As shoddy as many of their products are, the corporation that is the state provides far more goods, services, and dividends than any one other company does.
Is this summarily, or per worker, or per unit of money spent?
Please note that, unlike corporations, governments usually can print money ("quantitative easing" anyone?) and normally finance their expenses by taxing everyone, that is, their services can't be opted out of.
The state has provided me far more value than Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Uber have.
If they want to regulate them, regulate them. If they want to dissolve them, dissolve them. I at least get a vote with the state; I get no such say with large tech corporations. If you would like to opt out of the state, you likely have the skills to emigrate to another country.
Maybe we should break up that monopoly? Is there a word for people who defend every action taken by the state? I know there's Stockholm syndrome but this appears to be more nuanced.
You can avoid creating it. Look at Switzerland. But stable, well-run confederations are rare.
The US, and many other federated states (like e.g. India) do alleviate some of the problems of centralization by allowing different places to be run partly by local rules, and it does make a difference.
I heard many for-profit corporations are run in a federated way, too, because a huge monolith is not very adaptable.
As with everything else, there is a market for states. If you don't like this one you can patronize a different one. The right of exit still exists.
In a participatory republic you have the option of actually engaging in the process and changing policy. Maybe you ought to vote with your dollars accordingly.
Also, there's no action being "defended" here. The American state is not actually prosecuting tech companies for antitrust. The EU is.
I saw Reuters on Twitter today say "the social responsibility of a company is to increase profits" so quite a different MO if you buy that.