Comment by eesmith | Hacker News Reader

Comment by eesmith | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I believe you are referring to the misquote described by McKay as 'Benito Mussolini created the word "fascism." He defined it as "the merging of the state and the corporation."'?

I'll now quote from https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fascism-corporations-corpo... , which thoroughly rejects that interpretation:

"In other words, corporatism in Mussolini's fascism was not a free-market capitalist system. Far from it. It did not allow for the kind of competition, innovation, market entry, and research and development characteristic of modern capitalism, and it was closely ruled in every way by the state with Mussolini at its head.

Anything that draws a direct link between what are now referred to as corporations (large, powerful private companies operating in a modern free-market capitalist system) and Mussolini's corporatism, is founded on a misunderstanding — most likely caused by the similarity between the words."

> It did not allow for the kind of competition, innovation, market entry, and research and development characteristic of modern capitalism, and it was closely ruled in every way by the state with Mussolini at its head

That is precisely what is happening with Western economies. Big multinational corporations dominate procurement and dictate regulation to limit competition, create barriers to enter the market and research and development out of reach for SMEs. As in marriage of corporations and the state.

But that is still not "corporatism" ("corporativismo" in Italian), as used in Mussolini's fascism. From the Snopes page:

> In his Dictionary of Political Thought, Roger Scruton describes corporatism in this way:

> The economy was divided into associations (called 'syndicates') of workers, employers and the professions; only one syndicate was allowed in each branch of industry, and all officials were either fascist politicians or else loyal to the fascist cause. According to law the syndicates were autonomous, but in fact they were run by the state. The 'corporations' united the syndicates in a given industry, but made no pretence at autonomy from the state.

That is nothing at all like what is happening with Western economies, so it is not "corporatism", so it is not "textbook fascism".

You can read the various definitions of fascism at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism and verify that none align with 'marriage of corporations and government'.

FWIW, surely the Dutch East Indies company was a marriage of corporation and government, yes?

Thanks for that. That quote was not something I ever lost sleep over, but it also never seemed correct.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com