Posted on 04/15/2010 6:52:37 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
What is corporatism? In a (somewhat inaccurate) phrase, socialism for the bourgeois. It has the outward form of capitalism in that it preserves private ownership & private management but with a crucial difference: as under socialism, government guarantees the flow of material goods which under true capitalism it does not. In classical capitalism...government's role in the economy is simply to prevent force or fraud from disrupting the autonomous operation of the free market...Under corporatism, it is not, instead being systematically manipulated to deliver goods to political constituencies...
Unlike socialism, corporatism understands that direct government ownership of the means of production does not work...But it does not represent a half-way condition between capitalism & socialism. Corporatism blends socialism & capitalism not by giving each control of different parts of the economy, but by combining socialism's promise of a government guaranteed flow of material goods with capitalism's private ownership & management.
What makes corporatism so politically irresistible is that it is attractive not just to the mass electorate but to the economic elites as well...big business likes big government except when big government gets greedy & tries to renegotiate the division of spoils. Although big business was an historic adversary of the introduction of the corporatists state, it eventually found common ground with it.
The first thing big business has in common with big government is managerialism. The technocratic manager who deals in impersonal mass aggregates, organizes through bureaucracy and rules through expertise without assuming personal responsibility is common to both. The second thing big business likes about big government is that it has a competitive advantage over small business in doing business with it and negotiating favors. Big government in turn, likes big business because it is manageable; it does what it is told...
(Excerpt) Read more at 97.74.65.51 ...
If Obama (or any other Democrat) tries this with the insurance corporations and tries to go the route of single payer and getting rid of the insurance corporations being the ones who provide the good and service, Wall Street will turn on them, the insurance companies will turn on them and so will most of the private sector as they will wonder when they are next.
That is when they will see the Dems as trying to renegotiate a division of the spoils as this article at Front Page Mag points out.
Which is why Obama didn’t like SCOTUS’s ruling that corporations have the same rights and privileges as average citizens when it comes to money spent on political advertising.
While I am certainly not planning on voting for Ron Paul (I want Sarah Palin to get the nomination) Ron Paul isn’t a mental case. That word usage falls in line with the MSM trying to demonize him and is a baseless ad hominem attack.
If Ron Paul were to call Obama a fascist it would destroy him politically in his attempt to frame what Obama is and what he is doing. The best route to go is use the word corporatist.
Dr Paul should quit dressing it up. Fascism is the accurate term for it.
You lost readers by making this a Ron Paul thread.
LOL!
Like any other word, it depends on the definition used.
Mussolini said: “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism.”
If the gov’t controlled 100% of it and were the ones not only actually directly guaranteeing the flow but directly determining the flow, then it would be pure socialism.
As of now, GM is still controlled somewhat by board members, and still somewhat privately owned.
If GM were socialized right now, there would be nothing but green cars, battery-powered cars and nothing else, given the left’s tendencies. As of now, they still put out SUV’s and other cars that are an aabomination to the left because it is still partly privately owned and managed.
The housing market conditions, the banking conditions, ObamaCare and so on show us that corporatism is the order of the day in ObamaLand.
Obama seems to me to be a fusion of Communist/Fascist. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Thanks for the correction. Did not know that.
Maybe he is using the word corporatist because the MSM would eat him alive if he used the word fascist?
Calling someone a fascist has as much political impact as calling someone a Nazi.
Agreed. Corporatist is the word to use.
Obama certainly gives one the impression of having some tendencies toward taking up this option. E.G., The Attack on Jindfal's people in NOLA, is a typical fascist street action.
l-fc, we are repeating history.
It should still be here, but sadly it isn’t. Not much left of that anymore.
By Jove! I believe you have nailed it!...
Unlike most of the Paul acolytes in these threads, I've actually met Paul socially, and even had an enjoyable dinner and a 3-4 hour discussion with him and four other companions in Dallas several years ago. He's a very intelligent man, and his "theoretical" knowledge of the Constitution and the way the Republic is supposed to function is impressive.
In other words, he "talks the talk" very well. However, his performance record tells a different story, especially in recent years. The last straw, for those who are capable of assessing him honestly, was the abject hypocrisy of his behavior regarding earmarks.
As a completely subjective observation, the Ron Paul I see today is merely a shell of the man I met those years ago. I believe he has succumbed to his own celebrity and ego, and has lost the ability to differentiate between taking a stand for his principles and merely using his principles as stage props for political posturing. He has become a self-caricature.
That’s right, Obama put through healthcare corporatism for two reasons: because it’s all he could get for now and with it he can mess up the system enough to make 100 percent government ownership possible. It’s his approach in everything: corporatism/fascism en route to socialism/communism.
Of course......the real reason why people do not like Paul....is that he is anti-Liberal Globalist.....against the WTO, NAFTA....the same groups that are worshiped by Liberal Globalist “Corporatists”
Also....a lot of Liberal RINO GOP do not like it that Obama is called a “Corporatist”....because most Liberal RINO GOP are themselves “Corporatists”
Good to see that this writer from FrontPage Mag is not just regurgitating the same liberal globalist hogslop that Paul’s critics always spew
Communism will not work, neither will the slightly different from it - Leninism.
Direct gov’t ownership of the means of production will not work.
Nice ad hominem attack. Using ad hominem attacks (calling Ron Paul names) automatically renders your arguments null and void as it is an attack on the messenger.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.