[ptsneves]

Not American and I also agree that the current big techs should be broken up by force of the state, there is a very big difference between a company becoming monopolistic due to market forces, and a company becoming monopolistic due to state strategy, intervention, backing.

Things can be bad in a spectrum and I believe it is much easier for society/state to break up a capitalistic monopoly than a state backed monopoly. To illustrate, the state has sued some of those companies and they were seriously threatened, because of competition ills. That is not the case with a state company.

[Draiken]

And what exactly are grants then? Tariffs? All the lobbied laws that benefit specific corporations or industries? Aren't they state backed advantages?

Banks created their oligopolies and then who saved them when they fucked up?

Isn't Tesla a state backed monopoly in the USA because of grants and tariffs on external competitors? Isn't SpaceX? Yet nobody treats then as state backed.

I don't understand this necessity to put companies in a pedestal and hate on states. Capitalist propaganda I guess?

Market forces are manipulated all the time. This distinction is nonsense. Companies influence states and vice-versa.