REAL Corporatism

                                                     

When I say Corporatism, what do you think of? You probably think “crony capitalism”. That’s the way it’s used. Used by people who didn't take the time to look up the term, and learn what it actually means. Now I wanna be clear I’m not calling you out just for not looking up the term. I’m calling the people out who throw it around all the time, whilst having no idea what it actually refers to. Corporatism is an organization method that involves experts making decisions in their related fields. The idea is that society will function harmoniously if each group of experts works toward the best, within their field. Much like a Human body (or corpus) which is the root of the term Corporatism. So it’s basically a good thing. That’s weird, considering how it is most commonly used. So why is it used in this way? Well I think this is fairly simple and understandable, because of what corporation implies. When I say corporation whats the first thing you think of? And if you say panel of experts, I'm gonna be shocked, proud, but shocked.

I would posit that corporatism (REAL corporatism) is fundamentally a good idea. I would also posit that most of us already follow this philosophy in our life as is. For instance, I sprained my ankle a few months back. Now when this happened, I called my mom for a ride to the doctor, not to exam my ankle, I went to the doctor for that, because that's what he does. If I am sick or in pain I go to a doctor, not my mom , not my dad, and not some passionate go-getter with a poly-sci degree who thinks he’s hard, I’m going to the doctor, because he is the expert, he knows what the fuck he’s talking about, IT’S WHAT HE DOES. But if I wanted to start a business and needed a bookkeeper, I wouldn’t go to a doctor, I would go to my mom, because that’s what she does, if I wanted to build a house I'd go to my dad, because that’s what he does, and if I wanted to rewrite a more accurate version of the political compass test, I’d go to that passionate go-getter with a poly-sci degree who thinks he’s hard, why? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT HE DOES. Most likely you understand what I'm saying, and it makes sense to you. Because like I said we all follow this. Mostly anyway. When it comes to our government though, our representatives, we all forget and just go with that passionate go-getter with a poly-sci degree who thinks he’s hard. And to be fair that's the best we can hope for in our non corporatist system.

Now you might think I'm simply saying we should elect experts. And while I'm not saying don’t, it’s certainly not good enough to. The reason is that our system is not set up for it. Lets say we elect a economist, an engineer, and an ethical philosopher into the senate. Now what is their job? Senators. Corporatism is about having experts be experts. People all have biases, but everyone's least bias self is in their area of expertise. Of all the times my moms biases may show they show the least when she’s bookkeeping, and of all the times my dads biases may show, they don’t when he’s on that construction site. And that’s why I said the best you can hope for is a passionate go-getter with a poly-sci degree who thinks he’s hard. It’s the best case scenario. Because elect him senator, and he is doing what he does, a political scientist is the only elected expert who practices his expertise. In our current political system.

Many anarchists argue that the “state” has not met it’s “burden of proof” to justify its authority. They also argue that hierarchy should be more flat or horizontal. I would argue that a holarchy is essentially the only alternative to a standard hierarchy, and corporatism is the only way of successfully creating a holarchy. I would also argue that experts have met their “burden of proof” when it comes to authority. This is why I have coined the term “anarcho-corporatism”. Now I know I'm not an anarchist, but, neither are any anarchists, so it works. Anarchy or “rule without rulers” is hard to oppose ideologically, But realistically, states are inevitable. I do however think we could learn a lot from the scientific community. It is arguably the only anarcho-corporatist holarchy. It is hard to say a society could function identically to a community of academics. But I still think we could learn a lot by it’s model, function, and consensus reaching ability.

I will no doubt talk more about anarchy, holarchy, and the beauty of the scientific community. But for now I would like to encourage people to look up corporatism, follow this link; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism ; And tell EVERYONE you know, because it is about time this drastic misunderstanding of corporatism is brought to an end, (also I could use the views).