A Discussion of the most basic ideas and vocabulary we use to discuss ideas on this sub based around the example of the Dutch East India company.

It feels like I’ve had and seen the same basic discussion in a number of comments on here.

I will try to keep it short. An oversimplified version of the discussion boils down to someone saying “Government bad” then someone else saying “Corporation bad” and then those two individuals argue about how all the problems of the world are the result of one of those two power structures.

Considering that I think this sub probably understands the flaws of a State better than any on Reddit, I’d like to focus on corporate governance— particularly when we consider the example of the Dutch East India Company.

The main difference I’ve seen put forth on this sub is that the monopoly on force separates the two entities, but that doesn’t remove force from the equation. The threats of force are always there.

In fact people on this sub suggest privatized police forces and even privatized military, which is explicitly reintroduceing the idea of force into the discussion.

So, to the members of this sub who are anti-state, what ildo you perceive the difference between a corporate power structure and a government power structure to be, especially if that corporation has its own sizeable private military like the Dutch East India Company had in the mid 1700s.

What is the actual difference you see between a City Council and a Corporate Board for example?

What are the actual structural differences between a private enterprise with an army and a state and how does removing the state solve more problems than the existence of a state?