Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism

kaz said:
There is no corporate power in fascism, it's State power. Corporations have no artificial power unless government gives it to them. Only government can force people to make choices against their own interest because only government can use force to compel you to do so.

Fascism is socialism. Corporatism is socialism. They are all the opposite of free markets
Click to expand...

So you say.
 
Desh again confuses government controlled "private" companies with the corporate oligarchy she fears. The coin operated government is a problem when the richest gain access to HRC by donating to her campaigns is something that she should fear.

Fascism is socialism with a corporate veneer, Mussolini even had 5 year plans in his controlled economy where he directed exactly what companies could participate in a sectorized economy.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html

Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

Fascism is to be distinguished from interventionism, or the mixed economy. Interventionism seeks to guide the market process, not eliminate it, as fascism did. Minimum-wage and antitrust laws, though they regulate the free market, are a far cry from multiyear plans from the Ministry of Economics.

Under fascism, the state, through official cartels, controlled all aspects of manufacturing, commerce, finance, and agriculture. Planning boards set product lines, production levels, prices, wages, working conditions, and the size of firms. Licensing was ubiquitous; no economic activity could be undertaken without government permission. Levels of consumption were dictated by the state, and “excess” incomes had to be surrendered as taxes or “loans.” The consequent burdening of manufacturers gave advantages to foreign firms wishing to export. But since government policy aimed at autarky, or national self-sufficiency, protectionism was necessary: imports were barred or strictly controlled, leaving foreign conquest as the only avenue for access to resources unavailable domestically. Fascism was thus incompatible with peace and the international division of labor—hallmarks of liberalism.

Fascism embodied corporatism, in which political representation was based on trade and industry rather than on geography. In this, fascism revealed its roots in syndicalism, a form of socialism originating on the left. The government cartelized firms of the same industry, with representatives of labor and management serving on myriad local, regional, and national boards—subject always to the final authority of the dictator’s economic plan. Corporatism was intended to avert unsettling divisions within the nation, such as lockouts and union strikes. The price of such forced “harmony” was the loss of the ability to bargain and move about freely.

More at link..

.
Click to expand...

Again, the closest example in the US to this type of economy is the ACA or what people call Obamacare, where a sector of the market (1/6th of the market to be more exact) and its private companies are told what to offer, to whom, and even where they can sell it.

This economy is as far from a free market as you can get and often one that "democratic socialists" promote without even understanding the history behind it.

It is often easy to fool many people, but the reality is history isn't gone and we can check the veracity of remarks and claims. What Fascism is not would be the government controlled by corporations as Desh pretends, what it was is clearly indicated by the fact that a private owner of a company could not even produce what they chose instead only what the dictator's economic plan allowed and then only with the permission of the party elite in the cartel which controlled their sector of the economy. If you owned a company you produced what you were told, when you were told, payed what you were told and sold to whom you were told without regard to the markets.
 
evince said:
how is that recorded history a lie?
Click to expand...

By definition if Mussolini was controlling it then the state was controlling it meaning there was no free market.

It is no different than communism, socialism or any other ism. That they co-opted corporations makes no difference.

I notice you don't have a problem with Obama funneling money to corporations to find your green dreams. No when that happens you call it "investment"

You are an ignorant hack who is out of her depth
 
Damocles said:
Desh again confuses government controlled "private" companies with the corporate oligarchy she fears. The coin operated government is a problem when the richest gain access to HRC by donating to her campaigns is something that she should fear.

Fascism is socialism with a corporate veneer, Mussolini even had 5 year plans in his controlled economy where he directed exactly what companies could participate in a sectorized economy.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html



Again, the closest example in the US to this type of economy is the ACA or what people call Obamacare, where a sector of the market (1/6th of the market to be more exact) and its private companies are told what to offer, to whom, and even where they can sell it.

This economy is as far from a free market as you can get and often one that "democratic socialists" promote without even understanding the history behind it.

It is often easy to fool many people, but the reality is history isn't gone and we can check the veracity of remarks and claims. What Fascism is not would be the government controlled by corporations as Desh pretends, what it was is clearly indicated by the fact that a private owner of a company could not even produce what they chose instead only what the dictator's economic plan allowed and then only with the permission of the party elite in the cartel which controlled their sector of the economy. If you owned a company you produced what you were told, when you were told, payed what you were told and sold to whom you were told without regard to the markets.
Click to expand...







what you advocate economically is the same things Musolinin DID in Italy to pave the way for his fascism.



You are now running a CEO for president in hope od getting just that
 
evince said:
what you advocate economically is the same things Musolinin DID in Italy to pave the way for his fascism.



You are now running a CEO for president in hope od getting just that
Click to expand...

Mussolini supported free markets? Wow, I did not know that. Problem is you're full of shit, actually he didn't
 
evince said:
“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
― Benito Mussolini
Click to expand...

Corporatism in the sense that Mussolini meant it had an entirely different meaning than "Corporations" in American English. It's more about bringing together all the groups that constitute the body of society than putting state power in the hands of business (the correct term for that would be plutocracy or corporatocracy, not corporatism). People often seem to deliberately confuse this.
 
I'm pretty sure that quote is manufactured too.

The root word of "corporatism" comes from an Italian word for body (I.e. the body of society). So does the root word for the English "corporate", but it evolved into an entirely different sense. It's sort of like how, in about 30 Indo-European languages, the root word for "preservative" came to mean "condom", and only in English did it come to mean a substance that makes food last longer.
 
FACTS said:
Corporatism in the sense that Mussolini meant it had an entirely different meaning than "Corporations" in American English. It's more about bringing together all the groups that constitute the body of society than putting state power in the hands of business (the correct term for that would be plutocracy or corporatocracy, not corporatism). People often seem to deliberately confuse this.
Click to expand...

True, but in the end it's a distinction without a difference. You used the key term "State power." Government acts only in the interest of government. They are all the same flavor of vanilla. It's all socialism
 
evince said:
what you advocate economically is the same things Musolinin DID in Italy to pave the way for his fascism.



You are now running a CEO for president in hope od getting just that
Click to expand...
This is a DERP moment, really it is. What I am advocating is a free market, what you are advocating is fascism. You didn't even bother to read and understand where you are wrong about the economics of fascism because "facts" are problematic for you.
 
“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”

Benito Mussolini quote








“It's good to trust others but, not to do so is much better”

Benito Mussolini quote





“Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy”

Benito Mussolini quote
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top