If you want actual examples, almost all societies before 1800 we’re not capitalist. Feudal society wasn’t capitalist, neither was Roman society. Hunter gather society by most accounts was a form of primitive communism, and that is the vast majority of human history.
You’re going to need a narrow definition of company for that definition to not be very broad, as Wikipedia defines company as:
A company is a legal entity representing an association of legal persons with a shared objective, such as generating profit or benefiting society.
So basically a company can be any group of people, separated from the state but still recognized by it. So is a commune a company then? If everything was controlled by communes would that be capitalist?
It’s better to use a more specific definition, again from wikipedia:
Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and its use for the purpose of obtaining profit.[1][2] This socioeconomic system has developed historically in several stages, and is defined by a number of constituent elements: private property, profit motive, capital accumulation, competitive markets, commodification, wage labor, and an emphasis on innovation and economic growth.
While all of these existed in Roman civilization, concentrated in the big cities such as Rome, the majority of the economy was slaves and peasants working the land to feed themselves while being forced to give a portion to landlords as rent and to the government as taxes, much like most agricultural civilizations. This sort of economy does not revolve around profit ie. Buying something, paying someone to improve it, and selling it for more on an open market so you can buy more and sell that and on and on… That is possible in Rome and there are capitalists, but that’s not the main mode of production in the economy so the economy isn’t capitalist. Just like there are communes in the US but the US isn’t communist.
If you want actual examples, almost all societies before 1800 we’re not capitalist. Feudal society wasn’t capitalist, neither was Roman society. Hunter gather society by most accounts was a form of primitive communism, and that is the vast majority of human history.
Rome wasn’t capitalist?
What definition of capitalism are you using? They seemed very capitalist to me.
(I am using standard simple definition of “an economic system where private individuals or companies own and control businesses and property”)
You’re going to need a narrow definition of company for that definition to not be very broad, as Wikipedia defines company as:
So basically a company can be any group of people, separated from the state but still recognized by it. So is a commune a company then? If everything was controlled by communes would that be capitalist?
It’s better to use a more specific definition, again from wikipedia:
While all of these existed in Roman civilization, concentrated in the big cities such as Rome, the majority of the economy was slaves and peasants working the land to feed themselves while being forced to give a portion to landlords as rent and to the government as taxes, much like most agricultural civilizations. This sort of economy does not revolve around profit ie. Buying something, paying someone to improve it, and selling it for more on an open market so you can buy more and sell that and on and on… That is possible in Rome and there are capitalists, but that’s not the main mode of production in the economy so the economy isn’t capitalist. Just like there are communes in the US but the US isn’t communist.