It was exceedingly obvious 2024 was a populist election, and she let Trump take that mantle and run with it. Bernie would have mopped the floor with these corporatists. This is why Mamdani is ascendant.
Talarico’s messaging would probably be perfect for this. Progressive message packaged in religious dogma.
However, given the control billionaires have over media and the what they see, I can’t confidently say anyone could win in that uneven playing-field.
Literally anyone. ANY average person should’ve been able to beat the monster that is Trump. That we couldn’t isn’t proof Harris sucked (in fairness, she was pretty poor); it’s proof the rich wield all the megaphones.
Corporatists? Are you looking for the word corpocrats or corporatocrats?
Edit: corporatocracy is a government ran by corporate business interests, such as we see in the US.
Corporatism is a governance principle that government is a meeting ground for “corporate groups” to make decisions. Corporate groups represent a group of people, typically business leaders but also unions.
In a fascist corporatist state like Mussolini’s Italy this meant keeping business and union leaders close to keep a close eye on them for greater control. In a social corporatist state like Sweden, this means those same leaders have a legally mandated place in the government to get the benefits of capitalist growth tempered by the demands of common workers to receive a fair share of that growth and ensure safe working/living conditions.
I don’t think the powers that be in the US want unions anywhere close to the government, so I don’t think corporatist is the right term.
It was exceedingly obvious 2024 was a populist election, and she let Trump take that mantle and run with it. Bernie would have mopped the floor with these corporatists. This is why Mamdani is ascendant.
Talarico’s messaging would probably be perfect for this. Progressive message packaged in religious dogma.
However, given the control billionaires have over media and the what they see, I can’t confidently say anyone could win in that uneven playing-field.
Literally anyone. ANY average person should’ve been able to beat the monster that is Trump. That we couldn’t isn’t proof Harris sucked (in fairness, she was pretty poor); it’s proof the rich wield all the megaphones.
Corporatists? Are you looking for the word corpocrats or corporatocrats?
Edit: corporatocracy is a government ran by corporate business interests, such as we see in the US.
Corporatism is a governance principle that government is a meeting ground for “corporate groups” to make decisions. Corporate groups represent a group of people, typically business leaders but also unions.
In a fascist corporatist state like Mussolini’s Italy this meant keeping business and union leaders close to keep a close eye on them for greater control. In a social corporatist state like Sweden, this means those same leaders have a legally mandated place in the government to get the benefits of capitalist growth tempered by the demands of common workers to receive a fair share of that growth and ensure safe working/living conditions.
I don’t think the powers that be in the US want unions anywhere close to the government, so I don’t think corporatist is the right term.