I hate how the term privilege is thrown around these days, but man, this bizarre narrative reeks of privilege and some marxist fantasy.

Bezos is in his position because of his competency. He built the thing. Democracy is not a virtue in a workplace.

These laws and regulations developed not just randomly but because corporations treated workers almost like slaves.

Slaves? Like employees are forced to work, they have no choice in the matter, they're chained and cannot leave Amazon?

Either you're diluting what Slavery means or proposing the former which is false.

Every single employee at Amazon is free to go work for Walmart, Uber, local lumber yard, grocery stores or whatever.

The employees of Amazon have never been slaves and the comparison is disingenuous. Saying he was never tested on his competency is ridiculous. There were literally millions of people in the USA richer than Bezos at the time he started Amazon. There are many people on Wall Street who were *orders of magnitude* richer than Bezos that tried to start internet companies that crashed and burned.

> [Bezos] was never tested on his competency.

This is extremely naive. There are lots of failed CEOs and failed companies. Amazon survived AND grew over 20 years while actively fighting off competition from Walmart, Google, etc.

But luck is a major factor in this. If in ten years, Amazon tanks, history will say Bezos was a bad CEO. There is never a real demonstration that skill is involved. Some companies win and some companies lose.

In 10 years it's more likely that the US govt will declare bankruptcy than Amazon.

> but they are democracies

I really don't like democracy mixing with my business. It's the best, terrible system we have for when we have no other choice but to come to a mutual decision. But it really should be your last option.

I'm not sure why it should be my last option. There are several problems with autocratic leadership, one of which is that many times, the whims of the autocrat are fundamentally at odds with the good of the people he manages.

Many times, maybe, but I suppose I'm arguing it's a corner case.

Perhaps that those power structures are so natural to us implies just how successful they've been in our history. And not in the sense that fear is a good motivator, but because the reality is that most principals aren't all that far removed from their agents.

> Similar corruption exists today. It is inevitable.

OK, so if it's inevitably why hasn't this happened to the creative unions in Hollywood like SAG, WGA, the DGA, and the PGA?

Are...are you holding up Hollywood as an example of pure, legal employee protections? You know, the industry largely stood up by largescale money laundering schemes?