Corporatism

Corporatism is a political ideology which advocates the organization of society by corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, scientific, or guild associations on the basis of their common interests.[1][2][3] The idea is that when each group performs its designated function, society will function harmoniously — like a human body (corpus) from which its name derives.

Corporatist ideas have been expressed since Ancient Greek and Roman societies, with integration into Catholic social teaching and Christian democracy political parties. They have been paired by various advocates and implemented in various societies with a wide variety of political systems, including authoritarianism, absolutism, fascism, liberalism and socialism.[4]

Corporatism may also refer to economic tripartism involving negotiations between labour and business interest groups and the government to establish economic policy.[5] This is sometimes also referred to as neo-corporatism and is associated with social democracy.[6]

Kinship corporatism

Kinship-based corporatism emphasizing clan, ethnic and family identification has been a common phenomenon in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Confucian societies based upon families and clans in East Asia and Southeast Asia have been considered types of corporatism. China has strong elements of clan corporatism in its society involving legal norms concerning family relations.[7] Islamic societies often feature strong clans which form the basis for a community-based corporatist society.[8] Family businesses are common worldwide in capitalist societies.

Corporatism in the Roman Catholic Church

In the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church sponsored the creation of various institutions including brotherhoods, monasteries, religious orders and military associations, especially during the Crusades. In Italy, various function-based groups and institutions were created, including universities, guilds for artisans and craftspeople and other professional associations.[9] The creation of the guild system is a particularly important aspect of the history of corporatism because it involved the allocation of power to regulate trade and prices to guilds, which is an important aspect of corporatist economic models of economic management and class collaboration.[9]

In 1881, Pope Leo XIII commissioned theologians and social thinkers to study corporatism and provide a definition for it. In 1884 in Freiburg, the commission declared that corporatism was a "system of social organization that has at its base the grouping of men according to the community of their natural interests and social functions, and as true and proper organs of the state they direct and coordinate labor and capital in matters of common interest".[10] Corporatism is related to the sociological concept of structural functionalism.[11][8][12][13]

Corporatism's popularity increased in the late 19th century and a corporatist internationale was formed in 1890, followed by the publishing of Rerum novarum by the Catholic Church that for the first time declared the Church's blessing to trade unions and recommended for organized labour to be recognized by politicians.[14] Many corporatist unions in Europe were endorsed by the Catholic Church to challenge the anarchist, Marxist and other radical unions, with the corporatist unions being fairly conservative in comparison to their radical rivals.[15] Some Catholic corporatist states include Austria under the leadership of Federal Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss and Ecuador under the leadership of Garcia Moreno. The economic vision outlined in Rerum novarum and Quadragesimo anno also influenced the regime of Juan Perón and Justicialism.[16][17][18] In response to the Roman Catholic corporatism of the 1890s, Protestant corporatism was developed, especially in Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia.[19] However, Protestant corporatism has been much less successful in obtaining assistance from governments than its Roman Catholic counterpart.[20]

Politics and political economy

Communitarian corporatism

Sanzio 01 Plato Aristotle
Plato (left) and Aristotle (right)

Ancient Greece developed early concepts of corporatism. Plato developed the concept of a totalitarian and communitarian corporatist system of natural-based classes and natural social hierarchies that would be organized based on function, such that groups would cooperate to achieve social harmony by emphasizing collective interests while rejecting individual interests.[11]

In Politics, Aristotle also described society as being divided along natural classes and functional purposes that were priests, rulers, slaves and warriors.[21] Ancient Rome adopted Greek concepts of corporatism into their own version of corporatism but also added the concept of political representation on the basis of function that divided representatives into military, professional and religious groups and created institutions for each group known as colegios[21] (Latin: collegia). See collegium (ancient Rome).

Absolutist corporatism

Absolute monarchies during the late Middle Ages gradually subordinated corporatist systems and corporate groups to the authority of centralized and absolutist governments, resulting in corporatism being used to enforce social hierarchy.[22]

After the French Revolution, the existing absolutist corporatist system was abolished due to its endorsement of social hierarchy and special "corporate privilege" for the Roman Catholic Church. The new French government considered corporatism's emphasis on group rights as inconsistent with the government's promotion of individual rights. Subsequently corporatist systems and corporate privilege throughout Europe were abolished in response to the French Revolution.[22] From 1789 to the 1850s, most supporters of corporatism were reactionaries.[10] A number of reactionary corporatists favoured corporatism in order to end liberal capitalism and restore the feudal system.[23]

Progressive corporatism

From the 1850s onward, progressive corporatism developed in response to classical liberalism and Marxism.[10] These corporatists supported providing group rights to members of the middle classes and working classes in order to secure cooperation among the classes. This was in opposition to the Marxist conception of class conflict. By the 1870s and 1880s, corporatism experienced a revival in Europe with the creation of workers' unions that were committed to negotiations with employers.[10]

In his work Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft ("Community and Society") of 1887, Ferdinand Tönnies began a major revival of corporatist philosophy associated with the development of neo-medievalism and increased promotion of guild socialism and causing major changes of theoretical sociology. Tönnies claims that organic communities based upon clans, communes, families and professional groups are disrupted by the mechanical society of economic classes imposed by capitalism.[24] The National Socialists used Tönnies' theory to promote their notion of Volksgemeinschaft ("people's community").[25] However, Tönnies opposed Nazism and joined the Social Democratic Party of Germany in 1932 to oppose fascism in Germany and was deprived of his honorary professorship by Adolf Hitler in 1933.[26]

Corporate solidarism

Sociologist Émile Durkheim advocated a form of corporatism termed "solidarism" that advocated creating an organic social solidarity of society through functional representation.[27] Solidarism was based upon Durkheim's view that the dynamic of human society as a collective is distinct from that of an individual, in that society is what places upon individuals their cultural and social attributes.[28]

Durkheim posited that in the economy solidarism would alter the division of labour by changing it from the mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity. He believed that the existing industrial capitalist division of labour caused "juridical and moral anomie", which had no norms or agreed procedures to resolve conflicts, resulting in chronic confrontation between employers and trade unions.[27] Durkheim believed that this anomie caused social dislocation and felt that by this "[i]t is the law of the strongest which rules, and there is inevitably a chronic state of war, latent or acute".[27] As a result, Durkheim believed it is a moral obligation of the members of society to end this situation by creating a moral organic solidarity based upon professions as organized into a single public institution.[29]

Liberal corporatism

John-stuart-mill-sized
Portrait of John Stuart Mill

The idea of liberal corporatism has also been attributed to English liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill who discussed corporatist-like economic associations as needing to "predominate" in society to create equality for labourers and give them influence with management by economic democracy.[30] Unlike some other types of corporatism, liberal corporatism does not reject capitalism or individualism, but believes that the capitalist companies are social institutions that should require their managers to do more than maximize net income by recognizing the needs of their employees.[31]

This liberal corporatist ethic is similar to Taylorism, but endorses democratization of capitalist companies. Liberal corporatists believe that inclusion of all members in the election of management in effect reconciles "ethics and efficiency, freedom and order, liberty and rationality".[31] Liberal corporatism began to gain disciples in the United States during the late 19th century.[10]

Liberal corporatism was an influential component of the progressivism in the United States that has been referred to as "interest group liberalism".[32] In the United States, economic corporatism involving capital-labour cooperation was influential in the New Deal economic program of the United States in the 1930s as well as in Keynesianism and even Fordism.[23]

Fascist corporatism

Fascism's theory of economic corporatism involved management of sectors of the economy by government or privately-controlled organizations (corporations). Each trade union or employer corporation would theoretically represent its professional concerns, especially by negotiation of labour contracts and the like. It was theorized that this method could result in harmony amongst social classes.[33] However, authors have noted that historically de facto economic corporatism was also used to reduce opposition and reward political loyalty.[34]

In Italy from 1922 until 1943, corporatism became influential amongst Italian nationalists led by Benito Mussolini. The Charter of Carnaro gained much popularity as the prototype of a "corporative state", having displayed much within its tenets as a guild system combining the concepts of autonomy and authority in a special synthesis.[35] Alfredo Rocco spoke of a corporative state and declared corporatist ideology in detail. Rocco would later become a member of the Italian fascist regime.[36]

Italian Fascism involved a corporatist political system in which the economy was collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at the national level.[37] Its supporters claimed that corporatism could better recognize or "incorporate" every divergent interest into the state organically, unlike majority-rules democracy which they said could marginalize specific interests. This total consideration was the inspiration for their use of the term "totalitarian", described without coercion (which is connotated in the modern meaning) in the 1932 Doctrine of Fascism as thus:

When brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which gave rise to socialism and trade unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State.[38]

[The state] is not simply a mechanism which limits the sphere of the supposed liberties of the individual... Neither has the Fascist conception of authority anything in common with that of a police ridden State... Far from crushing the individual, the Fascist State multiplies his energies, just as in a regiment a soldier is not diminished but multiplied by the number of his fellow soldiers.[38]

A popular slogan of the Italian Fascists under Mussolini was "Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato" ("everything for the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state").

This prospect of Italian fascist corporatism claimed to be the direct heir of Georges Sorel's revolutionary syndicalism, such that each interest was to form as its own entity with separate organizing parameters according to their own standards, but only within the corporative model of Italian fascism each was supposed to be incorporated through the auspices and organizing ability of a statist construct. This was by their reasoning the only possible way to achieve such a function, i.e. when resolved in the capability of an indissoluble state. Much of the corporatist influence upon Italian Fascism was partly due to the Fascists' attempts to gain endorsement by the Roman Catholic Church that itself sponsored corporatism.[39]

However, fascism's corporatism was a top-down model of state control over the economy while the Roman Catholic Church's corporatism favoured a bottom-up corporatism, whereby groups such as families and professional groups would voluntarily work together.[39][40] The fascist state corporatism (of Roman Catholic Italy) influenced the governments and economies of a not only other Roman Catholic-majority countries, such as the governments of Engelbert Dollfuss in Austria and António de Oliveira Salazar in Portugal, but also Konstantin Päts and Kārlis Ulmanis in non-Catholic Estonia and Latvia. Fascists in non-Catholic countries also supported Italian Fascist corporatism, including Oswald Mosley of the British Union of Fascists, who commended corporatism and said that "it means a nation organized as the human body, with each organ performing its individual function but working in harmony with the whole".[41] Mosley also considered corporatism as an attack on laissez-faire economics and "international finance".[41]

The corporatist state Salazar established in Portugal was not associated with Mussolini, Portugal during Salazar's reign was considered Catholic corporatism. Portugal remained neutral throughout World War II. Salazar also had a strong dislike of Marxism and liberalism.

In 1933, Salazar stated: "Our Dictatorship clearly resembles a fascist dictatorship in the reinforcement of authority, in the war declared against certain principles of democracy, in its accentuated nationalist character, in its preoccupation of social order. However, it differs from it in its process of renovation. The fascist dictatorship tends towards a pagan Caesarism, towards a state that knows no limits of a legal or moral order, which marches towards its goal without meeting complications or obstacles. The Portuguese New State, on the contrary, cannot avoid, not think of avoiding, certain limits of a moral order which it may consider indispensable to maintain in its favour of its reforming action".[42]

Neo-corporatism

During the post-World War II reconstruction period in Europe, corporatism was favoured by Christian democrats (often under the influence of Catholic social teaching), national conservatives and social democrats in opposition to liberal capitalism. This type of corporatism became unfashionable but revived again in the 1960s and 1970s as "neo-corporatism" in response to the new economic threat of recession-inflation.

Neo-corporatism favoured economic tripartism, which involved strong labour unions, employers' associations and governments that cooperated as "social partners" to negotiate and manage a national economy.[23] Social corporatist systems instituted in Europe after World War II include the ordoliberal system of the social market economy in Germany, the social partnership in Ireland, the polder model in the Netherlands (although arguably the polder model already was present at the end of World War I, it was not until after World War II that a social service system gained foothold there), the concertation system in Italy, the Rhine model in Switzerland and the Benelux countries and the Nordic model in Scandinavia.

Attempts in the United States to create neo-corporatist capital-labor arrangements were unsuccessfully advocated by Gary Hart and Michael Dukakis in the 1980s. As secretary of labor during the Clinton administration, Robert Reich promoted neo-corporatist reforms.[43]

Chinese corporatism

Chinese corporatism, as described by Jonathan Unger and Anita Chan in their essay China, Corporatism, and the East Asian Model, is the following:[44]

[A]t the national level the state recognizes one and only one organization (say, a national labour union, a business association, a farmers' association) as the sole representative of the sectoral interests of the individuals, enterprises or institutions that comprise that organization's assigned constituency. The state determines which organizations will be recognized as legitimate and forms an unequal partnership of sorts with such organizations. The associations sometimes even get channelled into the policy-making processes and often help implement state policy on the government's behalf.

By establishing itself as the arbiter of legitimacy and assigning responsibility for a particular constituency with one sole organization, the state limits the number of players with which it must negotiate its policies and co-opts their leadership into policing their own members. This arrangement is not limited to economic organizations such as business groups and social organizations.

The use of corporatism as a framework to understand the central state's behaviour in China has been criticized by authors such as Bruce Gilley and William Hurst.[45][46] Other scholars such as Jennifer Hsu and Reza Hasmath have argued the framework is still useful for analyzing China's local state behaviour and its engagement with social actors.[47][48][49] Studying how the government engages with NGOs in particular has been a key part of the analysis of how local authorities in China have adapted and employed corporatist measures. Hsu and Hasmath argue that corporatist measures "continue to be employed by local authorities as an effective means of ensuring the potency and relevance of the local state in a rapidly changing sector," while the state itself continues to retreat from the provision of welfare and social services.[50] Local governments have adapted corporatist measures by "utilizing subtle or tacit forms of approval" to influence NGOs' operation.[51]

Russian corporatism

Post-Soviet Russia has been described as an oligarchy, a kleptocracy, and also as corporatist

On October 9, 2007, an article signed by Viktor Cherkesov, head of the Russian Drug Enforcement Administration, was published in Kommersant, where he used the term "corporativist state" in a positive way to describe the evolution of Russia. He claimed that the administration officials detained on criminal charges earlier that month are the exception rather than the rule and that the only development scenario for Russia that is both realistic enough and relatively favorable is to continue evolution into a corporativist state ruled by security service officials.[52]

In December 2005, Andrei Illarionov, former economic adviser to Vladimir Putin, claimed that Russia had become a corporativist state:

The process of this state evolving into a new corporativist [sic] model reached its completion in 2005. [...] The strengthening of the corporativist state model and setting up favorable conditions for quasi-state monopolies by the state itself hurt the economy. ... Cabinet members or key Presidential Staff executives chairing corporation boards or serving on those boards are the order of the day in Russia. In what Western country—except in the corporativist state that lasted for 20 years in Italy—is such a phenomenon possible? Which, actually, proves that the term 'corporativist' properly applies to Russia today.[53]

According to some researchers, all political powers and most important economic assets in the country are controlled by former state security officials ("siloviks").[54] The takeover of Russian state and economic assets has been allegedly accomplished by a clique of Putin's close associates and friends[55] who gradually became a leading group of Russian oligarchs and who "seized control over the financial, media and administrative resources of the Russian state"[56] and restricted democratic freedoms and human rights[54]

Illarionov described the present situation in Russia as a new socio-political order, "distinct from any seen in our country before". In this model, members of the Corporation of Intelligence Service Collaborators (KSSS) took over the entire body of state power, follow an omerta-like behavior code and "are given instruments conferring power over others – membership "perks", such as the right to carry and use weapons". According to Illarionov, the "Corporation has seized key government agencies – the Tax Service, Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Parliament, and the government-controlled mass media – which are now used to advance the interests of KSSS members. Through these agencies, every significant resource of the country – security/intelligence, political, economic, informational and financial – is being monopolized in the hands of Corporation members".[57]

Analyst Andrei Piontkovsky also considers the present situation as "the highest and culminating stage of bandit capitalism in Russia".[58] He believes that "Russia is not corrupt. Corruption is what happens in all countries when businessmen offer officials large bribes for favors. Today’s Russia is unique. The businessmen, the politicians, and the bureaucrats are the same people".[59]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ . Wiarda, Howard J (1996). Corporatism and Comparative Politics: The Other Great Ism. 0765633671: M.E. Sharpe. pp. 22–23. ISBN 978-0765633675.
  2. ^ Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 27.
  3. ^ Clarke, Paul A. B; Foweraker, Joe. Encyclopedia of democratic thought. London, UK; New York, USA: Routledge, 2001. Pp. 113
  4. ^ Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 31-38, 44, 111, 124, 140.
  5. ^ Hans Slomp. European politics into the twenty-first century: integration and division. Westport, Connecticut, USA: Praeger Publishers, 2000. Pp. 81
  6. ^ Social Democratic Corporatism and Economic Growth, by Hicks, Alexander. 1988. The Journal of Politics, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 677-704. 1988.
  7. ^ Bao-Er. China's Neo-traditional Rights of the Child. Blaxland, Australia: Lulu.com, 2006. Pp. 19.
  8. ^ a b Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 10.
  9. ^ a b Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 31.
  10. ^ a b c d e Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 35.
  11. ^ a b Adler, Franklin Hugh.Italian Industrialists from Liberalism to Fascism: The Political Development of the Industrial Bourgeoisie, 1906–34. Pp. 349
  12. ^ Murchison, Carl Allanmore; Allee, Warder Clyde. A handbook of social psychology, Volume 1. 1967. Pp. 150.
  13. ^ Conwy Lloyd Morgan, Conwy Lloyd. Animal Behaviour. Bibliolife, LLC, 2009. Pp. 14.
  14. ^ Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 37.
  15. ^ Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 38.
  16. ^ Bethell, Leslie (1993). Argentina Since Independence. Cambridge University Press. p. 229.
  17. ^ Rein, Monica (2016). Politics and Education in Argentina, 1946-1962. Routledge. The Church's social concept presented an alternative to the Marxist and capitalist positions, both of which it saw as misguided. Justicialism sought to extend this line of thinking.
  18. ^ Aasmundsen, Hans Geir (2016). Pentecostals, Politics, and Religious Equality in Argentina. BRILL. p. 33.
  19. ^ Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 39.
  20. ^ Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 41.
  21. ^ a b Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 29.
  22. ^ a b Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 33.
  23. ^ a b c R. J. Barry Jones. Routledge Encyclopedia of International Political Economy: Entries A-F. Taylor & Frances, 2001. Pp. 243.
  24. ^ Peter F. Klarén, Thomas J. Bossert. Promise of development: theories of change in Latin America. Boulder, Colorado, USA: Westview Press, 1986. Pp. 221.
  25. ^ Francis Ludwig Carsten, Hermann Graml. The German resistance to Hitler. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California, USA: University of California Press. Pp. 93
  26. ^ Ferdinand Tönnies, José Harris. Community and civil society. Cambridge University Press, 2001 (first edition in 1887 as Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft). Pp. xxxii-xxxiii.
  27. ^ a b c Antony Black, pp. 226.
  28. ^ Antony Black, pp. 223.
  29. ^ Antony Black, pp. 226, 228.
  30. ^ Gregg, Samuel. The commercial society: foundations and challenges in a global age. Lanham,USA; Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books, 2007. Pp. 109
  31. ^ a b Waring, Stephen P. Taylorism Transformed: Scientific Management Theory Since 1945. University of North Carolina Press, 1994. Pp. 193.
  32. ^ Wiarda, Howard J., pp. 134.
  33. ^ Mark Mazower, Dark Continent: Europe's 20th Century p. 29 ISBN 0-679-43809-2
  34. ^ "Fascism." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica, 2010. Web. 15 April 2010 [1].
  35. ^ Parlato, Giuseppe (2000). La sinistra fascista (in Italian). Bologna: Il Mulino. p. 88.
  36. ^ Payne, Stanley G. 1996. A History of Fascism, 1914–1945. [2] Routledge. Pp. 64 [3] ISBN 1-85728-595-6.
  37. ^ The Routledge Companion to Fascism and the Far Right (2002) by Peter Jonathan Davies and Derek Lynch, Routledge (UK), ISBN 0-415-21494-7 p.143.
  38. ^ a b Mussolini – The Doctrine of Fascism
  39. ^ a b Morgan, Philip. Fascism in Europe, 1919–1945. Routledge, 2003. P. 170.
  40. ^ Lewis, Paul H. Authoritarian regimes in Latin America: dictators, despots, and tyrants. Lanham, Maryland, USA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2006. Pp. 131. "Fascism differed from Catholic corporatism by assigning the state the role of final arbiter, in the event that employer and labor syndicates failed to agree."
  41. ^ a b Robert Eccleshall, Vincent Geoghegan, Richard Jay, Michael Kenny, Iain Mackenzie, Rick Wilford. Political Ideologies: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Routledge, 1994. P. 208.
  42. ^ Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review Vol. 92, No. 368, Winter, 2003
  43. ^ Waring, Stephen P. Taylorism Transformed: Scientific Management Theory Since 1945. University of North Carolina Press, 1994. Pp. 194.
  44. ^ "China,Corporatism,and the East Asian Model". By Jonathan Unger and Anita Chan, 1994.
  45. ^ Bruce Gilley (2011) "Paradigms of Chinese Politics: Kicking Society Back Out", Journal of Contemporary China 20(70).
  46. ^ William Hurst (2007) "The City as the Focus: The Analysis of Contemporary Chinese Urban Politics’, China Information 20(30).
  47. ^ Jennifer Hsu and Reza Hasmath (2014) “The Local Corporatist State and NGO Relations in China”, Journal of Contemporary China 23(87).
  48. ^ Jennifer Hsu and Reza Hasmath (2013) The Chinese Corporatist State: Adaptation, Survival and Resistance. New York: Routledge.
  49. ^ Reza Hasmath and Jennifer Hsu (2009) China in an Era of Transition: Understanding Contemporary State and Society Actors. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  50. ^ Hsu, Jennifer YJ; Hasmath, Reza (2014). "The Local Corporatist State and NGO Relations in China". Journal of Contemporary China. 23 (87): 516–517. doi:10.1080/10670564.2013.843929.
  51. ^ Hsu, Jennifer YJ; Hasmath, Reza (2014). "The Local Corporatist State and NGO Relations in China". Journal of Contemporary China. 23 (87): 517.
  52. ^ Cherkesov, Viktor. Нельзя допустить, чтобы воины превратились в торговцев. Kommersant #184 (3760), October 9, 2007. English translation Archived 2007-10-25 at the Wayback Machine and Comments Archived 2007-10-17 at the Wayback Machine by Grigory Pasko
  53. ^ "Q&A: Putin's Critical Adviser". By Yuri Zarakhovich. December 31, 2005. Time magazine.
  54. ^ a b The Chekist Takeover of the Russian State, Anderson, Julie (2006), International Journal of Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence, 19:2, 237 - 288.
  55. ^ The Essence of Putinism: The Strengthening of the Privatized State by Dmitri Glinski Vassiliev, Center for Strategic and International Studies, November 2000
  56. ^ What is ‘Putinism’?, by Andranik Migranyan, Russia in Global affairs, 13 April 2004
  57. ^ Andrei Illarionov: Approaching Zimbabwe (Russian) Partial English translation Archived 2007-07-05 at the Wayback Machine
  58. ^ Putinism: highest stage of robber capitalism Archived 2007-07-11 at the Wayback Machine, by Andrei Piontkovsky, The Russia Journal, February 7–13, 2000. The title is an allusion to work "Imperialism as the last and culminating stage of capitalism" by Vladimir Lenin
  59. ^ Braithwaite, Rodric (1 April 2007). "Review of Andrei's Pionkovsky's Another Look Into Putin's Soul". Hoover Institute. Archived from the original on 2007-09-27.

References

Further reading

  • Acocella, N. and Di Bartolomeo, G. [2007], ‘Is corporatism feasible?’, in: ‘Metroeconomica’, 58(2): 340-59.
  • Jones, R. J. Barry. Routledge Encyclopedia of International Political Economy: Entries A-F. Taylor & Frances, 2001. ISBN 978-0-415-14532-9.
  • Taha Parla and Andrew Davison, Corporatist Ideology in Kemalist Turkey Progress or Order?, 2004, Syracuse University Press, ISBN 0-8156-3054-9

On Italian corporatism

On fascist corporatism and its ramifications

  • Baker, David, The political economy of fascism: Myth or reality, or myth and reality?, '"New Political Economy'", Volume 11, Issue 2 June 2006, pages 227–250.
  • Marra, Realino, Aspetti dell'esperienza corporativa nel periodo fascista, "Annali della Facoltà di Giurisprudenza di Genova", XXIV-1.2, 1991–92, pages 366–79.
  • There is an essay on "The Doctrine of Fascism" credited to Benito Mussolini that appeared in the 1932 edition of the Enciclopedia Italiana, and excerpts can be read at Doctrine of Fascism. There are also links there to the complete text.
  • My rise and fall, Volumes 1–2 – two autobiographies of Mussolini, editors Richard Washburn Child, Max Ascoli, Richard Lamb, Da Capo Press, 1998
  • The 1928 autobiography of Benito Mussolini. Online. My Autobiography. Book by Benito Mussolini; Charles Scribner's Sons, 1928. ISBN 978-0-486-44777-3.

On neo-corporatism

External links

Encyclopedias
Articles
Anti-corporate activism

Anti-corporate activism holds that the influence of big business corporations is a detriment to the public good and to the democratic process.

Chamber of Fasci and Corporations

Chamber of Fasci and Corporations (Italian: Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni) was the lower house of the legislature of the Kingdom of Italy from March 23, 1939 to August 2, 1943, during the height of the regime of Benito Mussolini's National Fascist Party.

Christian corporatism

Christian corporatism is a societal, economic, or a modern political application of the Christian doctrine of Paul of Tarsus in I Corinthians 12:12-31 where Paul speaks of an organic form of politics and society where all people and components are functionally united, like the human body. Christian corporatism has been supported by the Roman Catholic Church, Protestants, Christian democrats, and others. Economic application of Christian corporatism has promoted consultations between employers and workers and has sponsored Christian trade unionism.

Conservative corporatism

Based upon the normative value of conservatism and the structural layout of corporatism, conservative corporatism arose as a response to liberal pluralism and Marxist radicalism by rejecting the pluralism of liberalism, the dialectical materialism of Marxism and the mutually held secular attitudes of both liberalism and Marxism. Economic systems of conservative corporatism are identified as involving a status-related welfare state, pronounced but not extreme income differentials, moderately hierarchical status rankings, moderate social rights and some social exclusion. Conservative corporatism is also a corporatist political culture that is distinct from fascist corporatism in that rather than having a dictatorship impose order through force, the conservative corporatist culture is already settled and ongoing. The conservative corporatist culture relies on existing shared values of its members and therefore does not feature a large police force. The theoretical source of legitimacy of a conservative corporatist culture is tradition and hierarchy of birth. While its members are rational beings, the culture itself does not attempt to justify itself by reason as for instance a fascist corporatist culture does, but rather appeals to the way it has always been done. They feel that tradition is the rightful basis of society.

The conservative corporatist culture is organized with rigid hierarchy defined by birth and age. They view this hierarchy as fundamental to the proper functioning of the society. They do not value or seek to achieve equality because they believe it is an illusion and detrimental. Any power attained by those who seek equality is considered an illegitimate replacement. Merit does play a limited role in who has influence, but hierarchy of birth takes precedence over merit whenever there is a conflict between the two. The conservative corporate culture is based on the family. Small corporate groups as well as the whole society are seen as a big family. For this reason, conservative corporatists tend to view time and goals in terms longer than one's own lifetime. Specialization of skills by small corporate groups tend to perpetuate the culture because it causes members to feel a sense of self-government and self-sufficiency. The connection of their work to the purpose of the whole society is close and obvious. Conservative corporate cultures are conceived in cooperation, not competition. Members accept the hierarchy and ownership is not vested in individuals, but rather groups. The good of these groups is believed to be the same as the good of the whole society.

Corporate nationalism

Corporate nationalism is a phrase that is used to convey various meanings:

A political culture in which members believe the basic unit of society and the primary concern of the state is the corporate group rather than the individual, and the interests of the corporate group are the same as the interest of the nation.

Corporations should work mainly for the national good rather than the good of their owners.

Corporations should be protected from foreign ownership.

Corporations should or may be nationalized.

The state is biased towards corporate interests.

Corporate statism

Corporate statism, state corporatism, or simply corporatism, is a political culture and a form of corporatism closely related to fascism whose adherents hold that the corporate group which is the basis of society is the state. The state requires all members of a particular economic sector to join an officially designated interest group. Such interest groups thus attain public status, and they participate in national policymaking. The result is that the state has great control over the groups, and groups have great control over their members.As with other political cultures, societies have existed historically which exemplified corporate statism, for instance as developed by Othmar Spann and Benito Mussolini.

Corporate statism most commonly manifests itself as a ruling party acting as a mediator between the workers, capitalists and other prominent state interests by institutionally incorporating them into the ruling mechanism. Corporatist systems were most prevalent in the mid-20th Century in Europe and later elsewhere in developing countries. According to this critique, interests, both social and economic, are so diverse that a state cannot possibly mediate between them effectively through incorporating them. Social conflicts go beyond incorporated dichotomies of labor and capital to include innumerable groups. Furthermore, globalization presents challenges, both social and economic, that a corporate state cannot sufficiently address because these problems transcend state borders and approaches. It therefore differs from Corporate nationalism in that it is a social mode of organization rather than an economic nationalism through private business corporations.

Crony capitalism

Crony capitalism is an economy in which businesses thrive not as a result of risk, but rather as a return on money amassed through a nexus between a business class and the political class. This is often achieved by using state power rather than competition in managing permits, government grants, tax breaks, or other forms of state intervention over resources where the state exercises monopolist control over public goods, for example, mining concessions for primary commodities or contracts for public works. Money is then made not merely by making a profit in the market, but through profiteering by rent seeking using this monopoly or oligopoly. Entrepreneurship and innovative practices which seek to reward risk are stifled since the value-added is little by crony businesses, as hardly anything of significant value is created by them, with transactions taking the form of trading. Crony capitalism spills over into the government, the politics, and the media, when this nexus distorts the economy and affects society to an extent it corrupts public-serving economic, political, and social ideals.

The term crony capitalism made a significant impact in the public as an explanation of the Asian financial crisis. It is also used to describe governmental decisions favoring cronies of governmental officials. In this context, the term is often used comparatively with corporate welfare, a technical term often used to assess government bailouts and favoritistic monetary policy as opposed to the economic theory described by crony capitalism. The extent of difference between these terms is whether a government action can be said to benefit the individuals rather than the industry.

List of political ideologies

In social studies, a political ideology is a certain set of ethical ideals, principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class or large group that explains how society should work and offers some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power and to what ends it should be used. Some political parties follow a certain ideology very closely while others may take broad inspiration from a group of related ideologies without specifically embracing any one of them. The popularity of an ideology is in part due to the influence of moral entrepreneurs, who sometimes act in their own interests. Political ideologies have two dimensions: (1) goals: how society should be organized; and (2) methods: the most appropriate way to achieve this goal.

An ideology is a collection of ideas. Typically, each ideology contains certain ideas on what it considers to be the best form of government (e.g. autocracy or democracy) and the best economic system (e.g. capitalism or socialism). The same word is sometimes used to identify both an ideology and one of its main ideas. For instance, socialism may refer to an economic system, or it may refer to an ideology which supports that economic system. The same term may also be used to refer to multiple ideologies and that is why political scientists try to find consensus definitions for these terms. While the terms have been conflated at times, communism has come in common parlance and in academics to refer to Soviet-type regimes and Marxist–Leninist ideologies whereas socialism has come to refer to a wider range of differing ideologies which are distinct from Marxism–Leninism.Political ideology is a term fraught with problems, having been called "the most elusive concept in the whole of social science". While ideologies tend to identify themselves by their position on the political spectrum (such as the left, the centre or the right), they can be distinguished from political strategies (e.g. populism as it is commonly defined) and from single issues around which a party may be built (e.g. civil libertarianism and support or opposition to European integration), although either of these may or may not be central to a particular ideology. There are several studies that show that political ideology is heritable within families.The following list is strictly alphabetical and attempts to divide the ideologies found in practical political life into a number of groups, with each group containing ideologies that are related to each other. The headers refer to names of the best-known ideologies in each group. The names of the headers do not necessarily imply some hierarchical order or that one ideology evolved out of the other. Instead, they are merely noting that the ideologies in question are practically, historically and ideologically related to each other. As such, one ideology can belong to several groups and there is sometimes considerable overlap between related ideologies. The meaning of a political label can also differ between countries and political parties often subscribe to a combination of ideologies.

Military–industrial complex

The military–industrial complex (MIC) is an informal alliance between a nation's military and the defense industry that supplies it, seen together as a vested interest which influences public policy. A driving factor behind this relationship between the government and defense-minded corporations is that both sides benefit—one side from obtaining war weapons, and the other from being paid to supply them. The term is most often used in reference to the system behind the military of the United States, where it is most prevalent due to close links between defense contractors, the Pentagon and politicians and gained popularity after a warning on its detrimental effects in the farewell address of President Dwight D. Eisenhower on January 17, 1961.

In 2011, the United States spent more (in absolute numbers) on its military than the next 13 nations combined.In the context of the United States, the appellation given to it sometimes is extended to military–industrial–congressional complex (MICC), adding the U.S. Congress to form a three-sided relationship termed an iron triangle. These relationships include political contributions, political approval for military spending, lobbying to support bureaucracies, and oversight of the industry; or more broadly to include the entire network of contracts and flows of money and resources among individuals as well as corporations and institutions of the defense contractors, private military contractors, The Pentagon, the Congress and executive branch.A similar thesis was originally expressed by Daniel Guérin, in his 1936 book Fascism and Big Business, about the fascist government support to heavy industry. It can be defined as, "an informal and changing coalition of groups with vested psychological, moral, and material interests in the continuous development and maintenance of high levels of weaponry, in preservation of colonial markets and in military-strategic conceptions of internal affairs."

An exhibit of the trend was made in Franz Leopold Neumann's book Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism in 1942, a study of how Nazism came into a position of power in a democratic state.

Such type of complex, in the First World War, had taken US to the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917.

National Corporate Party

The National Corporate Party (Irish: Páirtí Náisiúnta Corparáidíoch, PNC) was a fascist political party in Ireland founded by General Eoin O'Duffy in June 1935 at a meeting of 500. It split from Fine Gael when O'Duffy was removed as leader of that party, which had been founded by the merger of O'Duffy's Blueshirts, formally known as the National Guard or Army Comrades Association, with Cumann na nGaedheal, and the National Centre Party.The National Corporate Party wished to establish a corporate state in Ireland and was strongly anti-communist. Its military wing was the Greenshirts. The party raised funds through public dances. Unlike the Blueshirts, whose aim had been the establishment of a corporate state while remaining within the British Commonwealth in order to appease moderates within Fine Gael, the National Corporate Party was committed to the establishment of a republic outside of the British Empire with O'Duffy presenting his party as the true successor to the ideals of the Easter Rising. The party also committed itself to the preservation and promotion of the Irish language and Gaelic culture, something that would be echoed by a later fascist party in Ireland, Ailtirí na hAiséirghe.It failed to gain much support however, with the majority of Fine Gael members remaining loyal to that party and O'Duffy only securing a handful of loyal supporters for his group.O'Duffy left Ireland in 1936 to become involved in the Spanish Civil War, a fact which led to further decline in the National Corporate Party. The party was defunct by 1937.

National Union (Portugal)

The National Union (Portuguese: União Nacional) was the sole legal party of the Estado Novo regime in Portugal. It was founded in 1930 and dominated by António de Oliveira Salazar during most of its existence. Unlike in most single-party regimes, the National Union was more of a political arm of the government, rather than holding actual power over it.

The National Union was formed as a subservient umbrella organisation to support the regime itself, and therefore did not have its own philosophy. At the time, many European countries feared the destructive potential of communism. Salazar not only forbade Marxist parties, but also revolutionary fascist-syndicalist parties. In 1934, Salazar exiled Francisco Rolão Preto as a part of a purge of the leadership of the Portuguese National Syndicalists, also known as the camisas azuis ("Blue Shirts"). Salazar denounced the National Syndicalists as "inspired by certain foreign models" (meaning German Nazism) and condemned their "exaltation of youth, the cult of force through direct action, the principle of the superiority of state political power in social life, [and] the propensity for organising masses behind a single leader" as fundamental differences between fascism and the Catholic corporatism of the Estado Novo.The Portuguese corporatist state had some similarities to Benito Mussolini's Italian fascism, but considerable differences in its moral approach to governing. Although Salazar admired Mussolini and was influenced by his Labour Charter of 1927, he distanced himself from fascist dictatorship, which he considered a pagan Caesarist political system that recognised neither legal nor moral limits. Salazar also viewed German Nazism as espousing pagan elements that he considered repugnant. Just before World War II, Salazar made this declaration: "We are opposed to all forms of Internationalism, Communism, Socialism, Syndicalism and everything that may divide or minimise, or break up the family. We are against class warfare, irreligion and disloyalty to one's country; against serfdom, a materialistic conception of life, and might over right."Unlike Mussolini or Hitler, Salazar never had the intention to create a party-state. Salazar was against the whole-party concept and when in 1930 he created the National Union he created it as a non-party. The National Union was set up to control and restrain public opinion rather than to mobilize it, the goal was to strengthen and preserve traditional values rather than to induce a new social order. Ministers, diplomats and civil servants were never compelled to join the National Union.

Role ethics

Role ethics is an ethical theory based on family roles. Unlike virtue ethics, role ethics is not individualistic. Morality is derived from a person's relationship with their community. The ethics of Confucianism is an example of role ethics.

Social corporatism

Social corporatism (also called social democratic corporatism) is a form of economic tripartite corporatism based upon a social partnership between the interests of capital and labour, involving collective bargaining between representatives of employers and of labour mediated by the government at the national level. Social corporatism is a major component of the Nordic model of capitalism and to a lesser degree the West European social market economies. It is considered a compromise to regulate the conflict between capital and labour by mandating them to engage in mutual consultations that are mediated by the government.Generally supported by nationalist and/or social-democratic political parties, social corporatism developed in the post-World War II period, influenced by social democrats and Christian democrats in European countries such as Austria, Norway, the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden. Social corporatism has also been adopted in different configurations and to varying degrees in various European countries.

The Nordic countries have the most comprehensive form of collective bargaining, where trade unions are represented at the national level by official organizations alongside employers unions. Together with the welfare state policies of these countries, this forms what is termed the Nordic model. Less extensive models exist in Germany and Austria, which are components of Rhine capitalism.

Tory

A Tory () is a person who holds a political philosophy known as Toryism, based on a British version of traditionalism and conservatism, which upholds the supremacy of social order as it has evolved throughout history. The Tory ethos has been summed up with the phrase "God, King, and Country". Tories generally advocate monarchism, and were historically of a high church Anglican religious heritage, opposed to the liberalism of the Whig faction.

The philosophy originates from the Cavalier faction, a royalist group during the English Civil War. The Tories political faction that emerged in 1681 was a reaction to the Whig-controlled Parliaments that succeeded the Cavalier Parliament. It also has exponents in other parts of the former British Empire, such as the Loyalists of British America, who opposed American secession during the American War of Independence. The loyalists that fled to the Canadas at the end of the American Revolution, the United Empire Loyalists, formed the support base for political cliques in Upper and Lower Canada. Toryism remains prominent in Canada and the United Kingdom. The British Conservative Party and Conservative Party of Canada, and their members, continue to be referred to as Tories.

The term Tory is used regardless of whether they are traditionalists or not. Adherents to traditional Toryism in contemporary times are referred to as High Tories. The terms Blue Tory and Red Tory have been used to describe the two different factions of the federal and provincial Conservative/Progressive Conservative parties in Canada. In addition, Pink Tory is used in Canadian politics as a pejorative term to describe a member of the Conservative/Progressive Conservative party who is perceived as liberal.

Tory corporatism

Tory corporatism is a corporatist political culture that is distinct from fascist corporatism in that rather than having a dictatorship impose order through force, the Tory corporatist culture is already settled and ongoing. The Tory corporatist culture relies on existing shared values of its members and therefore does not feature a large police force. The theoretical source of legitimacy of a Tory corporatist culture is tradition and hierarchy of birth.

While its members are rational beings, the culture itself does not attempt to justify itself by reason as for instance a fascist corporatist culture does, but rather appeals to the way it has always been done. Tory corporatists feel that tradition is the rightful basis of society. The Tory corporatist culture is organized with rigid hierarchy defined by birth and age. Tory corporatists view this hierarchy as fundamental to the proper functioning of the society. They do not value or seek to achieve equality because they believe it is an illusion and detrimental. Any power attained by those who seek equality is considered an illegitimate replacement. Merit does play a limited role in who has influence, but hierarchy of birth takes precedence over merit whenever there is a conflict between the two.The Tory corporate culture is based on the family. Small corporate groups as well as the whole society are seen as a big family. For this reason, Tory corporatists tend to view time and goals in terms longer than one's own lifetime. Specialization of skills by small corporate groups tend to perpetuate the culture because it causes members to feel a sense of self-government and self-sufficiency. The connection of their work to the purpose of the whole society is close and obvious. Tory corporate cultures are conceived in cooperation, not competition. Members accept the hierarchy and ownership is not vested in individuals, but rather groups. The good of these groups is believed to be the same as the good of the whole society.

Welfare capitalism

Welfare capitalism is capitalism that includes social welfare policies. Welfare capitalism is also the practice of businesses providing welfare services to their employees. Welfare capitalism in this second sense, or industrial paternalism, was centered on industries that employed skilled labor and peaked in the mid-20th century.

Today, welfare capitalism is most often associated with the models of capitalism found in Central Mainland and Northern Europe, such as the Nordic model, social market economy and Rhine capitalism. In some cases welfare capitalism exists within a mixed economy, but welfare states can and do exist independently of policies common to mixed economies such as state interventionism and extensive regulation.

Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths

The Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths is one of the Great Twelve Livery Companies of the City of London. The company's headquarters are at Goldsmiths' Hall in the City of London.The Company, which originates from the twelfth century, received a Royal Charter in 1327 and ranks fifth in the order of precedence of City Livery Companies. Its motto is Justitia Virtutum Regina, Latin for Justice is Queen of Virtues.

Worshipful Company of Ironmongers

The Worshipful Company of Ironmongers is one of the livery companies of the City of London, incorporated under a Royal Charter in 1463.

Worshipful Company of Shipwrights

The Worshipful Company of Shipwrights is one of the ancient livery companies of the City of London. Although the Shipwrights' Company is no longer a trade association solely representing the shipbuilding industry, it retains strong links with global trade, and maritime and shipping professions.

The company ranks fifty-ninth in the City livery order of precedence and cohabits with the Ironmongers' Company.

Its motto is "Within The Ark Safe For Ever".

Ideas
People
Events
Symbols
Policies
Establishments
Ideology
Organizations
Political parties
People
Historical events

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by authors (here).
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.