Comments on: Mercantilism, Fascism, Corporatism — And Capitalism

By: Wild Pegasus

Wild Pegasus — Wed, 30 May 2007 06:01:24 +0000

Capitalism is an economic theory based upon the free exchange of goods and services.

Negative. Capitalism is a description an economic situation where an elite owns most of the means of production, and almost everyone else works for them. It has nothing to say about free markets.

Liberalism is a political theory based on individual liberty, including the free exchange of goods and services.

It is entirely possible to have a non-capitalist liberal society. It would be a society of small-time landowners and small businessmen, mixed with the occasional syndicate, co-op, labor union, or some other productive enterprise that left the means of production in the hands of workers.

It is just as entirely possible to have an illiberal capitalist society: China, for instance.

Liberalism does not need Capitalism.

- Josh

By: Stephen Littau

Stephen Littau — Wed, 23 May 2007 18:56:14 +0000

Great post Brad.

I think capitalist businessmen are their own worst enemies. Once they have the ability, they lobby congress to fix the system in their favor and thus set up the corporatist system you describe. Lenin said that “the capitalists will sell us the rope to hang them with.” Unfortunatley, I think he was right.

By: Brad Warbiany

Brad Warbiany — Wed, 23 May 2007 18:45:01 +0000

John,

It looks how I expected… Corporatism being the former, and fascism being the latter.

VRB,

Yes, mercantilism was probably the dominant economic theory of that time, but I’m not sure how wildly successful it was. It was superceded by capitalism, though, starting with Adam Smith and others in the second half of the 18th century.

Chris,

As I pointed out, capitalism tends to become corporatism when paired with a strong government, particularly one where elections are driven so much by money and advertising. We’re certainly no longer the capitalist bation we once were…

By: John

John — Wed, 23 May 2007 15:50:48 +0000

I think you got the “former” and “latter” mixed up in your distinction between corporatism and fascism. I could be wrong but read it again and make sure.

you wrote:

“but the former involves businesses controlling politicians for business interests, and the latter involves the politicians controlling business to further state interests.”

By: VRB

VRB — Wed, 23 May 2007 13:10:28 +0000

Brad,

I thought Mercantilism actually was a thriving economic system during the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 23 May 2007 09:48:46 +0000

Brad,

America would NOT be a corporatist state by any means. The fact that corporatism is one of the elements of economic politics in this country is subsidiary to the nature of the representative republic.

So long as their are representatives to influence, those with money (including corporations) will do so.

Japan would be a near perfect example of a mercantilist, corporatist state.