3 ms·
>There were private companies that basically owned some 3rd world countries in the 20th century. This situation probably still exists to some extent. Just one
by josu 9y ago
>There were private companies that basically owned some 3rd world countries in the 20th century. This situation probably still exists to some extent.
Just one example that never seizes to amaze me:
By 1803, at the height of its rule in India, the British East India company had a private army of about 260,000—twice the size of the British Army.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company
- codedokode 9y agoWas East India Company really independent from the government? Wikipedia says [1] in 18th century the government effectively had control over those territories. I think the idea was to allow private investors to colonize new territories and later seize control from them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#East_India_Company_Act_1773 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#East_India_...
- marcosdumay 9y ago> Was East India Company really independent from the government? It had an army, larger than the one from its home country. AFAIK, it was officially not independent, but what difference does the official title make?
- PeterisP 9y agoThe fact that nominally WIC "had" the army doesn't necessarily meant that in the case of conflicting orders it would obey WIC, as the Indian armies were run by British officers who also had sworn loyalty to the King/Queen.
- codedokode 9y agoI think it was not independent, it might be just a trick to make government not responsible if soldiers did something bad.