It has its origins, per the image leading the preview, in medieval guild systems. While this is a broad statement involving putting modern labels om historical insititions, there were explicit historical sources of inspiration for those who articulated modern corporatism, including in two Papal encyclicals, as a way to address labor relations and head off communism/left-wing solutions and create economic accord within a traditionalist/paternalist/Catholic framework.
Corporatism became an explicit ideological component of many fascist (or at least reactionary authoritarian) movements largely attributable to copying Mussolini: it heavily influenced the pre-Anschluss Austria government (“Austro-fascism”), Falangism in Spain, the Estado Novo in Portugal—and other countries where it was less centrally articulated but still an influencing concept under “Clerical-fascism” such as Nazi-controlled Slovakia which was led by a priest who was thrilled to lick Hitler’s boots.
Worth the read and worth looking into more beyond Wikipedia! It’s important to understand the ideological underpinning’s of ones enemies—especially when they’re (marginally) more intellectually articulated than “minorities bad.”
Corporatism has been employed in nefarious ways many times, but it’s also the basis for the Nordic model used by Sweden, where labor unions and business owners meet to form policy that benefits both groups.
I think this idea of corporate groups informs how I view power in the US, where businesses hold significantly more clout than labor unions. But that used to not be the case. A while back I was trying to understand what changed in the late 60’s or early 70’s that led to the stagnation of wages we have seen since, and found an article from the time that talked about the largest union potentially striking over Nixon’s move away from the Bretton-Woods system: https://www.nytimes.com/1971/08/21/archives/nixon-and-the-unions-president-pins-hopes-on-rankandfile-as-the.html
The thing that struck me was that it may be the first time I’ve read about the leaders of a union being invited to meet at the White House, the way an Elon Musk or other CEO would today. It leads me to believe that the most realistic peaceful path toward fixing the many issues facing the people of the US today is to empower unions such that they have the clout to challenge that of corporations again.
All this to say that corporatism as a concept can enable good or bad, but I would like to see it considered more. And I’d like to see it confused with corporatocracy less.
I could do with more depth to my knowledge though. Do you have any recommendations on books or articles to do more reading?
I mostly see it as an attempt to co-opt labor/reform movements by institutionalizing them and, while ostensibly legitimizing them, ultimately setting boundaries that view real material changes as too radical and ends up just supporting the interests of capital in an effort to manufacture the appearance of some kind of social harmony.
The only case I’ve specifically read deeply into is Austria where there’s a rich debate about whether they were “fascist” and what that means and what they were. It was several years ago and I can’t recall any names but in my initial post “austro-fascism” is a research term that’s going to get you right into the debate. Wikipedia is a reasonable place to start—iirc they were called the Fatherland Front?
Beyond that, my encounters have been more through histories that cover these periods and regimes but aren’t necessarily focus on the specific question of corporatism. Priest, Politician, Collaborator looks at Tiso, the puppet in Slovakia. Hugh Thomas’ The Spanish Civil War isn’t “about” corporatism but does discuss the ideological underpinnings of Franco and I just had a similar experience with Lisbon by Neill Lochery looking at Salazar’s corporatist beliefs weighed against the fear of invasion as a small state by its larger, nominal ideological neighbor in Spain.
The early phase of Italian fascism is worth looking into, too. The fascist manifesto was written by some modern artists and Italy remain in some ways weirdly constitutional as is synthesized Mussolini’s politics into and on top of existing political structures.
Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power
Are you quoting someone?