You can lead a horse to water but…
but I’m not confortable with all these powerful politician teaming against this one guy. It sounds to me like all the big kids in school beating up the smallest kid in the class and stealing their lunch money.
Oh no, this poor, poor…
*checks notes*
…literally richest man in the world, still the richest American ever to live in relation to GDP, whose company at its peak controlled close to 90% of the entire oil market in the US, who was so wealthy he literally became a synonym for being insanely rich.
I mean, I don’t know about you, but I personally can’t think of a less ill fitting analogy than calling Rockefeller or Standard Oil “the little guy”. The guy is literally still a synonym for being crazy wealthy even a century after the fact.
But to answer your question, no. Generally the consensus in the US is that antitrust has been too weak in recent times.
The OP’s reply…
Thank you for the information.
I don’t think you shouldn’t have empathy with someone just because is well off. Especially since he was poweless against the politicians.
John D. Rockefeller didn’t hold any political offices of his own, so how could he have defended himself?
Uh, by being filthy fucking rich?
ah yes, John D. Rockefeller famous for not having a private army that fire bombed and massacred striking coal miners. Wait, hold on. I’m hearing just now that he did have a private army that did that. Uhh, hold on… It was a private army and the Colorado National Guard? That doesn’t make sense he shouldn’t have any political power - he’s not a politician.
No, no, you’re right - he’s the underdog in this situation. There were 1000s of coal miners and he’s just one guy.
poor fucking john d. rockefeller becoming a slightly-less-unfathomably rich person
Isn’t it hilarious anti trust laws were introduced to the US to break up unions lmfao
I’m pro the concept of trust so I’m going to say no.
The assumption if that breaking up monopolies will lead to more competition, but even that isn’t necessarily true…
