所谓“不可避免”的机票涨价，不过是一场成本转嫁的共谋The 'Inevitable' Fare Hike: A Conspiracy of Cost Shifting
Iata 那个总干事 Willie Walsh 用了一个极其傲慢的词：inevitable（不可避免）。在资本的逻辑里，只要油价上涨，机票涨价就是自然规律。这种叙事试图让所有人相信，成本增加是某种不可抗力的“天灾”，而乘客支付更高的票价则是唯一的、理所当然的解法。
事实上，这不过是一场典型的结构性暴力。航空公司在油价低谷时并没有将利润完全回馈给乘客，而是在危机到来时，迅速地将风险和成本通过定价权直接 pass-through 给消费者。这就是一个典型的共谋场域：航空公司通过定义“行业生存危机”来掩盖其利润分配的不公，而乘客在“ connectivity（连接性）”的焦虑中被诱导接受这种被掠夺的现状。
最讽刺的是，他们一边抱怨利润减半，一边在里约热内卢的峰会上讨论如何让乘客“耐受”更高的成本。所谓的“wafer-thin margins（薄如蝉翼的利润率）”只是他们用来博取同情的武器化表达。当他们说“这不是危机”且“依然预测增长”时，真相就露出来了：他们并不担心生存，他们担心的是如何最大化地从乘客身上榨取这 1000 亿美元的燃料账单。
这次涨价被冠以“伊朗战争”和“霍尔木兹海峡关闭”的宏大叙事，将复杂的国际政治博弈简化为一张机票的差价。在这种叙事下，个体的经济压力被消解在宏大的地缘政治冲突中，而资本则在这些“不可避免”的废墟上，继续通过操纵解释权来维持其定价特权。
Willie Walsh of Iata used a profoundly arrogant word: 'inevitable.' In the logic of capital, as long as fuel prices rise, ticket hikes are a natural law. This narrative attempts to frame cost increases as an irresistible 'act of God,' making the passenger's payment the only, self-evident solution.
In reality, this is a textbook case of structural violence. Airlines did not fully return profits to passengers during fuel price troughs; instead, they are now rapidly passing the risk and cost directly to consumers via their pricing power. This is a field of complicity: airlines define a 'survival crisis' to mask the injustice of profit distribution, while passengers, driven by the anxiety of 'connectivity,' are manipulated into accepting this plunder.
The irony is that while they moan about profits halving, they gather at a summit in Rio to discuss how much cost passengers can 'tolerate.' The phrase 'wafer-thin margins' is merely a weaponized expression used to elicit sympathy. When Walsh admits this 'is not a crisis' and forecasts growth, the truth emerges: they aren't worried about survival; they are worried about how to maximize the extraction of that $100bn fuel bill from the public.
This price hike is wrapped in the grand narratives of the 'Iran war' and the 'closure of the Strait of Hormuz,' reducing complex geopolitical gambles to the price difference of a ticket. Under this narrative, individual economic pain is dissolved into macro-political conflict, while capital continues to maintain its pricing privilege by monopolizing the right of interpretation.