Is he right Veeky Forums? is corporatism the ultimate solution to capitalism?

is he right Veeky Forums? is corporatism the ultimate solution to capitalism?

Where is that solution? Fascism provides no rational blueprint or justification of its' designs for society. It's just, "you guys should all unite in complete obedience to that bossy bald guy, he'll figure everything out, honest".

No matter what your beliefs are, the Liberals or Marxists try to observe and analyse society and economy rationally, Fascists reject rationality entirely. A E S T H E T I C S.

>everything that isnt entirely materialistic is irrational

No, its shit. He dropped the ball when he started focusing on private enterprise as the basis of fascism , rather than economic socialism. There is nothing wrong with a "nationalist-socialist" system (not the nazi kind, because that too was fake).

A real nationalist socialist system eschews things like private property, corporatism and the liberal democratic process in favor of hierarchy that nonetheless derives its power from a unified socialistically organised people. Its what Gentile was arguing for, its what Spengler envisioned and its what the Fascists and Nazis betrayed by bending to the native capitalist and industrialist cartels and waging an imperialist war against the USSR.

Spengler did advocate corporatism, pretty explicitly in Preussentum und Sozialismus.

He argued in favor of private property, but not in favor of capitalism. For him hierarchy of command was the most important thing, but because people think hierarchy and "management" are the same thing they think he was a "nationalist socialist" (of the nazi kind) of some kind. But he was not, Spengler accepts Marx's critique of Capital entirely, what he disagrees with is that Marx was unable to escape the British fabian utopianism and thus advocated for humanistic socialism, which in fact is what became later the ideal of communism. Spengler , Gentile and Strasser stand as distinct from Marxism but not identical with fascist corporatism.

Do you know what corporatism means? It pretty much means class cooperation under state control. That's exactly what Spengler advocated.

Also sorry to use wikipedia here but it explains it sufficiently:
>True socialism according to Spengler would be in the form of corporatism, stating that "local corporate bodies organized according to the importance of each occupation to the people as a whole; higher representation in stages up to a supreme council of the state; mandates revocable at any time; no organized parties, no professional politicians, no periodic elections."

By class he doesn't mean the capitalist class and proletariat class, what he envisions is an oligarchic society where it is ruled by the "aristoi", whether these are of the military kind or those of the spirit, or birth. In the Decline of the West book he explicitly derides a society that is directed by the "rule of money", that is directed by capitals demands and the manipulation of it by men of trade (capitalists). National socialism in this sense is not some kind of authoritarian Keynesianism like the way it turned out be, it is a beast of its own.

Once again: corporatism =/= capitalism. It's in fact a reaction to capitalism.

Not in the sense in the way that it was implemented or even described by the Fascists and Nazis. It is why Strasser was killed and Gentile was sidelined. By what Mussolini means by corporatism is not the same, because what Mussolini describes is the state ruled like a corporate holding company.

corporatism =/= corporatocracy

...

>corporatism =/= capitalism. It's in fact a reaction to capitalism.

You need to learn to separate between corporatism as existing in a liberal democracy and corporatism in an authoritarian state.

Corporatism and capitalism aren't mutually exclusive in a liberal democracy.

It runs into the same issues as all the one-party totalitarian states: who gets to command the production is a function of ideological/institutional loyalty, much more so than competence, and the continuation of the power structure takes precedence over the functions that the power structure was set up to enact in the first place.

Deng Xiaoping might've been the first guy to see the issue here, which is why he propped up less politicized spaces for competition.

Now, markets are never truly level, and they fail to adress some issues, so market coordination is something every state has to go into (there are only mixed economies, really) but the rules for these markets shouldn't be meant to reinforce the market conditions that keep the biggest market players on top.

>By what Mussolini means by corporatism is not the same, because what Mussolini describes is the state ruled like a corporate holding company.
The question here isn't even Mussolini, it's you using the word corporatism incorrectly. The society is a body (corpus) composed of organs and limbs - corporations, that are basically similar to guilds and interest groups, ruled by the government which is the brain. Corporate hierarchy is very much like the hierarchy of organs, it has various importance. While both heart and liver are important, heart is ultimately the more important one, so some corporations are considered more vital than others. Also, elements present in the body might be harmful to the organism as a whole and it's the brain's duty to recognize and remove them.
Corporation in the corporatist sense doesn't have the same meaning as it does in modern America.

Furthermore, Spengler and Strasserists are world apart. Strasser advocated for Klassenkampf which is something Spengler recognized as fundamentally Marxist and opposed to his ideas.

Everything that deals with entirely materialistic problems should be entirely materialistic. How would you like your wage be determined by divination, for example? Fascism, however, is entirely anti-rational. Not just the economy. That's why they decided to simultaneously attack the whole world in a war till total victory.

Mussolini's corporatism isn't what you think it means. It means the incorporation of various organized syndicates such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labour, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, on the basis of their common interests.

It's basically an idealized idpol multiculti.

You're confused because in modern American parlance, corporation means almost exclusively privately owned incorporated business, and corporatism means government run or heavily influenced by those business interests.

thats exactly what i think it is. stop outtin words in my mouth

>That's why they decided to simultaneously attack the whole world in a war
wew wee

>is he right Veeky Forums? is corporatism the ultimate solution to capitalism?
yes