Support my team and I to make more videos like this at: https://patreon.com/tomnicholasCapitalism is dead. Killed by its own biggest fans. That's the thesis ...
There is a substancial difference because Standard Oil and Carnegie Steel were just large single companies. They never controlled the market access for other companies like Amazon etc. practically do.
Company towns at most affected a few thousand workers each. Sure, for those workers being stuck in them it was pretty much feudalism, but this has little to do with the overall economic system. At no point in time a majority of the population lived in company towns, unlike the situation we have now where the digital fiefdoms pretty much cover the lives of everyone.
Anyways, I recommend you just read Varoufakis’ book, which does a much more thourogh analysis than what I can do here. Of course even Varoufakis says that you can argue this is just another permutation of capitalism, but the fact remains that it is a substantially different economic model. Just summarizing it as “capitalism bad” and failing to analyze why this is actually different and thus needs different methods to fight against is interlectually lazy.
There is a substancial difference because Standard Oil and Carnegie Steel were just large single companies. They never controlled the market access for other companies like Amazon etc. practically do.
Total control of energy and materials is worse than not getting access to a popular store front. You can sell your products on your own website. But if you didn’t have materials and energy you can’t produce your own goods.
failing to analyze why this is actually different and thus needs different methods to fight against
My claim, based on Marx, is that it isn’t different and can be controlled in exactly the same way corporations have always been controlled.
Monopolies should be broken up. It doesn’t require any reframing. The only reason for calling capitalism “techno feudalism” is because being anti capitalism is a political third rail. But by saying “I’m pro capitalist but against techno feudalism” it makes it palatable to the public.
There is a substancial difference because Standard Oil and Carnegie Steel were just large single companies. They never controlled the market access for other companies like Amazon etc. practically do.
Company towns at most affected a few thousand workers each. Sure, for those workers being stuck in them it was pretty much feudalism, but this has little to do with the overall economic system. At no point in time a majority of the population lived in company towns, unlike the situation we have now where the digital fiefdoms pretty much cover the lives of everyone.
Anyways, I recommend you just read Varoufakis’ book, which does a much more thourogh analysis than what I can do here. Of course even Varoufakis says that you can argue this is just another permutation of capitalism, but the fact remains that it is a substantially different economic model. Just summarizing it as “capitalism bad” and failing to analyze why this is actually different and thus needs different methods to fight against is interlectually lazy.
Total control of energy and materials is worse than not getting access to a popular store front. You can sell your products on your own website. But if you didn’t have materials and energy you can’t produce your own goods.
My claim, based on Marx, is that it isn’t different and can be controlled in exactly the same way corporations have always been controlled.
Monopolies should be broken up. It doesn’t require any reframing. The only reason for calling capitalism “techno feudalism” is because being anti capitalism is a political third rail. But by saying “I’m pro capitalist but against techno feudalism” it makes it palatable to the public.