> No, not the VoC or the EIC, which were “companies” in the sense of bodies corporate, the old medieval sense of the word: power was delegated to them, and they ruled on behalf of the states that chartered them.

How's that different from modern companies where governments delegate some power of telling people what they should be doing? Delegate some levels of enforcement, some amount of sovereignty? This smells of no true Scotsman.

▲

varjag 14 hours ago | parent [-]

I think it's best to show how exactly it's similar first. It's not even clear what's your angle here. That employment is unironically a form of slavery? Or that advertisement is akin to privateering?

	▲	scotty79 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No. That the power companies have over their employees is delegated by the government that shares its own power by allowing private ownership of buisnesses and private employment. Mandate that government issues through allowing private businesses and setting up laws they operate by is similar to mandate that the government gave East India Company to de facto rule over whatever they ruled. If you declare that government is always in power since it always has the last word then no company ever could match it because of how company is defined. It's hiding behind definitions. I'm sure there were at least few instances where the government didn't have last word because it was overthrown by organization that had support of the wealthy. Besides, there are many more very weak spots in this write up. I just felt too tired to go one by one or even pick the worst one. I just commented on the one that popped up first and moved on with my day.