Every time I hear the term"corporatist" I get a little stupider.

[CreekDog]

Much as I probably agree politically with people who use the term...it's just so meaningless. I mean what is the alternative, a personist?

Gah, I just hate that term. When I hear it I just know that there won't be anything substantive said next. I'll just wind up in some dumb argument saying that Bernie Sanders or Barbara Boxer are actually not our enemies politically. An utter waste of time for Democrats.

:rant:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. You're speaking truth to power.

We create our own reality.

Paradigm. Algorithm.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

6. Let's be proactive and really shift some paradigms!

[jberryhill]

56. You forgot to add "Now!"

Unless you put "Now" at the end, you pretty much don't care

[Odin2005]

2. "Corporatism" refers to the use of state power to aid the corporate elites.

So it's not meaningless at all.

[DJ13]

7. And its less confrontational than the more accurate term

.....corporate fascist.

[Jim Sagle]

11. Gee, that was easy. So easy that I wonder how some folks don't get it.

Maybe they're paid not to get it.

[avaistheone1]

22. It's pretty clear.

Corporatism

the theory and practice of organizing society into “corporations” subordinate to the state. According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction. However, as the “corporate state” was put into effect in fascist Italy between World Wars I and II, it reflected the will of the country’s dictator, Benito Mussolini, rather than the adjusted interests of economic groups.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/138442/corporatism

[marybourg]

3. response:

:thumbsdown:

[Jennicut]

4. I prefer the term Corporaturds myself....

It is like "Under the Bus"...it can get overused. Sometimes people are right in using it but it is very overused.

[ProSense]

5. We are celebrating the win of a candidate, Sestak,

who strongly supports the Afghanistan war.

He's a progressive tonight. He'll be labeled a corporatist before long.

[Uzybone]

18. +10000

[Arkana]

36. I figure as soon as Obama officially endorses him

the purists will write him off as "just another DLC corpofascist tool".

[NJmaverick]

43. You got that right

[Number23]

57. "He'll be labeled a corporatist before long." Probably before the weekend and it's already

Thursday.

[phleshdef]

8. "Corporatist" has become our equivalent of the teabaggers use of "Socialist".

[Cant trust em]

9. I agree with their sentiment, but I hate corny labels. nt

[CreekDog]

10. I might feel differently about the term, if I didn't hear the stupidest arguments following it

which I mostly do.

[fujiyama]

12. You know what other word I hate?

"Bankster". I know it sounds cute, combining gangster and banker, and yes a lot of bankers have acted like crooks. But it's still irritating.

Makes me cringe. But then again I just absolutely fucking despise portmanteau words (hybrid words). You know what I'm talking about - "staycation", "edutainment". Annoying as hell.

[CreekDog]

13. You know what I hate? "You know what I'm talking about..."

:rofl: :rofl: :bounce:

[fujiyama]

16. Fair enough

You got me there.

But I still hate the word.

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Yes why use words and phrases that create tangible memes

that are accessible and easily understandable? Why do anything that might tip the cart over and wake people the fuck up?

We certainly should not use terms like bankster and corporatism that might resonate with the people.

[stevenleser]

68. They might "resonate" but they dont suggest anything tangible. So they dont support any specific

action.

Wake people up to do what exactly? Against or for whom, specifically?

[Cant trust em]

33. I'm all about some portmanteau.

They're not as fun if you didn't make them up yourself though.

[stevenleser]

63. Corporatism, pro-corporate and bankster are terms I hate too

First of all, a huge amount of people work for corporations so to say that one is thus "anti-corporate" as an antidote to corporatism conjures up an image of someone who is indirectly trying to put those people out of work. I wish we had better terms.

[JVS]

14. Are you recycling original posts?

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7851841

[Warren Stupidity]

24. .

[CreekDog]

38. Are you reading carefully?

:rofl:

[nemo137]

15. Especially since there's an actually school of political thought called corporatism.

Which has nothing to do with how the term gets used on DU at all. It was a 19th/20th century Catholic idea aimed at ending class conflict by building a more organic order where each sector of society worked for the benefit of all in this sort of neo-guild system. The Spanish Falange and the Austro-Fascists (and our own native fascists - at least Coughlin) were big fans of it.

By the by, there's no record of Mussolini giving that quote about fascism and corporatism, either.

http://www.publiceye.org/fascist/corporatism.html

[Uzybone]

17. you must be a DLC Corpodem

whatever the hell that means.

[cliffordu]

19. Uh.....Humanist???

Peeple person??

[Prism]

20. The opposite would probably be capitalist

Assuming capitalist meant free market competition (let's assume - I know that definition is inviting a tanker of worms for opening).

I think, by and large, people understand what the word means. Even if they're not articulating every reason behind its use. Corporate welfare is well understood. Use of public resources for private profit is well understood. Public funds used to cover corporate debt is well understood. Exploitation of labor is well understood. Tax-free use of public infrastructure is well understood.

Opposition to these things are all sound, basic Democratic issues.

Politicians only get into trouble because they need money, so they need corporations, so they start making career-protective choices.

People get cranky. Can't really fault anyone for pointing out our rather naked emperor and the vast political system surrounding him.

[TreasonousBastard]

21. It's sloganeering and it always pisses me off, but I see no end to it...

I just immediately close the thread or walk away from the conversation.

(There must be a corollary to Godwin's Law about superficial, brain-dead words and slogans.)

[Warren Stupidity]

27. "it's sloganeering" he said ironically. nt.

[TreasonousBastard]

29. Ha! Ya almost got me. The problem is that...

the term "sloganeer" has been in use as a noun and intransitive verb since the mid 20s. "Sloganeering" is simply a gerund formed from the verb. Far from "banksters" or other such modern, and increasingly cliched, hybrid terms.

But, I'll meet you half way and agree I used it for pretty much the same reason.

[Jakes Progress]

32. Language changes. Get used to it.

That term you defend because it has been around for a while was once a bit of made up verbiage. Sloganeer. Corporatist. Either join the language or move to France where they have tribunals to "protect" the language.

[TreasonousBastard]

62. Talk to the OP who made a bigger case of it than I did. And I'm not against...

language changing when the change works.

[nemo137]

60. Actually, Bankster dates from the late 1930's

It was used by Fr. Coughlin's magazine Social Justice, and probably others, but the Coughlinites are the fringe group from that era I'm most familiar with.

[TreasonousBastard]

61. Interesting. I still find it a little childish when used, though, and if it's that old...

it's a cliche by now.

[backscatter712]

30. Sloganeering works...

Yes, it's sophomoric and dumbs down the rhetoric, but why do you think the GOP wins so many of these fights? Because they're happy to go there.

Maybe we should go there too.

The corporatist banksters are stealing from America! Vote Democrat!

[TreasonousBastard]

64. Of course it works-- Hoover, FDR, and a bunch of others...

used it to their advantage. Reagan was a master at it, but it didn't work so well for Bryan or Goldwater.

Any advertising copywriter will tell you it has to hit an emotion that already exists. That makes is easier for conservatives and libertarians because their message is summed up with-- "Keep on doing what you're doing and it will all work out."

Our message isn't so simple.

[Sebastian Doyle]

65. Maybe we should use the term FDR did instead.

He referred to the thieving bastards as "economic royalists". I think that fits the Gold Mansacks crowd. And BP, who now literally think they own the fucking Gulf of Mexico.

[Warren Stupidity]

23. The alternative is a Republic by and for the People. nt

[Mr. Sparkle]

26. Our side is too nice to call them what they really are, fascists.

i would say that over 95% of what they claim to stand for, is for the benefit of big business. They have been duped by slogans over the last 20 years that they have never really thought to what it means to be a republican.

[WeDidIt]

28. "corporatist" and "DLC" are the DU opposites of the Teabaggers'...

"socialist" and "ACORN".

[Dr Fate]

40. That's right- GOP liars= Liberal truth tellers!

Heard it on CNN!

Every good conserva...errr, I mean "Centrist" knows that Far right liars are just the flip side of all those unreasonable environmental & anti-war activists! Even Wolf & Chris Matthews say so!

People who protested the war are just like the tea baggers too! The truth is somewhere in the middle! American is a center right country!

Liberals are not only "retarded"- they are TEA BAGGERS!!!! Probably just like Sarah Palin too!

Did I leave anything out? ;)

[Seneca]

53. There are plenty of ways to say the DLC sucks ass

Without using the word "corporatist". That's one of my problems with the word. Anyone with any sense KNOWS the DLC is the right-wing apologetics arm of the Democratic Party, but no one using the term "corporatist" ever explains WHY or HOW. They hide behind a meaningless word.

[harun]

31. An elected representative represents certain interests. They can

represent the individual interests of the people who voted for them or the individual interests of the Corporations that funded their campaign.

Of course, sometimes those interests are the same. Sometimes they are strikingly different. In cases where they differ, if representative X pathologically sides with the Corporate interests over their voters, they are clearly a "Corporatist".

Get it?

[Jakes Progress]

34. It's not because you hear it; it's because you react to it.

Language changes. Terms that we use freely and widely now were also decried by curmudgeons of yesteryear. The terms that work and come to mean something to people stay in the language. Those that don't just go away. English is a very flexible language.

[CreekDog]

37. So is "snitching"...do you like the way that word is used lately?

That it's a new word is not why I dislike it.

I dislike it because the people who use it tend to be brain dead, judging by the discussions that follow.

Words come and go --now that I like.

[TZ]

45. !

I believe the term that describes people who use corporatist is "knee-jerk" actually.

[CreekDog]

46. What about the people who use "knee-jerk"?

:evilgrin:

DTM. :rofl:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

50. "Correct."

At least in this context.

[CreekDog]

51. Actually

I was just saying that to annoy her. :D

[Jakes Progress]

54. Got nothing to do with liking or not liking the words

It's what language does. Judging words by the people who use them or judging people because they use new words are both short cuts to thinking. LIke judging people by their clothes or the skin color.

[Arkana]

35. That's because yer a DLC mole, buddy!

That's right! I done got yew pegged, buster!

;)

[TheKentuckian]

39. Sorry, its not my responsibility to type out a long hand descriptive

every time because you think a particular label is un appealing.

When I say 'apartment' you have a fair idea what I'm talking about so I don't have to explain that it is a connected multi-family dwelling which allows seperate home like dwellings, typically including individual cooking and rest areas, all on a single piece of property which allows for many occupents on one piece of land.

Does one loose IQ points when I say apartment and would one gain them if I go into a long winded definition of the word instead of "resorting to a useless label"?

[treestar]

49. That term is more easily defined

Political terms never are; and they are constantly misused.

This is how one politician can be a corporatist and a socialist at the same time.

[Dr Fate]

41. There are people who dont know that DEMS taking money from corporations is a problem?

Or who are confused as to why that is a problem?

How 'bout we call them "Conflict of interest" DEMS? Nah- corporatre stooge DEM works just fine- most people who pay attention to the papers, etc know what we mean by it...

[NJmaverick]

42. K & R!

[TZ]

44. Up to no good again I see CreekDog.

I knew you didn't really live in San Francisco...You really live in ARIZONA you corporatist apologist!!!!:P
:rofl:

[Bjorn Against]

47. So let's get rid of all the corporatists so we won't have to hear the term any more

[indepat]

55. Hear! Hear! And the banksters and Wall Street fraudsters for lagniappe

:applause:

[branders seine]

48. "Humanist" is the more generally used alternative.

Please, please, don't get any stupider.

[Seneca]

52. It's not even in any established dictionary

It's one of those blog creations whose true origins are lost in the fog. I understand what you mean - we all know corporations are often bastions of greed, are unaccountable to no one but their shareholders (and even then!), and have powerful lobbying arms to influence the laws in their favor. They can often treat their employees horribly, and many do not have unionized workforces. But the word is tossed around like some one-size-fits-all shorthand for something we know to be eeeeeeevuhl, but with no real argument to back it up. Someone says something positive about Obama, and the retort is, "HE'S A CORPORATIST WHORE!!11", thereby shutting down any meaningful exchange of ideas.

What cracks me up is that many of the same people using "corporatist" will show up in an Apple thread, defending some of their worst corporate policies. It's only "corporatist" when you don't like the corporation, or you dislike the politician linked to the corporation.

Also, whether using an Apple or PC - the computer being used by the person hammering out "corporatist" on their keyboard was made by a corporation, with parts and peripherals made by other corporations. Their desk was made by a corporation. They used corporate products to shower and (presumably) brush their teeth. Their clothes were made by a corporation. If one wants to make "corporatist" an effective epithet, they need to live a corporate-free life. Good luck with that!

Meanwhile, when criticizing corporations, or politicians with corporate ties, stick to the facts, use valid arguments, and be specific with your points. Throwing a wide net out there with the word "corporatist" on it just makes you look like a histrionic clown.

[okie]

58. It's not contradictory or hypocritical...

...to use the products of capitalist production when we, quite plainly, live in a capitalist society. It doesn't make any sense to say one can only criticize this system from the outside. An 'outside' of the system does not exist!

[Bjorn Against]

69. Wrong, it is a real word that has been around since the late 1800's

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/corporatist

[okie]

59. I've read many substantive arguments on DU that contain 'corporatist'

That said, I don't like the word very much. I think it obscures more than it explains. I think those using it are implicitly saying 'corporatism' is some kind of deviation from the normal state of things. I think they make it sound as if 'corporatism' is a perverted form of capitalism, when in fact it is the norm.

[ljm2002]

66. Somehow, I doubt it. n/t

[Raineyb]

67. Perhaps you should consult a dictionary. It won't make you smarter but at least

you'd realize the words have a meaning.

That you refuse to acknowledge the meaning of the word doesn't make said word imaginary.