Corporatism, once again...

[Quantum Windbag]

I think that CORPORATISM is the inevitable political outcome of rapidly advancing technological society that has CAPITALISM as its economy system and nominally, representational forms of governments.

After all, the economic advantages of increased efficiencies of advancing mostly go to the OWNERSHIP class, not the working classes.

That is why we are now seeing not only such a huge economic divide between the SUPER ELITE and the rest of us and also why we see that their growing power is now superceding even national powers.

Such economic advantage inevitably leads to control over governments (by debt, mostly).

WE should NOT be surprised this is happening.

The merchant classes took down the MONARCHIAL system in much the same way from 1776 though about 1917.

While the Monarchial empires fought each other for world control, it was their BANKERS who ultimately won control over their world.

Well now, the system of NATION STATES as the focus of all power is beginning to fall, too.

Again we see the same mechanism working to bring down nations....they become so INDEBTED that they no longer are calling the shots.

Perhaps in the longer run this is all for the best, but the turbulance from the changing power structure is going to be damned hard on most of us.

I thought that was the definition of anarchy.

 

[dblack]

Here is a better idea.

Why don't you tell us what YOU think it means and we'll go from there. Unless you cannot formulate what you believe and don't believe without someone else articulating it for you?

What do you think it means?

I'm content to go with common sources for the definition of the word. I won't insult your intelligence, or placate your lack of initiative, by copying and pasting what is easily accessible.

If it isn't already obvious, the poll is facetious. I'm poking fun at the lazy ignorance and gross misunderstanding of something that I actually consider an insidious threat to our way of life. I've tried, in other threads, to explain why I think corporatism is dangerous, but I'm always drowned out by idiots (just like in this thread) who simply don't know what it means, won't look it up, and won't listen if I try to correct them.

So, no, I won't play that game again. Some people here do seem to understand the term and, even if I might disagree with their assessment of it's harmful nature, I appreciate their attention. I'd really like to have an intelligent discussion of the topic with those folks without being drowned out by senseless drivel about the value of corporations.

Common sources contract each other on the meaning of the word.

Not in any significant way. No more so than they differ on other political themes like capitalism or socialism. My point here isn't that people are using subtly different definitions of the word. It's that they're getting it completely wrong. They're not even bothering to educate themselves on what the word means. They just hear the root word 'corporate' and go off on a tangent about whether corporations are good or bad, or whether they have too much influence over government.

There are many other definitions, all of which are valid, and none of which fit easily into your poll.

As I stated, the poll is facetious. I'm mocking the common misconceptions of the term.

I would also like to point out that none of the definitions of corporatism have anything to do with corporations.

Exactly. That really gets to the heart of the point I'm trying to make. Corporatism existed before modern corporations. It can exist without them. It can exist under capitalism, socialism or any other economic system.

Which brings us back to, what do you think it means? Copping out is not an option, unless you are a weasel.

I'm not copping out. I don't want anyone to take accept my personal definition. I want them to look it up and use it appropriately. If that's a copout, fine - put me down on page one in your book of weasels.

 

[dblack]

By way of example, here's some corporatism:

Exemption from health law’s individual mandate broadened for Native Americans

By Associated Press, Published: June 26

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The Obama administration on Wednesday broadened an exemption for American Indians from the new health care law’s requirement that virtually every U.S. resident has health insurance starting next year.

New rules clarify that people who are eligible to receive medical care through the federal Indian Health Service will be exempt from the requirement to have health insurance or face fines from the Internal Revenue Service. The Indian Health Service, a division of U.S. Health and Human Services, oversees a network of clinics that are required through treaty obligations to serve all patients of Indian ancestry, even if they cannot document their federal tribal status.

“Today, we continue to fulfill our responsibility to consult and work with tribal communities,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement.

Last month, The Associated Press reported that the Affordable Care Act exempted only American Indians and Alaska Natives who can document their membership in one of about 560 tribes recognized by the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs. Yet more than 100 tribes nationwide are recognized only by states and not the federal government. ...

 

[snowdenisahero]

Did you mean to post this in a different thread?

I posted my entire post with the portion of corporatism/fascism in bold from a thread I posted here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rested-and-tried-for-perjury-and-treason.html

What shocks me is the number of people who've read what everyone already knows is right, yet not one comment. At least I see one person voted so far.

You mean this?

Corporatism is the merger or Government and corporate power in an authoritarian state

No. It isn't.

dblack, heed your own words. Yes, I mean my post that no a soul here is paying attention to which shows how cluselss people here are. Your opinion means what" "No. It isn't" is your answer?

Yes, that's exactly what corporatism is. Fascism is the merger of government and corporate power in an authoritarian state. Where do you get your info and opinions from? I think most of you are kids or Government bootlicking clueless Americans who blindly support this jingoist empire. You people are so annoying, because you have no idea what you're talking about, and no earthly way to back up anything you say. You know who Mussolini was? Pathetic!

You said: "I want them to look it up and use it appropriately."

Who are you to want anything when you have no idea what you're talking about lol...?

There ya go. Check and mate.

"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.

Benito Mussolini"

Refute the common sense and factual points I brought up here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rested-and-tried-for-perjury-and-treason.html

 

[Billo_Really]

It has nothing to do with capitalism, it does have everything to do with government being involved in commerce by picking winners and losers and solidifying into law, the special interests of favored groups among competitive markets.

That's because of major corporations being involved in government and controlling their agenda.

What we're seeing is the government failing to protect individual rights and instead favoring special interests.

They're doing what they're paid to do, but the money isn't coming from us.

If government were not involved in commerce, at all, this would be a nonissue.

If business wasn't involved in government, this would be a non-issue.

People would be forced to compete and their standings would be left to their merits rather than the force of law killing competition.

What is killing competition, is corporate mergers and the failure of government to enforce anti-trust laws.

True. Once you realize that government is a failure in society and the root cause of this disease.

The root cause of the disease, is an un-informed republic, for allowing the situation we are currently in, to develop.

 

[dblack]

I posted my entire post with the portion of corporatism/fascism in bold from a thread I posted here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rested-and-tried-for-perjury-and-treason.html

What shocks me is the number of people who've read what everyone already knows is right, yet not one comment. At least I see one person voted so far.

You mean this?

Corporatism is the merger or Government and corporate power in an authoritarian state

No. It isn't.

dblack, heed your own words. Yes, I mean my post that no a soul here is paying attention to which shows how cluselss people here are. Your opinion means what" "No. It isn't" is your answer?

Yes, that's exactly what corporatism is. Fascism is the merger of government and corporate power in an authoritarian state. Where do you get your info and opinions from? I think most of you are kids or Government bootlicking clueless Americans who blindly support this jingoist empire. You people are so annoying, because you have no idea what you're talking about, and no earthly way to back up anything you say. You know who Mussolini was? Pathetic!

You said: "I want them to look it up and use it appropriately."

Who are you to want anything when you have no idea what you're talking about lol...?

There ya go. Check and mate.

heh.. ok. Now quite sure what you're going on about here. But you do have a point. And, depending on how you define 'corporate power', I may be willing to recant on my "No. It isn't." comment - perhaps replacing it with "It's not that simple."

If you read anything on corporatism beyond the Mussolini quote, you no doubt discovered that the "corporations" referred to aren't necessarily, or even usually, incorporated businesses. That fact is key to understanding corporatism. In the context of corporatism, political and economic power is distributed via organized interest groups. It's those groups that are the 'corporations' of 'corporatism' - and while they can be incorporated business, they also include many other groups like unions, trade guilds, religions, cartels, etc...

The point I'm trying to make here is that corporatism is much more fundamental and pervasive than mere corruption (businesses colluding with government), and most people never get past that perception. Corporatism threatens the fundamental principles of our republic (equal rights, rule of law, individual liberty) by replacing them with collective rights and class-based, identity politics. Under corporatism, everybody gets a different 'deal' depending on which groups they belong to.

Refute the common sense and factual points I brought up here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rested-and-tried-for-perjury-and-treason.html

I have no interest in refuting it. I completely agree.

 

[dblack]

If business wasn't involved in government, this would be a non-issue.

Right, but do you realize how this is a two-way street? When government is involved in business, when the state regularly intervenes in economic matters, business ARE involved. They have no other choice.

What is needed is something akin to our established freedom of religion, something that sets up 'wall of separation' between government and business interests; preventing business from manipulating government and vice-versa.

 

[Billo_Really]

Right, but do you realize how this is a two-way street? When government is involved in business, when the state regularly intervenes in economic matters, business ARE involved. They have no other choice.

What is needed is something akin to our established freedom of religion, something that sets up 'wall of separation' between government and business interests; preventing business from manipulating government and vice-versa.

When government is involved in business, it is at bigger businesses directions.

Take for example, the Afordable Care Act. It started out to reduce the cost of medical treatment for average American's through the "public option". But then the healthcare lobby went to work and had over 900 meetings at the WH between January and the time of the vote. As a result, not only was the public option removed from the bill, but it added the mandate to increase health insurance customers by 27,000,000.

Another example is the bank bailout, where government bailed out the very companies who caused the economic meltdown.

You're right about the revolving door, though. Officials who leave office, become lobbiests. And when they get elected, they bring big business reps into their government. And round and round we go...

 

[Wry Catcher]

Mussolini said, "Fascism is the union of corporation and state."

We should keep a close eye on the Roberts Court which seems to value Corporations over people (proving, BTW, that Romney was wrong).

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Right, but do you realize how this is a two-way street? When government is involved in business, when the state regularly intervenes in economic matters, business ARE involved. They have no other choice.

What is needed is something akin to our established freedom of religion, something that sets up 'wall of separation' between government and business interests; preventing business from manipulating government and vice-versa.

When government is involved in business, it is at bigger businesses directions.

Take for example, the Afordable Care Act. It started out to reduce the cost of medical treatment for average American's through the "public option". But then the healthcare lobby went to work and had over 900 meetings at the WH between January and the time of the vote. As a result, not only was the public option removed from the bill, but it added the mandate to increase health insurance customers by 27,000,000.

Another example is the bank bailout, where government bailed out the very companies who caused the economic meltdown.

You're right about the revolving door, though. Officials who leave office, become lobbiests. And when they get elected, they bring big business reps into their government. And round and round we go...

Ultimately, it is congress and the senate that have screwed us over by passing horrific bills such as the patriot act, Ocare, tarp, immigration, and other assorted travesties.

 

[francoHFW]

O-Care has as much public option as the congress would allow. They can add other reforms when the GOP gets bounced in 2014.

 

[snowdenisahero]

You mean this?



No. It isn't.

dblack, heed your own words. Yes, I mean my post that no a soul here is paying attention to which shows how cluselss people here are. Your opinion means what" "No. It isn't" is your answer?

Yes, that's exactly what corporatism is. Fascism is the merger of government and corporate power in an authoritarian state. Where do you get your info and opinions from? I think most of you are kids or Government bootlicking clueless Americans who blindly support this jingoist empire. You people are so annoying, because you have no idea what you're talking about, and no earthly way to back up anything you say. You know who Mussolini was? Pathetic!

You said: "I want them to look it up and use it appropriately."

Who are you to want anything when you have no idea what you're talking about lol...?

There ya go. Check and mate.

heh.. ok. Now quite sure what you're going on about here. But you do have a point. And, depending on how you define 'corporate power', I may be willing to recant on my "No. It isn't." comment - perhaps replacing it with "It's not that simple."

If you read anything on corporatism beyond the Mussolini quote, you no doubt discovered that the "corporations" referred to aren't necessarily, or even usually, incorporated businesses. That fact is key to understanding corporatism. In the context of corporatism, political and economic power is distributed via organized interest groups. It's those groups that are the 'corporations' of 'corporatism' - and while they can be incorporated business, they also include many other groups like unions, trade guilds, religions, cartels, etc...

The point I'm trying to make here is that corporatism is much more fundamental and pervasive than mere corruption (businesses colluding with government), and most people never get past that perception. Corporatism threatens the fundamental principles of our republic (equal rights, rule of law, individual liberty) by replacing them with collective rights and class-based, identity politics. Under corporatism, everybody gets a different 'deal' depending on which groups they belong to.

Refute the common sense and factual points I brought up here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rested-and-tried-for-perjury-and-treason.html

I have no interest in refuting it. I completely agree.

But what's the entity that allows these "different deals" to be created? I agree with you. No bid contracts are another great example of corporatism. The way the lobbyists basically bribe is another. The Bailouts. Governmnet should have let the banks fail, the car industries fail, and let THEM figure out how to stay in business, or let real competition work. The fact the big 3 have been bailed out with tax payer monies is absurd. There's no accountability in Government, they spend OUR money when, where and how they please. This is not an American problem, this is global: http://dailybail.com/home/grand-theft-bank-80-of-your-money-will-be-stolen-in-cyprus.html In theory, we should now own parts of these businesses if they want to socialistically steal our money to keep them in business. Also, that tesla company that wants to sell cars directly to the consumer is being thwarted by the big three and Government to keep their control of the industry, and again, is not what a free market is about. If the Governmnet didn't get involved in the economy (only had a very small role in our free market) then we wouldn't have corportism/fascism. We'd have a true free market and no monopolies. It's the Government that allows the creation of monopolies. A corporation's just a legal entity the Government says you MUST form to conduct business. Whether it's an LLC, etc. I could open up a corp, sign all kinds of contracts with third parties do business with them, then default on them all and shut down the corp with no personal liability. Scary thought, but it happens all the time.

 

[whitehall]

Anybody can incorporate. It's a way of protecting yourself from lawsuits and also it helps in paying taxes. Which do you hate, the little LLC's that are just trying to get by or the successful businesses? Corporations r us. Every pension system is invested in corporations. How is social security doing?

 

[Two Thumbs]

I wish there was another word for it. It's actually a form of fascism. But fascism is even more inflammatory and misunderstood than 'corporatism'. Maybe we should mint a replacement term here on this very site.

I really get why it's confusing. People hear the word and assume they know what it means - because "Hey, I know about corporations. What else is there to know?" But I'd really expect a little more curiosity and research here. I mean it is, nominally, a political discussion board. Is it so hard to look up the terms we use?

people working together annoys you?

well, groups working in together is a tad more accurate.

but I can see why people assume it's about big biz and government.

 

[Redfish]

so lets see if I get it. Corporations are inherently evil and government is inherently benevalent. OK.

Now about that swamp land I have for sale for your beachfront condo.

 

[Billo_Really]

Ultimately, it is congress and the senate that have screwed us over by passing horrific bills such as the patriot act, Ocare, tarp, immigration, and other assorted travesties.

Because big business told them to.

 

[Redfish]

Ultimately, it is congress and the senate that have screwed us over by passing horrific bills such as the patriot act, Ocare, tarp, immigration, and other assorted travesties.

Because big business told them to.

are you really that dumb? which corporations by name told congress to pass the patriot act? which ones by name told congress to pass obozocare, tarp, and amnesty?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Collectivist agrarian communes are the future.... for the people !!! Lol

 

[Redfish]

Collectivist agrarian communes are the future.... for the people !!! Lol

"from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" can anyone tell us when and where that has ever worked?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Collectivist agrarian communes are the future.... for the people !!! Lol

"from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" can anyone tell us when and where that has ever worked?

Never.....always ends in disaster.