Big Tech are the new Soviets

Communism, Capitalism, and “Technofeudalism”

• Multiple commenters argue that real-world “communist” states were closer to monopolistic, centrally planned capitalism than to theoretical communism.
• Others push back, claiming communism is an aspirational endpoint (classless, stateless abundance) and that countries like China/Vietnam are moving in that direction.
• Some insist the USSR was communism-in-practice and that large-scale communism fails due to human nature; it might only work in small communities.
• The article’s “technofeudalism” framing is disputed: critics say modern elites don’t depend on peasants the way feudal lords did, especially with automation, so “feudal” is the wrong analogy.

Big Tech Monopolies and Market Dynamics

• Several comments see Big Tech platforms as planned economies or nation-scale monopolies that are the logical endpoint of capitalism, not its opposite.
• Others counter that in theory a well-funded competitor could replicate Amazon/Uber’s strategy, so market forces still apply, though in practice barriers to entry are enormous.
• There’s a recurring critique that “the market” here is far from the ideal free market (high barriers, poor information, network effects), so its outcomes shouldn’t be treated as optimal.

Amazon, MFN Clauses, and Seller Dependence

• Discussion of Amazon’s “Most Favored Nation” terms: sellers allegedly cannot list lower prices elsewhere, so Amazon’s fee hikes propagate everywhere as “Amazon inflation.”
• Some describe this as “technofeudalism”: Amazon owns the digital “land,” extracts rent via fees, and cripples independent retail channels.
• Attempts to build alternatives have mostly failed or been absorbed, reinforcing the perception of an entrenched monopoly.

Extraction from Local Economies

• Uber, cloud platforms, and Big Tech generally are criticized for siphoning a large cut out of local economies, unlike traditional local firms whose profits recirculate locally.
• Some weigh this against better service and efficiency, asking whether local “inefficiency” might actually be preferable if money stays in the community.
• Rising energy costs and data centers are mentioned as another way Big Tech strains households while consuming large shared resources.

Debt, Innovation, and Scale

• One thread blames debt for enabling outsized players to “suspend” market discipline and dominate.
• Schumpeter’s claim that monopolies drive innovation is challenged: many landmark tech products originated in small startups later acquired by giants.
• Others argue that scaling products to billions of users is itself a form of innovation, even if core ideas came from smaller firms.

The Author’s Background and Elite Ties

• A long subthread attacks the author’s elite upbringing, media presence, and World Economic Forum involvement as evidence of detachment from working-class reality.
• Others label this ad hominem, arguing that privileged people can still critique power structures and that only the arguments and outcomes should matter.
• There’s disagreement over whether participating in elite forums is “collaboration” or strategic engagement to influence from within.

Historical and Philosophical Parallels

• Comparisons are made between Big Tech and the East India Company, and between mature monopoly capitalism and “practical communism” in former communist states.
• Several comments note that both Marxist and capitalist ideologies are materialist and have repeatedly failed to deliver their idealized “free market” or “true communism.”
• One succinct view: the extremes of capitalism and communism converge in similar authoritarian, monopolistic structures.