[jka]

In approximate terms, I think that I feel this way because large companies currently seem to have significant influence over the way that people conduct their lives.

If we're shifting to a situation where companies essentially regulate (and yes, that's a risky word to use in this context, but I'll do so anyway to provoke a bit of thought) social behaviour and norms, then I would see decision-makers in political spheres and corporate spheres as being relatively similar.

Conflicts of interest would arise based on corporate strategy, allegiances, and undisclosed information (not desirable properties in a market-driven system).

Under that kind of environment, enforcing rules on politicians while not enforcing them on corporate decision-makers could be seen as an attempt to shut down existing democratic processes.

[jka]

This is probably a bit pithy, and off-topic from the thread regarding conflicts-of-interest, but the phrase "no installation without representation" occurred to me a few moments ago.

I think that's a neat way to counteract an underlying frustration I have (and I don't think I'm alone) regarding proprietary software/hardware and technical ecosystems/governance that don't seem open to feedback and change.