Sunday, April 17, 2005

Dutch trainwreck: Capitalism? Tolerance? Whuzzat?

RNW, the Dutch national broadcaster is having what it thinks is a "healthy debate" on McDonald's. What about it? May it exist?

Never mind the narcissism of trying to obliterate a business just because you dont like it, and know full well that other people do. Imagine the tastelessness of picking on little details which is true of all businesses, but LESS true of big ones who can do more for their employees than anyone else.

This, coming from the Dutch who wont make inter-species sex illegal, in spite of the abuse to the animals. If people are smart enough to make their own choices in every other matter, why not when it comes to where they spend their money? Simple: because its American.

«The big golden arches that you see along the highway, they are bigger than anything else you see there. It's a way of saying: 'Look we are the best, we are the greatest and we're the number one'. This gets to people.»

No they aren't, child. They pale in comparison to Ahold and KLM, who have virtual monopolies and are never accused of cultural hegemony, whereas Mickey D's offers a quick meal which is popular worldwide at a price anyone can afford. People from every walk of life give them their business. How is that wrong?
Now, if you believe only the wealthy who need to dash off to their busy affairs are the only people who should have the luxury of not cooking for themselves in a pinch, well, then the argument makes sense.

But this is the worst part: taking it out on peoples common sense. The power the consumer has is his ability to let companies know what theyre doing wrong with the coins in their pocket. Dont like McDonalds? Dont go there. Dont think that people can be trusted to make choices about a balanced diet? Then get rid of those herring stands who could live on a diet of nothing but herrink, unlessed forced to anyway.

Meanwhile euro-wankers actually think that the existence of a business of any sort or another, one that is successful, is a subject of debate.

Frank van Schaik again: «Shame you made it to 50 years, but, no, really I would say take a good long look at the effects of the things you do and don't let profits always be your first goal.»

Why not? Do you know anyone who works for a poor person?

Is it any surprise that so many of them want to BOLT?

No comments: