Robert Locke writes one of the most thorough and well thought-out articles on political economics I have read in a very long time. The words “socialism” and “fascism” have been abused by misuse for so long they have essentially lost their meaning. I prefer the word “statism”, as a blanket word to cover many kinds of political control (but I realize this is too broad to be effective.)
Locke uses the word “corporatism”, which has a very specific meaning and is far more accurate then any other word commonly used in the public. To Locke, corporatism is particularly dangerous because all nearly all-major political ideologies support it in one way or another. The slow drift towards corporatism has been steady sense the turn of the 19th century.
His article is a good read, be sure to check it out.
I think a lot of people visualize "mixed economies" as lying somewhere along an axis that goes from "Socialism/Communism" on the one hand, to real Capitalism on the other. This visualization misses a big part of what Adam Smith had to fight against: i.e. "mercantilism".
ReplyDeleteAbstractly, the mixed economy is a tussle between Capitalism on the one end, and government interference on the other. Only secondarily, that interference of of two types: mercantilism and socialism. ["Corporatism" seems to be a new word for mercantilism.]
Thank you for the thoughtful post Realest Theorist. It was very interesting. And Of courser you’re right, “corporatism” does have a great deal in common with ”mercantalism”. The Twentieth century could be thought of as the ‘battle of the economies’, and I’m afraid many economic concepts where brutalized in the process.
ReplyDeleteSometimes, new concepts are needed to reestablish clarity in conversation and debate.