Is fascism collectivist or corporatist...

Is fascism collectivist or corporatist? I keep seeing different definitions by different people and it's becoming more incoherent with each take.

Other urls found in this thread:

"Collectivism" doesn't mean a whole bunch. It's a rather shallow, even empty concept.
Corporatism i.e. class collaboration through state-sanctioned "unions" does accurately describe the economic policies of historical Fascism to a certain extent.
That being said, keep in mid that Fascism simply isn't about economics. They don't really care that much about economic policy; to them, it is to be entirely subordinated to politics (the construction of a totalitarian state) and culture (the purification of the national community).
Self-described Fascists have supported whatever felt would benefit that. Don't forget that Mussolini's early economic policy was a continuation of preceding classical liberalism, and the Nazis oversaw a wide range of privatizations.

It’s both. The government is big and repressive, while also being controlled by corporations, so it’s a double whammy. The state also is collectivist, in a sense that everyone has to sacrifice themselves into the meat grinder “for the nation” or “for the volk,” (unless you happen to be a wealthy corporate interest, then you’re a “noble captain of industry” or some shit).


The government in fascist Italy wasn't "controlled by corporations". That's not what corporatism means.

Fascism is collectivist, that's a 'meta' of the political philosophy. It's a staunchly nationalist political philosophy.

Corporatism in the context of fascist economic theory is essentially (from my understanding); Productive Capitalism with Finance capitalism heavily regulated or minimized, with protectionist policies. Also state representatives and private industrialists consult and collaborate with one another to resolve and direct production and worker issues.

Syndicalism is the other fascist economic theory. Which I assume you know is when guilds, and unions run industries and companies.

Introductory text to Fascist political philosophy….

Fascism: Total Society By H R Morgan

And; Anatomy of fascism By Robert Paxton

Also, Fascists tend to be aphoristic and immaterial in their use of language, they aren't analytical and sequential in how they present their ideas.

fascism was collectivist in the sense that the fascists held a collectivist view of race and nation-they believed that the people of a country should be united as one and that their unity would be expressed through the creation of a totalitarian state where every citizen has an assigned role, hence the quote from Mussolini "Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." That's also part of why nazis hate jews and other quote-unquote deg3nerates so much=jews are a people without a state, so they are viewed as subverting the purity and unity of the german race. Homosexuals, the mentally ill, communists, the homeless, and other societal outcasts are considered unpersons because according to fascists and nazis they do not contribute to "the people" as a collective.
Even Mussolini, who wasn't as big on racism as other fascists still hated the socialists and the social outcasts for not fitting into his ideal of a unified Italian peoples.

One is a socio-cultural value, other is an economic policy, so they aren't mutually exclusive.

Welcome to fascism

corporatism within the context of fascist ideology means the incorporation of all productive power into an economy based around class collaboration.

Fascism is an extremely INDIVIDUALIST ideology, that's why it has such an intense focus on cult of personality on "great leaders" as opposed to any reliance on the dirty "masses". You can see it all throughout history, go over to Holla Forums and you'll see an insane worship of Trump and a belief that he will save them, as opposed to formulating coherent policy and organizing mass movements.

It's both. Corporatism isn't opposed to collectivism and in the Doctrine of Fascism there is a section called "Rejection of Individualism". As for definitions, I would recommend reading this article to get the general understanding and gist of what fascism is despite there not being a clear cut definition:

On top of this, one can manage society in a corporatist manner and still desire economic collectivization. See: DeLeonism.

So how many varients of the corporatist model are there? Is it only right Keynesianism or are the Integralists different?

Fascism emerged as an attempt by the ruling classes to preserve their power in the face of growing working-class movements in the early 20th century.

Fascist ideology is usually contradictory, half-baked, and lacking in scientific analysis, precisely fascism's function was to maintain the status quo while pretending otherwise.

That's how everyone uses the word now though and corporatism in that context doesn't even really make sense. I know you're technically right but they should just update the damn definition.

Pure opportunism in every way, some unions get incorporated into the state, others get boiled alive

it's more elitist than individualist. it's not just worship of any individual but specifically of a supreme leader who doesn't need to have achievements but can have them invented for himself by his control of the media. The masses in turn are supposed to absorb this message transmitted to them through modern mass media and imbibe those virtues, virtues which not only lionize greatness, but such "collectivist" values as bravery, self-sacrifice, undying faith in the nation, moral rectitude (fascists were basically glorifying "respectable" middle class values of conformity, temperance and monogamy)

also forgot to mention the values of "faith in the leader" or, in other words, cultivating the belief in a hierarchical order whose leaders are "naturally" there by their own merits instead of by chance and political manipulation.

If capitalism is the thesis and socialism is the anti thesis then fascism is the synthesis of the worst qualities of both. It's state-capitalism but for proffit and as an end goal not a transition period like it is in Leninism.

It's neither.

1) Fascism doesn't exist.
I mean it. Ideologically, Fascism is blatant opportunism that mutilates itself until it fits current needs of Capitalists. There is no "Fascism as ideology". There are only Fascists and Fascism-as-process. There is no underlying idea, only motivation to protect Capitalism by any means possible.

This is how you get so much conflicting stories from Fascists themselves - who may even claim to be anti-Fascist (nominally, Pinochet go the power to combat Totalitarianism of Allende). Don't trust a single word they say. There is no cake Fascism. Consequently, it is neither collectivist, nor corporatist.

2) Capitalists need Fascism to represent an alternative (opposition in all respects) to Liberalism, not Socialism.
Since academia and pop-thinkers are in the pocket of Capitalists, they are inevitably driven to present only Capitalist-friendly ideas as alternative to Liberalism. Consequently, every talking head will maintain that Fascism is everything that Liberalism is not. Even if it explicitly is.

This is how you get so much bullshit definitions of Fascism.

And - I must also note - most Trots are a subset of this. Since Trotsky failed to understand the role of Bureaucracy - and mechanism of class struggle - in Socialist State, his followers have to persist in this deviation from Marxism - or accept that Trotsky was wrong.

I'd say it is synonymous with "Socialism" (provided, you do not considers AnCaps Socialist).

It's not about ideology.

It's just easier to peddle some person as a Saviour to people. Communism is extremely collectivist and atheistic - and yet both Lenin and Stalin ended up being essentially idolized. This is a part of human psyche - to simplify (and personify) things. That how we get Stalin "deciding" everything - even if he was just good at mediating discussions: getting competent people together and keeping them talking on topic, until consensus is reached.

The elite hate fascism because fascists fight for national renaissance in the face of a self-selecting, self-serving elite that seek to destroy decency and national interest, our culture, faith and identity, and our race



I'm not sure how exactly DeLeonist qualifies as corporatist.

I don't think it makes sense to speak of "variants". Corporatism really is nothing more than an economic policy revolving around state-mandated class collaboration. Some movements came up with a name for their special-snowflake version of corporatism (neosocialism, planisme, etc) but I don't think it's relevant.

No, collectivism isn't synonymous with socialism.

That Coca-Cola ad is a contemporary satirical artwork, not actual advertising from Nazi Germany (though the Coca-Cola company did operate here).

Mussolini was looked down upon as a puppet dictator by Hitler. Fascism in the Italian practice was nothing more than a power play by the corporatists to hold some semblance of power. Had Mussolini and Hitler won, it would have shifted towards socialism.

That depends on how you understand Socialism.

Is there any basis to this statement? No, there isn't. Shift to Socialism happens due to objective circumstances: strong and organized Proletariat (or a threat of it on the horizon).

Opposition to socialism was the very reason fascists got to power.

"Collectivism" is a meme by lolbert retards. What the fuck would an "individualist" way of organizing society even look like? You either organize things "collectively" or you start agitating for primitavism


Does it also bother you that other revolutionaries (say, ones you ideologically align with) were funded in that manner?

like who

Corporatism = state control of the corporations
Corporatocracy = corporations manipulate the state


What the fuck are you talking about? Big money has always tried to snuff revolutionary movements. The United Fruit Company got the US to deter revolution against it's puppet governments in Guatemala, Allende was replaced with a dictator who was in the pockets of American Neoliberals, the opposition in Venezuela are bought off by Mobile, Gaddafi was killed off for trying to assert Africa's economic independence (which would have been bad for the corporation plundering Africa's resources).

the collectivist-individualist dichotomy is a farce

Those aren't exclusive.

it is collective worship of corporate culture