Comment by palmfacehn

Unfortunately, Corporatism is well established as the status quo. Typically the failures of this system are attributed to the market, rather than the hazards of interventionism. This allows further interventions to be applied as "fixes".

Rather than attributing it to right or left, I would characterize it as a synthesis of illiberal ideas. Under Corporatism, even union and worker movements merge with the state. UAW is just as relevant here as state adjacent corporations like Palantir, GM, VW, Airbus or Boeing.

>For example, the government might be prevented from spying on its people such as collecting internet histories and corporations might be prevented from exerting physical power over people like imprisoning them. But if the two groups are acting as one, this distinction doesn't matter.

We saw a similar strategy under the previous administration. Social media companies took direction from the White House to censor user content. Proponents claimed that this didn't violate civil liberties because of the voluntary nature of the collaboration.

It isn't hard to find parallels if you look hard enough. There will always be a nexus of power around the state. Whether it is nationalized corporations or public private partnerships, malign incentives will always exist in these cases. The variation is only in degrees.

However, I think the ultimate distinction for Fascism would be in Mussolini's open call for the state to become an all-encompassing, collectivist force. There is still a contrast to the extent that the US at least plays some lip-service to liberal individualist ideals. Overall, it retains some laissez-faire elements in comparison to other major economies.