Introduction
The British East India Company (EIC) and the Dutch Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie (VOC) were two of the most powerful corporations in history, dominating global trade and commerce for centuries. Similarly, today's big tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Apple have become behemoths on the world market, shaping our digital lives and economies.
Like their 17th-century counterparts, these modern giants have leveraged innovative technologies to expand their reach and influence. The EIC and VOC pioneered global trade routes, establishing monopolies over spices, textiles, and other valuable commodities. Similarly, Google's search engine and advertising platforms, Microsoft's software dominance, Amazon's e-commerce empire, and Apple's sleek electronics products have become essential tools for modern life.
Both eras also saw the rise of imperial powers that relied on these corporations to project their influence globally. The EIC played a significant role in Britain's colonial expansion, while the VOC facilitated Dutch trade and colonization efforts. Today, big tech companies are often seen as extensions of national power, with governments relying on them for data collection, surveillance, and economic growth.
However, just as the EIC and VOC faced criticism for their monopolistic practices, exploitation of labor, and environmental degradation, modern big tech companies have been accused of similar transgressions. Google has faced scrutiny over its handling of user data, while Amazon's treatment of warehouse workers has sparked concerns about worker rights. Microsoft has been criticized for its role in perpetuating surveillance capitalism, and Apple has faced backlash for its supply chain practices.
Another parallel between the two eras is the concentration of wealth among a select few. The EIC and VOC shareholders became incredibly wealthy as their companies expanded globally, while today's big tech moguls have amassed vast fortunes through stock options, dividends, and lucrative deals. This concentration of wealth has led to concerns about economic inequality and social justice.
Despite these similarities, there are significant differences between the two eras. The EIC and VOC operated in a pre-industrial era with limited global connectivity, whereas modern big tech companies have leveraged digital technologies to create complex networks that span the globe. This increased interconnectedness has enabled faster communication, collaboration, and innovation, but also raises concerns about data privacy, cybersecurity threats, and job displacement.
In conclusion, while there are striking parallels between the domination of the British East India Company and the Dutch VOC on the world market, and today's big tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Apple, there are significant differences in their operating environments. Both eras have seen the rise of powerful corporations that shape global economies and societies, but modern big tech companies operate in a vastly more complex digital landscape with unprecedented connectivity.
As we navigate this new era of technological disruption, it is essential to learn from history's lessons about corporate power, economic inequality, and social justice. By acknowledging both the similarities and differences between these two eras, we can work towards creating a more equitable and sustainable future for all stakeholders involved in global commerce and innovation. While not forgetting that both East India Companies had a lasting heritage with their international trade networks and shipping technologies, which had a permanent impact on a changing world. The biggest influence came from the VOC as they basically invented capitalism and created the first shares and stock market. So both are long gone, but their legacy is still here today.
Comparison in relative wealth and worldly power
Although there is scientific debate, there are scholars who believe that the VOC at its peak was more powerful than all current Big Tech combined. Others state that a company like Microsoft was on it's peak in 2001 still 3 to 4 times bigger. The main difference is that current Big Tech companies have no worldly power, which the VOC and EIC did have. Both having a huge army and the power to start wars. A purely financial and asset comparison does not take worldly power in to account. In their peak both East India Companies dominated the world, conquered countries, murdered lots of innocent people, stimulated slave trade, purely based on Greed and a unhealthy, wrongly believe of race superiority.
The downfall of The East India Companies
The Dutch East India Company (VOC) was a major player in global trade during its heyday, but it ultimately declined due to various factors. Here are some key reasons for its downfall:
Over-expansion: The VOC expanded too quickly, which led to financial strain and decreased profitability; Competition from other European companies: As the VOC's dominance waned, other European trading companies like the British East India Company (EIC) and French Compagnie des Indes Orientales began to challenge its position in global trade; Decline of Dutch economy: The Dutch Golden Age came to an end, and the country's economic growth slowed down. This reduced demand for VOC products and made it harder for the company to maintain its market share; Financial mismanagement: The VOC was plagued by financial mismanagement, including excessive borrowing and poor investment decisions.
The British East India Company (EIC) also faced challenges that contributed to its decline:
Over-expansion into Asia: Like the VOC, the EIC expanded too quickly in Asia, which led to increased costs and decreased profitability; Competition from Indian princely states: As European powers withdrew from India during the 19th century, local princes and rulers began to assert their independence, reducing the need for British trading companies like the EIC; Decline of textile trade: The EIC's main product was textiles, which became less valuable as industrialization reduced demand for hand-woven fabrics; Government intervention: As the British government took a more active role in Indian affairs during the 19th century, it began to regulate and eventually nationalize many aspects of trade, including tea and coffee production.
The VOC's decline was gradual, but its eventual collapse came with the following events:
Financial crisis (1720): The VOC faced a financial crisis due to excessive borrowing and poor investment decisions; Nationalization (1799): The Dutch government nationalized the VOC, effectively ending its existence as an independent trading company.
The EIC's decline was more rapid, with several key events contributing to its downfall:
Indian Rebellion of 1857: The rebellion led by Indian princes and rulers against British rule in India marked a turning point for the EIC; Government intervention (1860s): As the British government took control of tea and coffee production in India, it reduced the need for private trading companies like the EIC; Decline of textile trade: The decline of the textile industry further eroded the EIC's market share.
By the early 20th century, both the VOC and the EIC had ceased to exist as independent trading companies, marking the end of an era in global commerce.
We have learned that the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the British East India Company were two of the most powerful trading companies in history, but they both experienced significant decline or collapse. They collapsed because of a couple of reasons, which we can sum up in a few lessons:
Lesson 1: Overexpansion can be fatal
Lesson 2: Failure to adapt can lead to decline; The VOC failed to adapt to changes in the global economy, such as the rise of new trading powers like Britain. Similarly, the British East India Company's failure to innovate and respond to changing market conditions led to its decline.
Big Tech should prioritize innovation and adaptation to stay ahead of the competition. They should invest in research and development, and be willing to pivot their businesses if necessary. Looking at the next few paragraphs, this can be the mayor threat.
Lesson 3: Corruption can undermine a company
Lesson 4: Hubris can lead to downfall: The VOC became complacent and arrogant, believing it was invincible. Similarly, the British East India Company's leaders became overconfident and failed to recognize the changing market conditions.
Big Tech should avoid hubris and remain humble. They should acknowledge their limitations and be willing to learn from others. They seem to struggle with this, with still clinging to proprietary technologies and data stealing, while the world is changing.
The EU is opening up
The European Union (EU) has been actively promoting open source software (OSS) in recent years, recognizing its potential benefits for innovation, competition, and digital sovereignty. Here are some key developments that demonstrate the EU's shift towards OSS: Open Source Strategy: In 2019, the European Commission published an Open Source Strategy to promote the use of OSS across the EU institutions, agencies, and member states; OSS adoption: The EU has been actively promoting the adoption of OSS in various areas, such as:
Public administration: Encouraging governments to adopt open source solutions for digital services and platforms:
Education: Promoting the use of OSS-based educational resources and tools.
Research: Supporting research projects that focus on developing new OSS technologies or improving existing ones.
Open Source Software Observatory: The EU has established an Open Source Software Observatory (OSSO) to monitor, analyze, and promote open source software in Europe.
EU's own OSS initiatives: The European Commission is actively using OSS for its internal IT systems, such as:
The EU's cloud-based infrastructure: Using open source solutions like OpenStack or Kubernetes for cloud computing.
The EU's data analytics platform: Building an open source-based data analytics platform to support evidence-based policy-making.
Collaboration with the open source community: The EU is engaging more closely with the global open source community, participating in initiatives such as:
The Open Source Initiative (OSI): Collaborating on promoting and protecting OSS licenses.
The Linux Foundation: Participating in projects like the LF's European Union Public Policy Committee to promote open source adoption.
EU funding for OSS: The EU has allocated funds specifically for OSS-related initiatives, such as: Horizon 2020: Funding research and innovation projects that focus on developing new OSS technologies or improving existing ones; COSME: Supporting the development of innovative OSS-based solutions in various sectors.
These developments demonstrate the European Union's growing commitment to open source software. By promoting OSS adoption, collaboration with the global community, and funding initiatives, the EU aims to foster innovation, competition, and digital sovereignty across Europe.
Switzerland which is not a member of the EU currently has an active law which states "Public Money, Public Code". Basically meaning when software is developed for the state, paid with taxpayers money, all resulting code should be free and open source software. Next, privacy laws in the EU are getting more and more strict, directly in conflict with the business models of Big Tech.
In relation to the previous paragraphs, Big Tech companies are showing they have problems to adapt to this changing European World. Could this be the start of their downfall?
The new USA under nr 47
The expectation is that president nr. 47 will not withhold Big Tech from the path they have chosen, so from that point, no change incoming. With a luring huge trade war with China and perhaps a smaller trade war with the EU, threats for most USA based Big Tech is there, as they can come in the middle of the trade war. In the European Union, Sovereignty is put more on the agenda since the re-election of Mr Trump. The EU seems to realize it's a bad idea to be dependent on companies from a country which became less trustworthy. As the European data on US controlled servers could become an asset in a trade war. Another development is a move towards open source technologies in Asia, where companies and governments want to be less dependent from the USA based big tech, as it is well known that proprietary software, is uncheckable and can have many software backdoors, which could be used for espionage and electronic warfare. In China, we can see an own state controlled Linux distribution and a big company like Huawei moving away from Android, China has chosen a path away from US controlled Big Tech companies, where it also tries to regulate their own digital market, creating hindrances for US based Big Tech companies. These developments will lead to a loss of market share for the Big Tech companies.
Conclusion
In this changing world, there's a lot of room for communities developing free (Libre) and open source software by companies and communities without borders. While the downfall of Big Tech might have been started, we still can not draw conclusions. But it seems that change is in the air and Big Tech at least struggles to adapt. So yes we have seen there are history lessons for Big Tech to learn from. Maybe we should be happy that they don't and hope that their possible downfall will change the world in a positive way.