• RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yeah sort of, in the sense of the classes being so far apart. And nepotism hires can feel like hereditary rule.

    But companies don’t generally go to war with each other. The comparison falls apart if you think about it too hard.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Pepsi v Cola

      Coca Cola Death Squads

      Shell African Village Clearances

      Banana Republics

      Coal wars

      Sheep wars

      And if you want to know how bad it gets without guardrails look up any East Indies Company or West Indies. They literally had militaries and fought literal battles for control of markets and resources.

    • Saleh@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Mergers and acquisitions are quite combative at times, albeit not physically.

      When it comes to going outside the western countries, companies absolutely do use violence to get their goals. There is multiple mining companies waging war on indigenous people in South America and Africa, murdering them to steal their lands. Look for the term Banana republic to see how US companies used to slaughter striking employees, etc…

      • RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        I get that there are similarities, because capitalism came from feudalism. In feudalism the serfs were trading their labor for military safety provided by the king. The king got most of the resources from the serfs, but the serfs got something out of it too. While capitalism you are exchanging labor directly for money. Serfs generally had no ability to leave their kingdom. Under capitalism the employees can choose to quit and work for someone else. They could also start their own business. Starting your own kingdom wouldn’t have gone so well under feudalism.

        That’s why capitalism and feudalism are two different words. They mean two different things.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          There were absolutely freemen under Feudalism. And you were free in most places to start your own enterprise as long as you paid your taxes, Guild and King.

          And the country thing doesn’t apply. The US wouldn’t let you start your own country either. We kind of fought an entire war over that.