>Isn't this why society comes together to form a government and pass laws to prevent these sorts of behaviours?
No, people form (limited) government to prevent abuse from government.
The idea that a company could abuse you in any substantial way (other than fraud, violating contract terms) must have seemed like an edge case (only the East India Company would have been large enough to present such a threat circa 1775).
So, maybe your claim would work if you consider companies to be a form of government, which is an entirely defensible position.
People form governments to set the rules for their society. You don't get to define what is and isn't legitimate government on principles other than democratic consent.
No, people form (limited) government to prevent abuse from government.
The idea that a company could abuse you in any substantial way (other than fraud, violating contract terms) must have seemed like an edge case (only the East India Company would have been large enough to present such a threat circa 1775).
So, maybe your claim would work if you consider companies to be a form of government, which is an entirely defensible position.