For so long, a number of definitions have been used to confuse, as I see it.
The supposed polls of capitalism and socialism have been dualistic. But corporatism seems what you defined above. Please choose a reference of your own liking to read a definition of corporatism, which pretends to be capitalism but is not.
Laissez faire capitalism is not a private-public partnership, has no "stakeholder" as the WEF and others assert to be equivalent to shareholders, and is managed in the Adam Smith view by "invisible hands," so very different than the "elite" and very visible hands seen in a coporatist media today.
Rather recently I also read an assertion that Communist China practices "state capitalism," another attempt to sully laissez faire capitalism by Communists and corporatists.
Best wishes.
Good post, thanks.
I ran across this in another thread, and it seems to fit the commerce/government issue well:
“All these entities are private and answer to no one but themselves, and at the same time they have the power to influence national governments, including through their own representatives who are made to be elected or appointed to key posts. They admit it themselves, when they are received with all the honors by heads of state and world leaders, respected and feared by these leaders as the true masters of the fate of the world. Thus, those who hold power in the name of the “people” find themselves trampling on the people’s will and restricting their rights, in order to be obedient courtiers to masters whom nobody has elected but who nevertheless dictate their political and economic agenda to the nations.”—Archbishop Vigano