Etelfrido

Wiarda classifies corporatism in historical or "natural" corporatism,ideological corporatism, manifest corporatism, and modern neocorporatism. Historical or "natural" corporatism would occur in many premodern societies that are founded on traditions emphasizing solidarity,group identity, and community. These include the ethnic, clan, and tribalbasis of African politics, many of the Confucian based societies of EastAsia, the group, clan, and caste based societies of South Asia, and thosesocieties based in the tradition involving the Koran. In Western Europe, acorporatist system existed before the onslaught of the Renaissance, theEnlightenment, and the Industrial Revolution which included militaryorders, guilds, the Roman Catholic Church and its orders, and thearistocracy. With the emphasis on the individual and on individual rightsbrought about by the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, manycame to regret the coming breakup of the old order. This led ideologicalreactionaries to create modern corporatism. In the papal encyclicals,Quadragessimo Anno and Rerum Novarum 9a religious based system ofcorporatism was sketched. Secular forms of corporatism had anautocratic nature. Corporatism involved various regimes includingFascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Vichy France, Franco's Spain, Salazar'sPortugal, Metaxas's Greece, Dolfuss's Austria, Vargas's Brazil, andPeron's Argentina in the earlier half of the twentieth century. Many ofthese regimes were authoritarian and involved severe human rightsabuses leading many to perceive corporatism in a highly negative light.Later regimes that came to involve corporatism would reject thecorporatist label despite their adherence to this ideology because of thenegative connotations that became associated with the word due to thefascist regimes that operated under its principles. Modern neocorporatism is distinct from these authoritarian regimes and tends to bemore democratic in character and is particularly useful model forunderstanding various regimes in Latin America, as well as in Europe. Inthe United States is exhibiting a creeping form of corporatism with the welfare state had corporatist connotations. Many critics remain firmlyopposed to corporatism, given the bad name and associations it has beengiven but also based on ideological reasons of their own. Marxists forexample have long regarded corporatism as a right wing phenomenonand a tool of the capitalist class to appease the proletariat. Stalin oncecalled Trotsky a “corporatist” in an effort to discredit him.10

From Juan Vicente Sola's Corporatism, tradition and survival.