The Three C's

Capitalism, Corporatism, Communism, and Their Relation

I have observed a growing predicament for conservatives that seems to be reaching a boiling point. It is a predicament that conservatives have spent much time whining and fussing about, but they have not been able to place their frustrations on any logical or at least defensible grounds. The problem is as follows. Conservatives are motivated by tradition and a history of success to defend capitalism (our first “c”), which is a free market economy. However, one of the outcomes of capitalism is that behemoth corporations often enter the social, political and cultural spheres espousing values that are inconsistent with conservatism. Is there a reasonable approach to condemning the actions of these corporations while simultaneously defending the free market principles of our economy? I propose that there is such an approach—an approach that shows that our current capitalist economy is devolving into what is likely to become a collectivist, communist economy.

Why is it in the purview of conservatives to defend capitalism? Capitalism was ingrained into our nation alongside all the other founding principles. When these founding principles were established, it was by men who were separating themselves from a country built on mercantilism. Mercantilism was the dominating theory and policy of Britain at the time and meant that there was a deep partnership between merchants and government to create monopolies over select regions and industries. This gave power and wealth to only select institutions and individuals.

The United States’ nation and economy were designed to take power away from the government and government-backed institutions and give it back to individuals and local economies. In our current strand of capitalism, however, we are now witnessing corporations that consistently seek to reverse this power shift, and monopolistic tendencies are prevalent. Some of these corporations do in fact already hold monopolies and almost all use this power to influence movements in the social, political, and cultural spheres. We are simultaneously witnessing growing cooperation between corporations and the government.

This brings us to the concept of corporatism, our second “c”. Corporatism is defined by Merriam-Webster as “the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction.” Corporatism is characterized by the coordination between corporations and government, the latter supporting the former. The coordination between corporations and the government in the U.S. has greatly increased over the last decades. Specific areas of coordination that are often brought into the public eye are the co-monitoring of online media and social networks, the co-creation of military strategy and weapons manufacturing, and the co-writing of laws governing technology (think AI and data).

What aspects of our current state align with corporatism? Consider corporations such as Amazon, Meta, Alphabet, or Disney. These companies not only hold de facto monopolies within their respective industries, but also exercise massive control over data, media, news, entertainment, and information. They commonly align their policies and messaging with the current political powers, and there are also countless examples of these corporations working directly with government. To illustrate their influence, these four corporations mentioned above control the following brands: Whole Foods, AWS, Ring, Twitch, MGM, IMDb, WhatsApp, Instagram, Threads, Oculus, Google, YouTube, Uber, Fitbit, Waze, Pixar, ESPN, Hulu, LucasFilm, Marvel, ABC, and National Geographic. While an impressive list, it is certainly not exhaustive and does not capture the brands their owners may also own, and the sub-brands also controlled. Is it accurate to say that our strand of capitalism is already a form of corporatism? No, as there is no formal sponsorship of select corporations by the government [1]. However, the line is wearing thin as the cooperation between these corporations and government continues to increase.

This brings us to our final “c”—communism. I’ve already shown that the jump from our current system, capitalism to corporatism, is not a leap too far. So how distant is corporatism from communism? To start, they are both collectivist in theory. Collectivism is the prioritization of a group over the individual. However, communism in theory grants the organization of collectivism to the masses, whereas corporatism grants this to an oligarchy, a select group of individuals. Corporatism and communism have, for example, become interwoven in countries like China today. In China, the state has direct oversight and involvement in corporations. These corporations clearly hold monopolies and operate in line with the policies and messaging of the political power in China. The economic theories governing communism are in direct opposition to those that govern capitalism in its original form, theories such as a free market, individual determination, and laissez-faire policy.

I believe showing the devolvement of capitalism into corporatism, and from there, into communism is an exercise that can begin to help conservatives address the current predicament. This approach can help distinguish healthy outcomes of a capitalist market vs negative monopolistic tendencies opposed to the tradition that conservatives seek to defend. The increased involvement of corporations in the social, political, and cultural spheres is an outgrowth of this economic devolvement, and it signals an increased cooperation between corporations and government. Understanding this ongoing economic devolvement will aid conservatives in finding a solution to the issue. Whatever this solution may be, it won’t be found in simply “shouting louder” than “woke” counterparts.

---

George Warren Blackham

---

“The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, worst off, it’s exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear, that there is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by the free-enterprise system.” - Milton Friedman

---

  [1] It is important to note that our government does control certain commercial entities, such as Amtrak, USPS, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. These companies do not hold monopolies, nor do they serve as “organizations of society”. Most would consider these commercial entities as duties that fall under the role of the government, but it is a topic up for debate.