Interesting focus only on China. Apols I erased my comment but the original point was the political empires seem to last many centuries as oppposed to corporate empires which seem to be at their peak for mere decades.

You make a massive error in your analysis, and that is to limit your perspective to Chinese dynastic political cycles. You ignore the idea of geographic empire building, where there is ample evidence of multi-century empires, and we are not talking only Roman. Also Byzantine, then Ottoman, British, French, and Spanish, not to mention Persian or Zulu. On China, while internal politics mean dynasties come and go, Chinese territorial integrity has been unchallenged for many centuries, testament to the fact that while the individuals, families, dynasties, may come and go, the underlying political structure is very resilient.

In ever single one of my cited cases, the nation-level structure is multi-century in longevity, and beats by an order of magnitude any commerce-driven corporate leadership structure we have ever seen.

So. My point is that corporations as a structure for human interaction/cooperation are deficient in that they are not able to deploy force. Only money. The latter is not long lived without the former.