Looking at the small print

I am wondering if the small print, defining all the terms and condition – at the end – really allows to offer

“services”

that boil down to something like

“s r  ce “

Admittedly, good cheese is frequently full of holes; but if we look at the wholes of the cheese wheels they are most delicious (well, of course, depending on the cheese and the personal gusto). And when we buy it, we do not pay the holes as they do not add to the weight, only ii some way to the seize.
But services in our societies are full of gaps, non deliveries, falls promises …: promising 4G but selling phones that are factually not allowing using them; selling phone services that in fact can only be used occasionally (o tempora o spacio, ma c’è senza moralità) … – perhaps that is the deeper meaning of the name of a company promising something that seems as if Vodafone … – sorry for the typo: I meant looks as if would be a phone. …

Sure, that can be seen as an individual customer being annoyed with one service provider. It could also be read as one customer referring to one service not properly delivered, though being exposed to many of similar unqualified services. But perhaps it is not just line customer but many customers; and many customers not being delivered appropriately, i.e. as promised and contractually defined.

And perhaps it is even more than that: a state that promises protection …, and actually delivers protection only to those that are too big to fail; an educational system that promises to deliver education but delivers at most training; a foreign policy that promises security and allows modern crusades; a regional policy body that promises solidarity and “sends one skiff” to host people arriving in many huge vessels; a democracy that allows

147 companies formed a ‘super entity’ within this, controlling 40 per cent of its wealth. All own part or all of one another. Most are banks – the top 20 includes Barclays and Goldman Sachs. But the close connections mean that the network could be vulnerable to collapse. (Waugh, 2011, October 20th: ‘One Super-corporation Runs the Global Economy’… and it could be terrifyingly unstable

from: Daily Mail; for the study: Vitali, Stefania/Glattfelder, James B./Battiston Stefano, October 2011: The Network of Global Corporate Control; in: PLoS ONE 6(10): e25995; doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025995

…

When do we finally reply in the same way? Answering payment requests by really paying for what we get (by paying for what we really get); acting as educated people and not like skills-trained robots; accepting only our collective decisions and not the decisions of the collective of 147 …

Criticising the Inequality of distribution of wealth is an important point. The critique of the inequality of the access to the production of wealth is a more important point. At the end, however, the most important point is another:

Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.

(Karl Marx 1845: Theses On Feuerbach