple trees, will control the supply of apples to a given community, and, from the business mans point of view, all will be fine and well. Though when the people whom he sells the apples to, set about growing their own apple trees in their own back gardens, they then have no need to go through the business man, satisfying his insatiable demands for money, in order to receive their apples. This from the business mans point of view, would be disastrous, not only has he lost his meal ticket, but he'll also have to, God forbid, start working for a living. It is here were we encounter the business mans friend and ally, the patent and the copyright, which help to preserve the structure over which the business man rules, by ensuring that he and he alone, has sole right to the manufacture, and or distribution of that product. With such practises being exercised by the business man who controlled the supply of apples, we would invariably see, the business man laying claim to just such patents with regards the apples, its pips, and even the trees that they grow upon, whereby he would either demand an immediate clamp down on all illegal apple growers, thereby forcing anyone who wants an apple to go to him, and subsequently pay his maximum incomings in return for his minimum outgoings, or demand a royalty for each and every apple grown, whereby ultimately everyone will go through him in some way or other anyway.

The same principles are still in action within such a relationship, as in a personal one, and we therefore see that in order for the worker to get on within such a structure, and therefore experience reward from the business man, he must conform to an image as set by the oppressor. In this instance, as in so many others, a uniform, and a pleasant telephone manner "Hello, may I help you please" etc.

The image itself is not important, it will vary from structure to structure, and is basically whatever they that control the structure say it is. It is to all intents and purposes, their ideal, their grading system.

Using the image that they hold up, as a sorting system, the individual controlling the structure, will inevitably, use just such an image with which to control all levels of reward and punishment to be experienced by whomever may exist within that structure, thereby controlling them.

In the example of business, we see the individual controlling such a structure laying down images for all those hoping to get on within, and therefore climb, that structure conform to.

Education is a commonly accepted form of image. In the example of a job being advertised, stating the facts "The candidate applying for the post should be university educated..." etc. Such statements are common place within job vacancy advertisements, and yet the above statement is totally irrelevant, and holds no relationship whatsoever to the vacancy being offered. University educated in what? Anything. Browsing through some of the degree courses being offered hold absolutely no relevance to the outside world, and allow the holder of such a degree no real advantages over any Joe Bloggs from the street, with regards their ability to perform given tasks. That being the case, why must the ideal candidate possess such a degree. The answer simply being, because they say so. In the more common example of general secondary school level education ('O' levels etc.), how often do just such qualifications come in handy for doing the day to day tasks required within the workplace? Invariably never. Those laying down such images will state they are, and in many instances may well believe they are, but the fact of the matter remains, it's just an image, that image being whatever the individual controlling the structure wants it to be, white/black, male/female, fat/thin etc.

Uniforms are yet another fine example of an image being laid down by the oppressor within the workplace. From the subliminal uniform of a collar and tie, to the outright uniform of a bank worker, air stewardess, soldier etc. The uniform itself is whatever the person controlling that structure wants it to be. Claims of "Of smart appearance" etc. aren't of any real importance, and are entirely dependant upon what one calls 'smart', such a vague definition will inevitably be interpreted by different people as meaning different things. Some people living in African tribes will swear blind that having a four foot long neck, surrounded by tight hoops is smart, despite what anyone existing outside such a structure may think.

No doubt, the worker within the structure will start to grow restless, especially so when he sees the large profits that the business man is making in return for doing nothing more than standing in the way of the worker and the customer, creaming off a large chunk of cash for himself in the process. It is here where we see the emergence of unions, and such like, standing up and waving the flag for workers rights. Though the union on its own, isn't really interested in the rights of the worker as an individual, which is why such an organisation rarely if ever, call an all out strike, with regards the unfair dismissal, or treatment of one single worker. The union as an organisation, is more interested in helping the worker stick his snout in the trough, and experience a taste of the huge profits being creamed off by the business man.

Looking back at the model business, we see such principles in action, when the worker sees the profits being wallowed in by the business man, and demands a slice of the cake. For example, assuming such a business makes a thousand pounds a week in profit, and the worker demands a pay rise, stating that it is his efforts that are bringing in such an income, as and when the business man succumbs to such demands, no doubt with the threat of an all out strike hanging over his head, the structure may now look something like this:-

Though the story doesn't end there, the reason the business man was experiencing such an amount of profit in the first instance, was simply because that is the way he wanted it. If he wanted to make less money, then he would have done so. And with the worker dipping into his profits, with his demands of a pay rise, he now sets about increasing his incomings, in order to compensate his increased outgoings, whereby he can not only satisfy the demands of the worker for increased pay, but also, his own demands for his required amount of profit, thereby leading to an increase in the cost of the product or service to the customer thus:-

Clearly, in the above instance, we see that despite the transition in language terms, from simple cavemen beating and abusing each other, to the modern day terminologies of business, the same principles of power and oppression are in action, in order for any individual to experience power to any given amount, an equal amount of oppression must be forthcoming from within that relationship.

With the business man being blatantly averse to such practises as sharing his beloved profit with the worker, and with the worker more than likely threatening strike action unless his snout is reserved a place at the trough, the business man more often than not resorts to such practises as commission, performance related pay etc.

In utilising such practises, the controller of the structure, the business man, effectively sets his people, the workers, out into society, hunting for prey, with the promise of keeping a portion of each kill they make in the name of their leader. This obviously has the effect of allowing both the business man, and the worker an increase in the amount of power they are currently experiencing, transferring itself into modern day economic terms, as an increase in their current standards of living.

Whilst such practises work fine under limited circumstances, they are not the most efficient form of increasing profits. Setting your people out individually to run through the woods searching for prey, is not the most effective way of hunting. Far better to entice your prey into an attractively laden trap. It is here where we encounter the modern day examples of advertising.

In order for the business structure to expand, and pull in more customers for it to abuse, such customers must be forthcoming from within the environment within which that business operates. This is most commonly achieved by way of the summoning up of people for sacrifice via advertising.

The concepts of advertising are pretty simple, and are nothing more than convincing prospective customers to part with their cash in return for products or services that they may well neither want or need. Quite what that product is, is not entirely important, as in the case of business in general, what the business man really wants is the customers money. If he has to provide some form of incentive for the customer to part with his money, then he will, but the money, and its acquisition, is the primary motives behind any business mans actions.

We can see advertising in probably its best light, when looking at how it is implemented with the various examples that modern day society has to offer. For example, the diet milk shake. The product itself is nothing more than a milk shake, albeit topped up with some vitamins and minerals, though this doesn't stop the advertising fraternity promoting it as being a wonder cure for obesity, with their claims of "Try the diet milk shake for yourself, and see the weight come off. Simply drink one amazing diet milk shake a day, in place of a standard meal, and watch those pounds fall off". They blatantly fail to mention the fact that the only reason any prospective customer will lose weight is the fact that they have cut out one meal a day. Whether they chose to drink a miracle diet milk shake, in place of that meal, or a glass of water, is irrelevant. The fact of the matter remains that they have lost weight through cutting out one meal, and all the calories that meal contains, a day. And, funnily enough, if they had chose to simply drink a glass of water, they would have quite coincidentally lost more weight than on the officially promoted milk shake diet, if only for the fact that water contains less calories than milk.

Though simple common-sense matters like that won't stop members of the advertising fraternity from claiming that they are doing people a favour. And when those same advertising people bring forward certain happy and smiling individuals proudly stating "It really works. I lost ten pounds in a month", we can see the true purposes of advertising and its similarity to the primeval acts of summoning up people for sacrifice, and perhaps more interestingly, the fact that these customers after having been blatantly ripped off, and consequently abused, walk around smiling, thinking that they have in some way got a good deal.

The same basic pattern of gratitude within a victim of abuse, is exhibited by those that pay comparatively large sums of money to see their favourite singers sing. Looking at the example of a fan going to a large concert for instance. In order that the concert organisers may keep their outgoings to a minimum by only paying for the one large concert, the fan will find themselves having to trek halfway across the country, stump up a higher price than if the performer had come to their town, which incidentally, would incur greater outgoings for the organiser, and then be confronted and pressurised into buying a wagon load of unnecessary overpriced paraphernalia in order to acquire some form of souvenir of the event. The same fan will no doubt state that they had a wonderful time, and that it was worth every penny, despite the fact that they have, economically speaking, been abused left, right, and centre, by the very idol that they worship.

Looking back, with the olde worlde language of cult worship, we can see just exactly how certain persons within primitive communities, willingly and eagerly, offered themselves up as human sacrifices for their mythical idols, and Gods. They to thought that they were receiving a good deal, and would no doubt eagerly cue up in the hope of being one of the lucky chosen few who would be offered to their God.

In modern day times, and with the transition in language terms from cult to business, we see the same practises occurring on a large basis, with practically every economic transaction made. Obviously not to the same extent as in human sacrifice, but then in keeping with the short/long term gain of the controller and their respective level of development, it is in the business mans interests to keep his prey alive, if only for the fact that he can abuse them again and again and again.

With the amount of both power and oppression being experienced within the business structure only really existing at the point in time of the economic transaction taking place, the business man, in order to experience the same amount of power again, and again, will need the customer to come back yet again, in order to allow themselves to be abused, and consequently grant the business man power to the level at which he enjoys. It is here where we encounter consumerism.

Just as the pervert who locks his victim in a room, in order that he may repeatedly abuse them, so does the business man maintain his long term interests, by forcing to come back and play the same old game time after time. These principles are routinely shown within the world of business, with products and services which continually need to be either replaced or upgraded.

The most common example of such dubious business practises occur within the world of fashion. With the business man concerned, forcing the customer to surrender themselves within the structure in return for some tacky piece of clothing. Once again the propaganda machinery of the ad men are utilised in order to twist the mind of any prospective customer into buying the business mans product, in this case clothing, with all sorts of false promises along the lines of "It will make you look more attractive", "Everyone will fancy you", "You will be more popular" etc. therefore pressurising any prospective customer into buying the aforementioned product.

Whilst this is perfectly fine for the instant at which the transaction takes place, there will inevitably come a time, when all those who are going to be susceptible to such claims, will have surrendered themselves within the structure, leaving nobody left for the business man to abuse. Not wanting to forego the experience of power which the business man originally sought and found, he will inevitably come up with a new and enhanced product, which he can then sell once again, to the exact same people whom he abused in the first instance. If they were vulnerable enough to fall for it in the first place, then there is clearly every reason to believe that they will fall for it time and time again. Within the fashion arena, this is achieved by the same people rolling out much the same product (clothing), though maybe in a slightly different colour or style, to sell, at a huge profit, to the same people once again (the customer).

Such practises are common place within the business world, indeed it is the staple diet. Which is why we never see such products as the toothbrush that never wears out, the tyre that never goes bald, and the light bulb that never pops. Such products, whilst being the customers dream, are the business mans nightmare. For once everybody within that society acquires such a product, then the business dies, and with it the power that attracted the business man in the first place.


<<< back

next >>>

© Sean Copland 1995-2014
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16

best blogs