Capitalism, being the product of a class society, has not only designated the factors of production but also served as a classification function. In the classical classification of early capitalism, societal layers were divided into the bourgeoisie and the working class.

The bourgeoisie essentially refers to those living within the city walls, i.e., urbanites. The act of migrating from villages to cities is also referred to as bourgeois… However, in capitalism, as was debated fervently at one point, a different meaning was attributed to the term bourgeoisie as a factor of production.

Or it could be said that the meaning attributed was by anti-capitalists to the term bourgeoisie.

Not with the loaded meaning but with its literal meaning, today bourgeoisie signifies the middle-income group. By this expression, I have also indicated a transition from classification to categorization in capitalism. Even in critical approaches today, distinctions are made not in terms of classes but in terms of income groups. However, what I really want to address is the existence of a new and as yet implicit classification…

This new classification will gain more significance with the changes in military, political, technological, and other fields over time and will be referred to more often. It will manifest itself with the commencement of intra-class oppression rather than opposing fronts…

In essence, I am talking about a preferential classification rather than the previous form of classification.

In capitalism, people are now divided into capitalists and consumers.

Capitalism claims to offer equal opportunities for everyone to become a capitalist. It does so by showcasing thousands of examples worldwide, such as the technology billionaire emerging from a garage, the social media billionaire who dropped out of university, the businessman who became a billionaire by founding and selling a bank despite being a bank manager, and the construction worker who rose to become the wealthiest singer from being a construction laborer. It says that a human lifespan may be sufficient to become a great capitalist. Just abandon all your values, and you can achieve it, it says.

While countless examples are presented by capitalism, those who fail to become capitalists are considered to have brought trouble upon themselves and deserve any treatment, unless they choose not to become capitalists (the exceptions).

However, these are not workers. In fact, I argue that the concept of a worker no longer exists and has been replaced by the concept of a consumer. (This aspect should be considered when evaluating technology-intensive production.)

According to capitalism, consumers live according to what they deserve.

If I were to answer the question in the title, capitalism does not ask for anything from consumers. It says they can consume as much as they are able to, and they should not consume when they are not wanted. It has no other desire from them.

Perhaps the prevailing economic theories worldwide that favor the financial sector over the real sector adequately explain the situation.

Capitalism no longer has any dealings with consumers, exploitation of workers, or the oppressed as depicted in conventional discourse. Because these groups are no longer exploitable by capitalism. Or perhaps these groups can no longer satisfy capitalism's appetite for exploitation. They already take about 20% of the generated income.

Capitalists, on the other hand, own about 80% of the generated income.

Capitalism, that is, does not demand anything from consumers, but it has great expectations from capitalists. It wants capitalists to be more capitalist. It is tired of the society stuff. It wants to test capitalists. It wants them to break each other. Because according to capitalism, true capitalism is not about exploiting the oppressed classes. True capitalism is about capitalists exploiting other capitalists. It requires a level of competition and bargaining among capitalists that is tough enough to be worthy. Today, capitalism can only be about capitalists exploiting other capitalists.

The issue will not only be about company mergers but also about the mergers of countries that appear to be the closest allies today. (Also, as a reminder, it seems that starting from France, which has been unable to adapt to the new world order, would be a good idea.)

So, what about the broad masses (consumers) while capitalists exploit other capitalists?

I guess most will see sticking with their own capitalist as a necessary part of survival. With a psychology very different from today... With an understanding that changes the meaning of loyalty…

Some will believe in the idea that nobody should be loyal to anyone else. So consumers will break other consumers, but the conflict within this class will be overlooked. In the past, they feared the rich man's servant.

Let me also say that farming, which used to be feared, will offer much higher welfare than staying as a wage worker, as there is no concern for loyalty. The farmer uprising in France can be seen as an indication of this.

Nations will either be left behind or continue on their path depending on the president they choose…

Ultimately, a great trial will take place that no economic actor in the world can avoid.

Inflation Report Presentation

The first inflation report presentation of 2024 will be remembered for a long time with the explanation "the link was broken". Link means connection. If it was broken, the policy rate would have been raised to 65%. It was not an operation that would last 7 months.

Many interpreted this as a confession. If it is a confession, the experience is that for the 7-month part of a plan that was expected to adapt to capital, the political behavior of Western financial circles has been different for some time.

It is now necessary to ask whether the connection was broken because the hot money had already moved away from Türkiye, as it had previously disrupted plans.

The monetary policy must find a way to adapt to economic and political change. The conditions are not the same as before. Both capital and labor are now in a different order. (You know, for me, capital is one thing and capital is another.)

Although the purpose of the previous period's quest is not discussed, everyone has an opinion on whether it has been successful. The credit opened to this period should be used well to analyze what is being sought and to find the correct synthesis.