[0thgen]

A lot of the counter arguments people have made seem to be: "no one can choose whether or not to participate in the system, therefor it's serfdom".

I'm curious why people don't just extend this to everything then? In order to survive in the modern world (whether it's a capitalist or socialist economy): I'm required to work, I'm required to follow the law, I'm required to adopt social customs of my peers, I'm required into a certain language, I'm required to use utilities. So why the focus on "techno-feudalism", if all of you would describe _any_ system of requirements as feudal?

Feudalism isn't just defined by "lock in", it also describes the social structure of individuals, and how contracts were made.

It seems that the real reason for calling the current system "feudal" is because it comes politically loaded with "bad / coercion", not because it actually fits the description. It's the same as when people call capitalism "wage slavery". Rhetorically convenient, but intellectually lazy.

[tmnvix]

> I'm curious why people don't just extend this to everything then?

I think because there is a difference between being required to participate in systems controlled by a democratically elected government (or society in general in the case of cultural systems like language) that are at least purportedly put in place for your benefit compared with being required to participate in privately controlled systems that fundamentally prioritise extracting something from you.

[0thgen]

What is the difference exactly? Being forced to work for the democratically elected government versus being compelled to work for private businesses?