In the past, I have stated that the more-highly-qualified a person is, the less likely he/she is to want to admit that he/she can be deceived. As if to prove the validity of this analysis, I have recently been trying to have a rational discussion with Prof. Hans Micklitz, a highly-qualified, senior, European, legal academic who was engaged, in the late 1990s, by the European Commission to head a team of highly-qualified, legal academics to draw up a report into 'Door to Door Selling', 'Pyramid Selling' and 'Multi Level Marketing'. So far, the only response that I have been able to obtain from Prof. Micklitz, is his friendly (and remarkably-frank) confession that he found this (undoubtedly-well-paid) task to be amongst the most-difficult of his academic career.
Since Prof. Micklitz has rather rudely-ignored my subsequent, urgent concerns (despite being given ample opportunity to respond in private), I have now decided to make his highly-embarrassing, supporting-role in the ongoing tragi-comedy of 'MLM income opportunity' fraud, public.
Unfortunately, under Prof. Micklitz' management, the resulting 300 page document (submitted to the European Commission in November 1999), mainly comprised a typically-incomprehensible legalistic analysis of the diverse trading schemes laws, and regulations, of not only the member countries of the European Union, but also those of the USA. However, Prof. Micklitz, and his colleagues, then failed to deduce that the entire report was fundamentally-flawed, because it was partly-based on demonstrably-worthless anecdotal evidence (supplied by demonstrably-deluded 'MLM' adherents) and on the classic, misleading definition of 'direct selling' supplied by US-based 'MLM income opportunity' racketeers via their de facto agents in Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/
cons_int/safe_shop/door_sell/ sur10_01.pdf .
In other words, part of Prof. Micklitz report was the equivalent of looking at an absurd medical pseudo-science through the clouded-eyes of a few delirious individuals who claimed to have been cured.
That said, other parts of this 1999 report to the European Commission, began to identify how a closed-market swindle, without any significant or sustainable external revenue, can be dissimulated as a 'direct selling income opportunity.' The report also contained extensive reference to US federal anti-racketeering legislation. However, in brief, the report completely failed to identify a major, ongoing, organized criminal enterprise which has damaged and silenced, and continues to damage and silence, countless millions of ill-informed victims around the world and, instead, essentially-concluded that the existing, diverse legislation in the various European countries appears to be largely adequate (because 'MLM' participants seem quite happy and no one has really complained) and, therefore, neither unification of these diverse laws, nor significant changes in their individual content, was needed.
Some of the rather obvious questions which I would like to put to Prof. Hans Micklitz are:
- What do you understand by the terms: 'blame the victim fraud' and the 'Big Lie?'
- Why on Earth did you and your colleagues consult with, and accept the word of, unaccountable persons whom (at the very least) you must have suspected could have had a severe conflict of interest when it came to telling the truth about the results of so-called 'MLM?'
- Why on Earth didn't you apply common-sense and try to hold these persons to account by asking them to provide quantifiable evidence (in the form of audited account) to support their anecdotal claims, or independently check the quantifiable evidence as to the actual long-term results of so-called 'MLM' in Europe (i.e. consult with European income-tax officials)?
Unfortunately, this far-from intellectually-rigorous 1999 report to the European Commission, should really be seen as an object-lesson in how to not to go about examining organized crime cloaked with labyrinths of corporate structures pursuing lawful, and/or unlawful, enterprises, instigated, and/or perverted, to prevent, and/or divert, investigation and isolate their bosses from liability .
As ever, I would advise your free-thinking readers (particularly, senior Indian law enforcement agents) not to fall into the same trap as Prof. Micklitz and his colleagues. Instead, they should make a conscious effort not to be distracted by the mystifying fairytale that the bosses of 'MLM income opportunity' frauds, and their deluded-followers, have steadfastly pretended to be reality. They should concentrate on uncovering the growing, Indian section of the global financial holocaust (with a small 'h') which so-called 'MLM income opportunities' have all been hiding.
These are the irrefutable facts.
- Numerous corporate structures exist around the world which have been arbitrarily defined by their instigators as 'Multi Level Direct Selling Companies.'
- An almost total absence of income tax-payments by the constantly-churning, insolvent, non-salaried, commission agents of these corporate structures over a period of 50+ years, proves that it has always been effectively-impossible to earn net-income lawfully from so-called 'MLM income opportunities.'
- The made-up, technical-sounding term, 'MLM income opportunity,' has, therefore, been a big 'Nazi'-style lie.
- Lying to people in order to take their money is fraud which is a form of theft.
Given these irrefutable facts, Corporate Frauds Watch formally invites Prof. Hans Micklitz, and his colleagues, to justify the content (and particularly the conclusion) of their 1999 European Commission report.
David Brear (copyright 2012)