Is there a difference between corporatism and fascism?

[Avant Guardian]

If so, what is it?

[TheKentuckian]

1. Since there are variants on about any system, I'm sure there are substantial

differences but the biggest one I'd at least suggest is that fascism is driven more fore ideological concerns rather than all consuming avarice.

At the wrong end of the stick they are reasonably described as "in the same neighborhood".

[Avant Guardian]

2. Im sure there are many variants

I am specifically talking about American corporatism as practiced in the USA.

Is it the lead-in to fascism? Is it a form of fascism?

[Liberal In Texas]

3. I think it's probably when the corporation(s) decide to control the

government. Which is what we're witnessing right now, an slow-motion coup by the corporatists to take over the government.

They've already bought many of the lawmakers, next they'll just run everything.

[nemo137]

4. One's a made up word based on an unattributed quote

and one is an actual political system with a few fairly distinct features.

[2banon]

12. "the power that fascists seek is both economic and raw physical control"

this is excerpted from Gregory Wonderwheel's article on the subject dated a few years ago:

Fascism and Reality, a Reprise

by Gregory Wonderwheel

Fascism is a mass psychology not a mob psychology. Fascism is a mental orientation to the world that has its roots in the mind, not in economics. The power that fascists seek is both economic and raw physical control, but the need for that power is based in the emotional disease of the fascist who has been taught to have a truly twisted relationship with his or her own being in the world.

The societal structures that arise from the fascist state of mind are manifested within the cultural context in styles of clothing, head-dress, badges, posture, pomp, etc. but fascism may develop in any form within any particular culture which has achieved a certain level of "civilization". It is only another symptom of fascism that "civilization" is held out as an ideal without criticism of what civilization entails. Thus, while "undeveloped" tribalism may exhibit roots or seeds of fascism, but not fully developed actual fascism, Aztec civilization did reach the level of development into a Western Hemisphere indigenous fascism. The same may be said for Chinese, Roman, Catholic, and Islamic fascism.

When a civil society is based on literal allegiance to one-sided fixations of the inherent polarities of consciousness and those poles line up in a certain configuration then that civilization is fascist. Those polarities include (with the fascist favored orientation first): masculine-feminine, mass-individual, militancy-entreaty, form-substance; classification-chaos; manufacture-nature, similarity-variety, religion-skepticism, family-foreign, divine-worldly, authority-independence, patriotism-freedom, etc.

He has devised a sort of check list as reference points:

Here is my check list for fascism: Simply ask these questions and if your society (in any place or time) answers 7 or more "yes", then your society has a critical mass of individual fascists to have become a fascist society.

1) Does the "Masculine" principle dominate?

2) Is the Feminine principle only sentimentally revered without true equality?

3) Are "Family values" used as a propaganda tool to reinforce absolute hierarchy within the society?

4) Is there a class structure that dehumanizes the servant and subservient classes or deifies the ruling class?

5) Is a military or a warrior class in top control in society with militarism used as a paradigm for problem-solving?

6) Is nature viewed as an enemy or commodity with natural sexuality viewed as sinful?

7) Does "salvation" (the answers to ultimate questions) come from outside rather than from within, from the group rather than the individual?

8) Is form preferred over substance, slogan over content, symbol or sign over acts expressing the values the symbol represents?

9) Is "patriotism" to one's race or nation used to cement class structure and power within the lower classes subjected to that power?

10) Is religion used as a tool of the State to homogenize and control opposition?

read more here

[nemo137]

13. Treating fascism as a mental aberration is a mistake.

It's a political philosophy - one that inexorably leads to disaster, but a real political philosophy with defined features. I'd direct you to the work of Roger Griffin and Robert Paxton, both of whom look at Fascism as having a set of distinct features - Griffin identifies "palingenetic ultranationalism" (a nationalism focused on rebirth from decadence), while Paxton takes an organizational approach based on having a parallel party apparatus, combined with similar ideas about rebirth to Griffin. It's not a simple matter of preferring one side of an artificial duality.

[2banon]

14. Thank you for the suggestion

and the lead to Griffin and Paxton.

The subject is certainly important (critical) enough to warrant further study and understanding. I'd say at the minimum it is challenging intellectually. And you make an important point (if I read you accurately). One could say, it is dangerous to attempt to simply reduce the nature of fascism as merely a manifestation of a psycho/socio-pathological condition, and ought not to be dismissed as such. History certainly has taught us that much as clearly it is indeed a political philosophy with horrific results on the affecting people existing under such rule.

Returning to the original question then, is it accurate to say that Corporate controlled governance or rule the same thing as fascism? I hear it said often. I suppose technically speaking, that answer is not at all the same.

So why does it *feel* as if it were the same? (viscerally)

[nemo137]

18. They both radically curtain individual freedom, and are illiberal

There are many kinds of authoritarian and illiberal regimes. They are all dangerous. But fascism is a very real thing, and the means of fighting it are different (I think) than fighting crony capitalism. Defeating para-governmental party structures, or blunting the palingenetic impulse is one thing. Building a working, independent legal and governmental system is another.

[readmoreoften]

16. good post

[readmoreoften]

15. +1

On the nose. One quote, ostensibly from Mussolini does not a political system make. It seems to me that people are substituting "corporatism" for the term "advanced capitalism", a sort of straw man in the place of capitalism, if you will. On the other hand fascism is a rather fleshed out political system.

[TahitiNut]

5. Mussolini would say "No."

:shrug: In the panoply of fascists, I regard the plurality of the GOP (especially including Cheney and Dumbya) quite cozily ensconced. I think of Mussolini, Franco, Stroessner, Trujillo, and regard them as materially identical in both goals and strategy.

Read http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html

[2banon]

10. I've heard Mussolini quoted as saying it is Corporatism..

actually, the way i hear the relevant statement quoted goes something like this: "I should have called it Corporatism instead of Fascism" (paraphrasing from memory)..

Don't know the context.. I think I hear Thom Hartmann reference this a number of times.

I've read an interesting dissertation on the the psychology of fascism..it was something of a warning on how easy it is succumb to the state of mind. I think it was published on line, i'll see if i can find it.

[mmonk]

6. Spelling

[TahitiNut]

7. !

:spray: :rofl:

[mmonk]

9. .

;-)

[Juche]

8. Yes

Corporatism (oligarchy, plutocracy) doesn't have the nationalism that fascism does. And I doubt the social conservatism seen in fascism would matter.

I'm not an expert though. But latin american countries that were turned into corporate serf states in the 20th century didn't seem to have those traits.

Then again, corporatism was usually just tacked onto corrupt military juntas and corrupt governments, rather than being a form of government themselves.

If anything, corporate oligarchy is more of a parasite that affects any corrupt nation irrelevant of ideology. Monarchies, military juntas, democracies, etc. can all have corporate oligarchies once they become corrupt enough.

[Poll_Blind]

11. War Corporatism is the door of a New Fascism being opened. (2min video please watch!)

And don't be fooled, not all fascism looks like Adolph Hitler.

If you have not seen it, you should spend two minutes and be very entertained and educated watching What Barry Says on YouTube.

PB

[Zanzoobar]

17. Definitions are only as good as the understaning of them.

The understanding must be rooted in sound calculation rather than emotional hyperbole.

In other words, put 100 economists in a room and you'll get 100 different opinions on the economy based on their individual experience.

It is impossible to define a term when the term has a hundred definitions already.

Better to define your philosophical underpinnings and avoid indefinite labels. However, you'll never be elected to office should you choose to do so.