U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-22-2008, 01:24 PM
 
Location: Orlando, Florida
43,858 posts, read 43,564,164 times
Reputation: 58603

Advertisements

The extreme right are no more prone to Naziism than the extreme left are prone to Communism? Or are they?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-22-2008, 06:58 PM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,516,394 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by TonyT
Quote:
It would have been very hard for Benito Mussolini to admire the Marshall Plan since the plan wasn't even formulated until 1947 and Mussolini died in 1945.
True, my bad.
It was actually the other way around, your US president Roosevelt greatly admired Mussolini and had based his New Deal on Mussolini's economic system in Italy.
Quote:
Greatly admiring Benito Mussolini's fascist system in Italy, Roosevelt proceeded to implement the same type of economic system in the U.S. For example, his National Recovery Act gave him virtually unlimited dictatorial powers over American business and industry. And any American citizen who did not do his "patriotic" duty by supporting the NRA and its "Blue Eagle" soon found himself at the receiving end of FDR's vengeance and retaliation.
Source: FDR and the End of Economic Liberty
Quote:
While one can debate whether that is true or not, equating the modern view of corporatism to actual fascist corporatism is completely inaccurate.
I disagree, because in fascists nations, like communist nations there is no 'personal freedom' and / or a freedom of choice.
The only difference between corporatism and fascist corporatism is that in a corporate society people believe that they have more choice, except their many 'different' choices are just variations of the same basic thing.
Corporatism and fascist corporatism only give you the illusion of choice, while communist nations are more up front by not giving you a choice.
To a communist religion is the opium of the world while I view regular corporatism and facist coporatism as just another brand of opium.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2008, 06:43 AM
 
Location: Turn right at the stop sign
1,575 posts, read 2,550,784 times
Reputation: 3268
Well, the whole idea of corporatism was extremely popular with economists in 1930's, in large part because they saw it as an antidote to the economic excesses that they blamed for the Great Depression. As far as the New Deal, it wasn't so much FDR that admired the Mussolini economic model, but rather the person put in charge of formulating the New Deal, Colonel Hugh Johnson. Keep in mind that many of the elements of the New Deal were actually challenged and found to be unconstitutional, so in the end corporatism in America died very early on.

But the point I was trying to make is that people are mistakenly labeling as corporatism what they see in economics today. Part of the problem is that the theory of corporatism mentions the formation of "corporations". People seize on that word and take it to mean that it refers to large companies and such. That is an incorrect interpretation of the word. Corporations, in the context of corporatism, were meant to be organizations comprised of management and workers, very much along the lines of the guild system. Collectively, they would negotiate wage and labor disputes amongst themselves. This was all to be done under the watchful eye of the government, which would intervene as needed. Under fascism, industry as a whole was subject to the whims of the particular dictator or his minions.

The author, Sylvia Ann Hewlett, in regards to corporatism, wrote in her book "The Cruel Dilemmas of Development: 20th Century Brazil":

Corporatism is based on a body of ideas that can be traced through Aristotle, Roman law, medieval social and legal structures, and into contemporary Catholic social philosophy. These ideas are based on the premise that man's nature can only be fulfilled within a political community.
..........
The central core of the corporatist vision is thus not the individual but the political community whose perfection allows the individual members to fulfill themselves and find happiness.
...............
The state in the corporatist tradition is thus clearly interventionist and powerful.


The above describes classic corporatism as practiced by fascist or totalitarian governments. Industry was told what to do by the government, not the other way around. Given that fact, I do not see how one can say that if industry is now telling government what to do, we are witnessing the return of corporatism a la Mussolini or whoever. We may be seeing something, but it isn't corporatism as either originally envisioned or even put into action by fascists. That was the message I was trying to convey. But since the topic of this thread isn't really about what corporatism is or isn't, I will simply leave it at that and let the thread move on.

Last edited by TonyT; 10-23-2008 at 07:15 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2008, 09:19 PM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,516,394 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by TonyT
Quote:
Keep in mind that many of the elements of the New Deal were actually challenged and found to be unconstitutional, so in the end corporatism in America died very early on.
I highly doubt this statement.
Your American government listens more to large corporations than their own citizens, largely because American corporations are political and economical heavyweights compared to the average American citizen.
(See your American health care and the role of GM)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2008, 01:13 AM
 
Location: Turn right at the stop sign
1,575 posts, read 2,550,784 times
Reputation: 3268
How can you doubt the statement? On May 27, 1935, the U.S. Supreme Court declared eight New Deal programs unconstitutional. In an unanimous decision, the justices declared that there were clear constitutional limits to the government's right to control the economy of the nation. Their decision is widely seen as having ended the attempt to install a fascist style corporativist system in America.

Industry, corporations, conglomerates, or whatever, influencing the government or being listened to by government is NOT corporatism. I don't understand why you can't seem to understand that, especially since I have written two posts explaining why it isn't. In all of the reading I have done, I have yet to find one instance of a country where the scenario you describe exists and seen it labeled as an example of corporatism; at least not by anyone who truly understands the concept and definition of corporatism. If you don't believe me, then by all means, do your own research and find out what corporatism really is and how it is works.

It is one thing to have a lively debate or discussion about a subject. It is quite another to argue just for argument sake. Unfortunately, it seems that the latter is what you prefer. This is especially evident when the basis of the point you keep arguing has been shown to be in error, not once but twice. No matter, I'm sure that won't stop you from continuing on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2008, 05:11 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,708 posts, read 7,561,052 times
Reputation: 1023
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyT View Post
The above describes classic corporatism as practiced by fascist or totalitarian governments. Industry was told what to do by the government, not the other way around. Given that fact, I do not see how one can say that if industry is now telling government what to do, we are witnessing the return of corporatism a la Mussolini or whoever. We may be seeing something, but it isn't corporatism as either originally envisioned or even put into action by fascists.

In what sense did the government tell corporations "what to do"? How did the government determine "what to do" outside the will of the managments of the corporations? (If this took place, it is probably only a matter of time before those corporations all lost money and ceased to exist as private enterprises.) Are you saying that this actually took place in fascist Italy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2008, 05:21 PM
 
44,571 posts, read 43,103,689 times
Reputation: 14375
Quote:
Originally Posted by zman0 View Post
I see a lot of posts talking about the "left wing" or the "right wing," analogizing either side to "Communism" or "Nazi/Fascism" respectively.

I question the analogy between Nazism and the term "right wing," as it is commonly used. Looking at some of the political positions of the Nazi party, they are more in line with modern liberalism than modern conservativism.

Examples:


The Rise of Hitler - The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party

Given these platforms are generally opposed by modern Conservatives (considered the "right wingers"), isn't it inappropriate to equate "Nazis" with "far right"?

In fact, many of the policies outlined in the 25 points should best be described as "nationalist socialism," which would be left of center, more towards Communism than conservative thought.

Your thoughts?


edit: I'm not saying that all liberals are Nazis, some of the positions of the Nazi party are deplorable and to suggest that any political affiliation could embrace these by proxy is highly inappropriate.

Socialism does not condone racism or genocide. Nazism is just socialism with racism and nationalism added to it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2008, 09:48 PM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,516,394 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
Quote:
Nazism is just socialism with racism and nationalism added to it.
And don't forget genocide.
The rich aren't a race although some rich folk like to believe that they are a 'special' kinda breed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2008, 04:53 AM
 
Location: Turn right at the stop sign
1,575 posts, read 2,550,784 times
Reputation: 3268
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
In what sense did the government tell corporations "what to do"? How did the government determine "what to do" outside the will of the managments of the corporations? (If this took place, it is probably only a matter of time before those corporations all lost money and ceased to exist as private enterprises.) Are you saying that this actually took place in fascist Italy?
What I was describing in a very simplistic way was what is known as a "planned" economy which is intended to bring order to the chaotic nature of the free market system. That is the system that was put into place in fascist Italy. The government coordinated economic activity so as to meet whatever objectives were in the best interest of the State. Private property and business ownership was permitted but controlled through business-government "partnerships". Business and labor were grouped together into what were called "syndicates". The syndicates were then placed into confederations representative of their individual role in the economy; agriculture, industry, commerce, banking, etc. The activity of the confederations were directed by government planning boards called "corporations". The individual corporations were in turn overseen by the National Council of Corporations; i.e. the State, which regulated how they operated.

As you can imagine, this massive bureaucracy did nothing to assist in making economic activity in Italy more efficient or increase it's economic clout. High tariffs were placed on imported goods to protect Italian producers but those simply made Italian goods less palatable to overseas markets. While industry was not discouraged from making a profit, they weren't really encouraged to do so either. If they failed to turn a profit, the government stepped in and subsidized them. Mussolini stated that by 1934, "Three quarters of the Italian economic system had been subsidized by the government". That was seen as a good thing.

So that was corporatism, Italian style. One would think that given the overwhelming evidence that as an economic system, corporatism is an abject failure, there are still those that advocate bringing it back. Only this time around it comes disguised as "The Third Way". But just look past the name and examine the objectives: preserve private enterprise, regulate the free market to make it more fair, and use the economy to expand social justice. And who is going to be the driving force behind it all? The state. Kind of sounds like corporatism to me, but I could be wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 04:09 PM
 
44,571 posts, read 43,103,689 times
Reputation: 14375
I will attempt to explain this. Planned economies and socialism are to the left. Nazism just took parts of the left and mixed it up with the bad parts of the right. Left as in socialism, planned economies. The bad parts of the right such as racism, nationalism. All of that is to the right. Communism isn't really nationalism in its purest form. Soviet communism was nationalistic though, in this sense.When the Russia annexed 14 other nations, it attempted to make them Russia's own, through Russification. The rule basically was pledge your loyalty and culture to the Soviet Union, and the Soviet Communist party, and you'll live a good life(a relatively good life at least). Nazists specifically sought to eradicate peoples they saw as "inferior". It didn't matter whether you supported the Nazi party or not. If you were not German and/or supported Nazism, you went to the death camps. Soviet Union rule was conquer and rule. Nazi goal was conquer and exterminate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top