What is "corporatism"?

[mix]

Is this meant to refer to the long period of neoliberal capitalism (unregulated, predatory) that began in the 1980s and continues into the present?

Does it mean a capitalist society/economy dominated by corporations?

Is it intended to give a fascist whiff to our political system and economy?

Whenever I see it used here, I always think: Isn't this really American capitalism?

The term in its historical context, the decades of fascism, makes sense to me. As a way to talk about America's capitalist oligarchy, it does not.

[FarLeftFist]

1. For the GOP it means...

The capitalism that was around in the 1800's.

[mix]

2. ...that golden age (for them) before the progressive era.

But this is a critical term of the left, what does it mean for those who use it?

[laughingliberal]

3. I see it as a big, toxic mix that includes elements of everything you mentioned.

The term boiled down to its common element, though, simply means our government works for the benefit of the wealthy corporate interests at the expense of the populace.

[mix]

5. Why not call this capitalism?

The state has historically enabled corporations and the wealthy, and its military and laws have created the conditions for capitalism to thrive.

[laughingliberal]

7. There are different forms of capitalism AND many people in this country still associate capitalism..

with democracy and freedom. If we call it 'capitalism,' the messaging fails.

[mix]

8. In this country the only real different types of capitalism

have been agrarian and industrial and regulated and unregulated. No need to say where we are now.

Maybe the "messaging" fails because the realities of capitalism--war and poverty--are obscured by this misnomer, "corporatism."

[laughingliberal]

22. I disagree. I think, as already stated, too many Americans equate 'capitalism' with democracy.

If we had 20 years to educate people differently, that would be one thing. At this point, I think trying to expose the marriage of the government and the wealthy corporate interests is primary. The problems inherent in capitalism will, to some extent, become apparent when the cronyism is exposed.

[mix]

23. If you can't accurately diagnose the disease, then you'll never find the cure. nt

[laughingliberal]

25. Having diagnosed a few diseases in my time, I'll say it really made no difference if I called...

it 'stomach flu,' or 'gastritis,' as long as the treatment was correct. It was sometimes necessary to tailor my terminology to the patient's level of understanding.

[mix]

27. Your patients were in good hands.

"Corporatism," however, remains an intellectual curiosity as a critical, analytical term. It reflects less a valid historical interpretation of the present, than an anxiety of how dominant capitalist corporations have become in people's lives.

[laughingliberal]

28. I'm sure you're right about this. But I do believe the word 'corporatism' paints a picture for...

a lot of people that describes perfectly what's going on. It does for me. Language matters but I suppose I come down more on the side of it matters most if it results in arriving at the right destination. IOW, speaking to people in a language they understand. If it results in people clamoring to tear down the existing structure, I don't know if it will matter what they called the existing structure.

Capitalism is, of course, the root cause of the problem but the resistance of the American people to any criticism of capitalism is phenomenal. For example, a blue collar working guy can rail all day long about how the system's rigged against him and never realize that all the problems he just described are the result of capitalism. As soon as I mention that, he immediately starts defending it and proclaiming how evil 'socialism' is. If I, however, say it's the fault of the corporatists, he agrees with me. I then say it's necessary to break the bonds between the wealthy corporate interests, like WS and the banks, and our government and restore rule of the country to the people, he's with me all day.

[somone]

4. It's now socialist corporatism

- corporate CEOs take the profits while taxpayers assume the risk

[mix]

6. Minimizing risk and avoiding it altogether are very capitalist moves.

I don't see how this is "socialist" or "corporatism."

[blindpig]

9. A bullshit term which absolves Capitalism of responsibility.. n/t

[mix]

well said

+1

[leftstreet]

13. +1

Yep

[Starry Messenger]

14. +1

[Mimosa]

10. Corporatism is the world economic system which began in the early 1980s. n/t

[mix]

15. Capitalism is the only "world" economic system historically,

and this was true at least since the 19th century. There was a respite in world embracing capitalism during the Cold War, but after 1991, when globalization began its toxic blossom, the free market reasserted itself and here we are.

Back to the future.

[leftstreet]

11. It's newspeak. Capitalists are trying to hide behind new messaging

They also love "market forces," which also absolves capitalism.

It's Teh Force!

[Starry Messenger]

12. It's a weasel word.

I think used by people who still think there is a "good" form of capitalism, and if we'd just bell that cat we could have freedom from the "bad" parts. Usually ignoring that even if we could, the really ugly shit would take place in third world countries while the first world enjoys an elevated standard of living.

[mix]

18. It's a classic apologist term.

But for those who do get it, that it is capitalism, not "corporatism," we are, for the time being, inextricably trapped within this neoliberal system. I suppose being able to see our predicament for what it is...this is a first step in trying to change things...but where are the alternatives? What is beyond the horizon of capitalism?

[Starry Messenger]

19. Solidarity or death by extinction.

I think we can collectively bury this thing, Capitalism. We don't need a fully formed "alternative plan" in order to build solidarity. It has been done before, elsewhere. We can learn from that. We can do it again.

[Odin2005]

16. The merger of corporations and the state.

The US government is controlled by the Corporate Elite, therefore it is a Corporatist Plutocracy.

In a Capitalist society the state is the tool for the interests of the Corporate Elite. Corporatism, AKA Fascism, is simply the endpoint of this. Even our regulatory framework is a front for crushing small enterprise that would compete with the Corporate Elites, the recent food safety bill, which is an attack on small producers, is an example.

[mix]

17. This was historically true in the USA before fascist corporatism.

And it continues to be true today. We don't need to look to the world's most abhorrent political ideology--fascism--to explain our own evils.

[Puregonzo1188]

20. Are you looking for a definition of common use in our current political context or the political

science definition?

People on this board use it to describe control by the government by corporations, but political scientist use it to describe when a state recognizes various interest groups and attempts to make linkages with them across society. It's true of a fascist society where only state associations are recognized, but it's also true of something like Social Democracy in Western Europe where the state recognizes both labor and capital, and incorporates them into economic planning (called tripartism). I think most DUers would be shocked to know this definition.


Check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

[mix]

21. I know the term's proper historical usage. And thanks for the comments,

but my question is how do Duers who use this term understand its meaning.

[Puregonzo1188]

24. Thanks, I'm currently an undergraduate Political Science/History major and its weird

to see how the term is used on way by political scientist and another in our contemporary political discourse. I'll be writing about "social democratic, corporatist welfare states" and feel like that seems so paradoxical or oxymoronic given how must be interpret the word.

[mix]

26. I have only come across this peculiarly wrong analytical term on the internet.

I have never heard or read a scholar, or anyone else with a solid understanding of politics and history, use it the way it is used on DU for example, to mean an emergent fascist state dominated by corporations.