Wikipedia

2720 readers

345 users here now

A place to share interesting articles from Wikipedia.

Rules:

Only links to Wikipedia permitted
Please stick to the format "Article Title (other descriptive text/editorialization)"
Tick the NSFW box for submissions with inappropriate thumbnails
On Casual Tuesdays, we allow submissions from wikis other than Wikipedia.

Recommended:

If possible, when submitting please delete the "m." from "en.m.wikipedia.org". This will ensure people clicking from desktop will get the full Wikipedia website.
Use the search box to see if someone has previously submitted an article. Some apps will also notify you if you are resubmitting an article previously shared on Lemmy.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

dantheclamman@lemmy.world

Plum@lemmy.world

366

Corporate statism [state corporatism] (infosec.pub)

submitted 3 days ago by CubitOom@infosec.pub to c/wikipedia@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_statism

Corporate statism or state corporatism is a political culture and a form of corporatism the proponents of which claim or believe that corporate groups should form the basis of society and the state. By this principle, the state requires all citizens to belong to one of several officially designated interest groups (based generally on economic sector), which consequently have great control of their members. Such interest groups thus attain public status, and they or their representatives participate with national policymaking, at least formally.[1]

photo source

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] flango@lemmy.eco.br 31 points 3 days ago

That's the dream of the big tech, to become an institution of the state. Democracies all around the world have become dependent on their products, it's like we brought the egg of the snake inside our homes.

[–] Bonus@lemm.ee 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The Futurist's Manifesto of Futurism (1909) had some disturbing parallels/influence. Disturbing to me, anyways. As a designer, I see this glossed over by plenty of folks who seem to be okay with blindly romanticizing Futurism and Fascist architecture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto_of_Futurism#Contents

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto_of_Futurism#/media/File:DeclarationOfFutuism-EN-1.png

We will glorify war—the world’s only hygiene—militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of freedom-bringers, beautiful ideas worth dying for, and scorn for woman.

We will destroy the museums, libraries, academies of every kind, will fight moralism, feminism, every opportunistic or utilitarian cowardice.

It is from Italy that we launch through the world this violently upsetting incendiary manifesto of ours. With it, today, we establish Futurism, because we want to free this land from its smelly gangrene of professors, archaeologists, ciceroni and antiquarians. For too long has Italy been a dealer in second-hand clothes. We mean to free her from the numberless museums that cover her like so many graveyards.

https://www.italianfuturism.org/manifestos/foundingmanifesto/

[–] sudneo@lemm.ee 4 points 2 days ago

Marinetti has been on Mussolini's side - like most futurists - for many years. While there were some divergences, and the relationship between futurism and fascism are very debated, the fact that a link between the two exists is undeniable indeed.

[–] xploit@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Sooo did he steal that from mafia or did mafia adopt the idea afterwards?

[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Socialism works the same way. They frame it as the state absorbing corporations instead of corporations absorbing the state, but the result is the same. In a free society, the state and corporations need to remain separate, with corporations providing the services that involve substantial risk and can be permitted to fail, while the state provides the essential services where failure isn't an option.

Corporations should be small and nimble while government should be big and stable. The problems start when you expect or allow one to act like the other.

[–] sudneo@lemm.ee 12 points 2 days ago

Not really. There are various way to interpret workers owning the means of production. Some of these interpretation consider the state as nothing more than an entity made of workers, and therefore the state owns stuff. Other currents consider workers in a given company owning that company, and the state remains separate (this is similar to a co-op economy).

There are more options, of course, depending on which groups own which means of production, and how the power is divided (I.e., district level, sector level etc.).

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I smell bullshit