Governments are at war with big business. In June Joe Biden, America’s president, spoke for many politicians the world over when he blamed it for greed-fuelled price rises, slow wage growth, forgone innovation and fragile supply chains. His trustbusters at the Federal Trade Commission (ftc) have been going after large deals merely because they are large—or at least that is how it feels. Courtroom defeats do not weaken the agency’s zeal. The latest came on July 11th, when a judge rejected its request to prevent Microsoft’s $69bn acquisition of Activision Blizzard, a developer of video games. The ftc is expected to appeal against the ruling.

Trustbusters invoke three reasons for their renewed vigour: greater market concentration, reduced churn among the world’s biggest firms and rising corporate profits. On the surface all three point to rising corporate power. Look closely, though, and the trends may be the result of benign factors such as technological progress and globalization. In some local markets, greater concentration may, paradoxically, have led to more competition, not less. Some big firms, it is true, have been collecting rents, including in big sectors such as health care. But trustbusters’ strategy—to reflexively question any deal involving a big firm—is wrongheaded.

Still, high concentration, low churn and rich profits need not necessarily make consumers worse off. That concentration has been rising for 100 years, during which life has improved for virtually everyone, is the first clue that it may be the result of benign forces. Increases in industry concentration in America over the past century are correlated with greater technological intensity, higher fixed costs and higher output growth, according to researchers. None of these seems particularly evil.

Most encouraging, far from being suppressed, dynamism may be on the rise. John Haltiwanger of the University of Maryland notes that business formation has surged since the pandemic. Whether these startups will dislodge existing enterprises is still unclear. But venture-capital investment suggests investors see scope for healthy returns. One hypothesis is that the remote-friendliness of the post-covid economy reduces startup costs. Young firms no longer need to rent a big office. They can hire from a less local talent pool. Consumers’ growing comfort with such options could inspire more new businesses to set up shop.

Such overzealous trustbusting carries its own risks. It may distract attention from more immediate threats to economic dynamism. Acquisitions can be useful for preserving the value of startups when subdued markets make it hard for founders to raise capital. And some big deals may benefit consumers, as when a biotech startup joins forces with established drugmakers to test and distribute a new therapy. Competition authorities were probably asleep for too long. Now they may be getting up too quickly.

Startups are mentioned to indicate________.