But that is still not "corporatism" ("corporativismo" in Italian), as used in Mussolini's fascism. From the Snopes page: > In his Dictionary of Political Thoug

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 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?