Corporatism

Emblems used by medieval German guilds, displaying various symbols related to their professions

Corporatism is a political system of interest representation and policymaking whereby corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, business, scientific, or guild associations, come together on and negotiate contracts or policy (collective bargaining) on the basis of their common interests.[1][2][3] The term is derived from the Latin corpus, or "body".

Corporatism does not refer to a political system dominated by large business interests, even though the latter are commonly referred to as "corporations" in modern American vernacular and legal parlance; instead, the correct term for this theoretical system would be corporatocracy. Corporatism is not government corruption in politics or the use of bribery by corporate interest groups. The terms 'corporatocracy' and 'corporatism' are often confused due to their name and the use of corporations as organs of the state.

Corporatism developed during the 1850s in response to the rise of classical liberalism and Marxism, as it advocated cooperation between the classes instead of class conflict. Adherents of diverse ideologies, including fascism, communism, socialism, and liberalism have advocated for corporatist models.[1] Corporatism became one of the main tenets of fascism, and Benito Mussolini's fascist regime in Italy advocated the total integration of divergent interests into the state for the common good;[4] however, the more democratic neo-corporatism often embraced tripartism.[5][6]

Corporatist ideas have been expressed since ancient Greek and Roman societies, with integration into Catholic social teaching and Christian democratic 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 social democracy.[7][8]

  1. ^ a b Molina, Oscar; Rhodes, Martin (2002). "Corporatism: The Past, Present, and Future of a Concept". Annual Review of Political Science. 5 (1): 305–331. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.5.112701.184858. ISSN 1094-2939.
  2. ^ Wiarda 1997, pp. 27, 141.
  3. ^ Clarke, Paul A. B; Foweraker, Joe (2001). Encyclopedia of democratic thought. London, UK; New York, US: Routledge. p. 113.
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Slomp, Hans (2000). European politics into the twenty-first century: integration and division. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers. p. 81.
  6. ^ Cite error: The named reference :0 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  7. ^ Wiarda 1997, pp. 31, 38, 44, 111, 124, 140.
  8. ^ Hicks 1988.

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search