Corporatism

Corporatism is a political ideology[1] and political system of interest representation and policymaking whereby corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, business, scientific, or guild associations, come together and negotiate contracts or policy (collective bargaining) on the basis of their common interests.[2][3] The term is derived from the Latin corpus, or "body".

Corporatism does not refer to a political system dominated by large business interests, even though the latter are commonly referred to as "corporations" in modern American vernacular and legal parlance. Instead, the correct term for that theoretical system would be corporatocracy. The terms "corporatocracy" and "corporatism" are often confused due to their similarity and to the use of corporations as organs of the state.

Corporatism developed during the 1850s in response to the rise of classical liberalism and Marxism, and advocated cooperation between the classes instead of class struggle. Adherents of diverse ideologies, including economic liberalism, fascism, and social democracy, have advocated for corporatist models.[2]

Kinship corporatism

Kinship-based corporatism emphasizing clan, ethnic and family identification has been a common phenomenon in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Confucian societies based upon families and clans in Eastern and Southeast Asia have been considered types of corporatism. Islamic societies often feature strong clans which form the basis for a community-based corporatist society.

Politics and political economy

Communitarian corporatism

Early concepts of corporatism evolved in Classical Greece. Plato developed the concept of a totalitarian and communitarian corporatist system of natural-based classes and natural social hierarchies that would be organized based on function, such that groups would cooperate to achieve social harmony by emphasizing collective interests while rejecting individual interests.

In Politics, Aristotle described society as being divided between natural classes and functional purposes: those of priests, rulers, slaves and warriors. Ancient Rome adopted Greek concepts of corporatism into its own version of corporatism, adding the concept of political representation on the basis of function that divided representatives into military, professional and religious groups and set up institutions for each group known as collegia.

After the 5th-century fall of Rome and the beginning of the Early Middle Ages, corporatist organizations in western Europe became largely limited to religious orders and to the idea of Christian brotherhood—especially within the context of economic transactions. From the High Middle Ages onward, corporatist organizations became increasingly common in Europe, including such groups as religious orders, monasteries, fraternities, military orders such as the

External links

Encyclopedias
Corporatism – Encyclopædia Britannica
Corporatism – The Canadian Encyclopedia
Articles
Professor Thayer Watkins, The economic system of corporatism, San Jose State University, Department of Economics.
Chip Berlet, "Mussolini on the Corporate State", 2005, Political Research Associates.

References

Howard J. Wiarda. Corporatist Theory and Ideology: A Latin American Development Paradigm Journal of Church and State, Oxford University Press, 1978^
Oscar Molina, Martin Rhodes. Corporatism: The Past, Present, and Future of a Concept Annual Review of Political Science, 2002^
Paul A. B Clarke, Joe Foweraker. Encyclopedia of democratic thought Routledge, 2001

Fascist corporatism

A fascist corporation can be defined as a government-directed confederation of employers and employees unions, with the aim of overseeing production in a comprehensive manner. Theoretically, each corporation within this structure assumes the responsibility of advocating for the interests of its respective profession, particularly through the negotiation of labor agreements and similar measures. Fascists theorized that this method could result in harmony amongst social classes.[22]

In Italy, from 1922 until 1943, corporatism became influential amongst Italian nationalists led by Benito Mussolini. The 1920 Charter of Carnaro gained much popularity as the prototype of a "corporative state", having displayed much within its tenets as a guild system combining the concepts of autonomy and authority in a special synthesis.[23] Alfredo Rocco spoke of a corporative state and declared corporatist ideology in detail. Rocco would later become a member of the Italian fascist régime.[24] Subsequently, the Labour Charter of 1927 was implemented, thus establishing a collective agreement system between employers and employees, becoming the main form of class collaboration in the fascist government.

Italian fascism involved a corporatist political system in which the economy was collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at the national level.[25] Its supporters claimed that corporatism could better recognize or "incorporate" every divergent interest into the state organically, unlike majority-rules democracy, which (they said) could marginalize specific interests. This total consideration was the inspiration for their use of the term "totalitarian", described without coercion (which is connoted in the modern meaning) in the 1932 Doctrine of Fascism as thus: "When brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which gave rise to socialism and trade unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State.[26]" "[The state] is not simply a mechanism which limits the sphere of the supposed liberties of the individual... Neither has the Fascist conception of authority anything in common with that of a police ridden State... Far from crushing the individual, the Fascist State multiplies his energies, just as in a regiment a soldier is not diminished but multiplied by the number of his fellow soldiers.[26]"

A popular slogan of the Italian Fascists under Mussolini was "Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato" ("everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state").

Within the corporative model of Italian fascism, each corporate interest was supposed to be resolved and incorporated under the state. Much of the corporatist influence upon Italian fascism was partly due to the Fascists' attempts to gain endorsement by the Roman Catholic Church that itself sponsored corporatism.[27] However, the Roman Catholic Church's corporatism favored a bottom-up corporatism, whereby groups such as families and professional groups would voluntarily work together, whereas fascist corporatism was a top-down model of state control managed primarily by government officials.[27][28]

The fascist state corporatism of Roman Catholic Italy influenced the governments and economies – not only of other Roman Catholic-majority countries, such as the governments of Engelbert Dollfuss in Austria, António de Oliveira Salazar in Portugal, Juan Domingo Perón in Argentina and Getúlio Vargas in Brazil[29] – but also of Konstantin Päts and Kārlis Ulmanis in non-Catholic Estonia and Latvia.

Fascists in non-Catholic countries also supported Italian Fascist corporatism, including Oswald Mosley of the British Union of Fascists, who commended corporatism and said that "it means a nation organized as the human body, with each organ performing its individual function but working in harmony with the whole".[30] Mosley also regarded corporatism as an attack on laissez-faire economics and "international finance".[30]

The corporatist state of Portugal had similarities to Benito Mussolini's Italian fascist corporatism, but also differences in its moral approach to governing. Although Salazar admired Mussolini and was influenced by his Labour Charter of 1927, he distanced himself from fascist dictatorship, which he considered a pagan Caesarist political system that recognised neither legal nor moral limits. Salazar also had a strong dislike of Marxism and liberalism.

In 1933, Salazar stated: "Our Dictatorship clearly resembles a fascist dictatorship in the reinforcement of authority, in the war declared against certain principles of democracy, in its accentuated nationalist character, in its preoccupation of social order. However, it differs from it in its process of renovation. The fascist dictatorship tends towards a pagan Caesarism, towards a state that knows no limits of a legal or moral order, which marches towards its goal without meeting complications or obstacles. The Portuguese New State, on the contrary, cannot avoid, not think of avoiding, certain limits of a moral order which it may consider indispensable to maintain in its favour of its reforming action.[31]"

The Patriotic People's Movement (IKL) in Finland envisioned a system with elements of direct democracy and professional parliament. The president would be elected with direct vote, who would then appoint the government from among professionals in their respective fields. All parties would be banned, and members of parliament would be elected by vote from corporate groups representing different sectors; Agriculture, Industry and Public servants, free trades, etc. Every law passed in the parliament would be either ratified or overturned by a referendum.[32][33][34]

Contemporary examples by country

Argentina

Juan Peron's governments are known for having corporatist elements. They aimed to represent the interests of different sectors of Argentine society by grouping them into multiple organizations:[37] workers were represented by the CGT, Peronist businessmen in the General Economic Confederation, landowners by the Argentine Agrarian Federation, women by the Female Peronist Party, Jews in the Argentine Israelite Organization, students in the Secondary Student Union.[38] Peron was able to coordinate and centralize the working class, which he mobilized to act on his behest. Trade unions have been incorporated into Peronism's structure and remain a key part of the movement today.[39] Also, the state intervened in labor-capital conflicts,[40] with the Ministry of Labour and Social Security being responsible for directly negotiating and enforcing agreements.[41][42]

Also, the Onganía regime during the Argentine Revolution had a corporatist ideology, experimenting in particular in Córdoba under the governance of Carlos Caballero. Although in practice, it represented a type of exclusive corporatism, where only private interests were represented through organizations. They were given representation in the State in exchange for accepting certain controls. In reality, this led to many functions and structures of the State passing into private hands, but in an unbalanced way. Business and religious groups ended up taking control of important areas of the government. As a result, the state's ability to act independently and efficiently was greatly reduced, which also explains why resistance to these measures arose.[43]

For instance, some Catholic fundamentalists were in the Ministry of Social Welfare (although with a short stay), such as Minister Roberto Petracca and the Secretary of Promotion and Community Assistance (SEPAC), Roberto Gorostiaga. Both were Catholic militants, members of Ciudad Católica, of the Verbo Magazine and followers of Jacques de Mahieu. Together with these, in 1967, there were also other types of Catholic groups in the Ministry of Social Welfare, with social Christian principles and modernizing for the time. In this spectrum were the minister, Julio Álvarez, the secretary of SEPAC, Raúl Puigbó, the undersecretary of SEPAC, Antonio Critto, and the undersecretary of Security.

Thus, the integration of the ministries offers a clear example of the corporatist element of this period. Especially, as it opened institutional areas to the representation of some interests of civil society. However, this opening occurred selectively, including mainly groups that already supported the government. The private actors that were incorporated had a limited role, as they could only provide information and technical advice, since this was considered to be the best form of participation.[44][45]

China

Jonathan Unger and Anita Chan in their essay "China, Corporatism, and the East Asian Model" describe Chinese corporatism as follows:[46] "[A]t the national level the state recognizes one and only one organization (say, a national labour union, a business association, a farmers' association) as the sole representative of the sectoral interests of the individuals, enterprises or institutions that comprise that organization's assigned constituency. The state determines which organizations will be recognized as legitimate and forms an unequal partnership of sorts with such organizations. The associations sometimes even get channelled into the policy-making processes and often help implement state policy on the government's behalf."

By establishing itself as the arbiter of legitimacy and assigning responsibility for a particular constituency with one sole organization, the state limits the number of players with which it must negotiate its policies and co-opts their leadership into policing their own members. This arrangement is not limited to economic organizations such as business groups and social organizations.

The political scientist Jean C. Oi coined the term "local state corporatism" to describe China's distinctive type of state-led growth, in which a communist party-state with Leninist roots commits itself to policies which are friendly to the market and to growth.[47]

The use of corporatism as a framework to understand the central state's behaviour in China has been criticized by authors such as Bruce Gilley and William Hurst.[48]

Hong Kong and Macau

In two special administrative regions, some legislators are chosen by functional constituencies (Legislative Council of Hong Kong) where the voters are a mix of individuals, associations, and corporations or indirect election (Legislative Assembly of Macau) where a single association is designated to appoint legislators.

Ireland

Most members of the Seanad Éireann, the upper house of the Oireachtas (parliament) of Ireland, are elected as part of vocational panels nominated partly by current Oireachtas members and partly by vocational and special interest associations. The Seanad also includes two university constituencies.

The Constitution of Ireland of 1937 was influenced by Roman Catholic Corporatism as expressed in the papal encyclical, Quadragesimo anno (1931).[50][51]

Netherlands

Under the Dutch polder model, the Social and Economic Council of the Netherlands (Sociaal-Economische Raad, SER) was established by the 1950 Industrial Organisation Act (Wet op de bedrijfsorganisatie). It is led by representatives of unions, employer organizations, and government appointed experts. It advises the government and has administrative and regulatory power. It oversees Sectoral Organisation Under Public Law (Publiekrechtelijke Bedrijfsorganisatie, PBO) which are similarly organized by union and industry representatives, but for specific industries or commodities.[52]

Slovenia

The Slovene National Council, the upper house of the Slovene Parliament, has 18 members elected on a corporatist basis.[53]

Western Europe

Generally supported by nationalist and social-democratic political parties, social corporatism developed in the post-World War II period, influenced by Christian democrats and social democrats in Western European countries such as Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Social corporatism has also been adopted in different configurations and to varying degrees in various Western European countries.

The Nordic countries have the most comprehensive form of collective bargaining, where trade unions are represented at the national level by official organizations alongside employers' associations. Together with the welfare state policies of these countries, this forms what is termed the Nordic model. Austria, however, exhibits an equally comprehensive but more sectorally organized system of collective bargaining, supported by a highly institutionalized framework of social partnership. A less extensive model exists in Germany (Rhine capitalism).

Kinship corporatism

Politics and political economy

Communitarian corporatism

See also

Further reading

External links

References

Corporatism in the Catholic Church

Corporate solidarism

Liberal corporatism

Fascist corporatism

Neo-corporatism

Contemporary examples by country

Argentina

China

Hong Kong and Macau

Ireland

Netherlands

Slovenia

Western Europe

Argentina

China

Hong Kong and Macau

Ireland

Netherlands

Slovenia

Western Europe

On Italian corporatism

On fascist corporatism and its ramifications

On neo-corporatism