“State” Corporatism in Latin America: A Decades Back Historical Reminder

Öz

Corporatism as an ideology has a relatively long history. In its modern forms, however, as a particular ideal-typical institutional arrangement for linking the associationally organized interests of civil society with the state, in particular with reference to its variety as regards, generally defined, antiliberal, delayed capitalist, authoritarian states, preeminently in Latin America, it has emerged and developed mainly through the second half of the twentieth century. This paper will basically dwell on historical, theoretical, and institutional examination and evaluation of that variety of modern corporatism, which has come to be labelled, almost unanimously, as “state” corporatism, concluding with a critical assessment. This reminder, made through the mentioned studies emphasized, will reveal the rich literature on corporatism and analyze the points underlying the definition of "scattered intellectual kitchen." As a dimension of the analysis in question, it will focus on different corporatist samples and discuss the corporatist model in Latin America with its aspects and orientations within the framework of these samples.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Corporatism
• State
• Authoritarianism
• Latin America
• Interest Representation

Latin Amerika’da Devlet Korporatizmi: Onlarca Yıl Geriye Uzanan Bir Hatırlatma

Öz

Bir ülkede toplumun önde gelen sivil çıkar gruplaşmalarını devlet/iktidar “karar-verme” yapılanmasına -değişen mekanizmalarla katılımını sağlamak üzere- bağlayan, kavramsal- kurumsal bir siyasal yapı biçimi anlamında modern “korporatizm” özellikle 20. yüzyılın son çeyreğinde, başlıca iki ayırdedici türüyle, bir yandan “liberal” bir yandan da “otoriter” siyasal sistemlerin incelenmesinde bir süre hayli rağbet gören bir model olmuştur. İşte bu yazıda, ikinci türüne örnek olarak, Latin Amerika bağlamında 1970’lerde mevcut siyasal sistemleri açıklamada siyaset bilimi çalışmalarında üzerinde bir hayli kalem oynatılmış bulunan “devlet korporatizmi”, söz konusu çalışmaların kayda değer örneklerine atıfla, konuya ilk defa aşina olacak okuyucuya tanıtıcı bir uslupta, yeniden hatırlatılacaktır. Üzerinde durulan önemli çalışmalar vasıtası ile yapılan bu hatırlatma korporatizme dair zengin literatürü ortaya koyarken, “dağınık entelektüel mutfak” tanımlamasının altında yatan noktalar analiz edilecektir. Söz konusu analizin önemli bir boyutu olarak farklı korporatist örneklemlerin üzerinde durulmakta ve bu örneklemler çerçevesinde Latin Amerika’da korporatist model yön ve yönelimleri ile tartışılacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Korporatizm
• Devlet
• Otoriyeryanizm
• Latin Amerika
• Çıkar Temsili

Kaynakça

1. Almond, Gabriel A. (1983), ‘Corporatism, Pluralism, and Professional Memory’ (review article), World Politics 35 (2): 245-260.
2. Anderson, Charles W. (1974), ‘Toward a Theory of Latin American Politics’, in H. J. Wiarda (ed.) Politics and Social Change in Latin America: the Distinct Tradition, Amherst: University of Massachusets Press: 249-265.
3. Anderson, Charles W. (1977): “Political Design and the Representation of Interests,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol.10, No.1 (April): 127-52.
4. Bailey, John J. (1977), ‘Pluralist and Corporatist Dimensions of Interest Representation in Colombia’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 259-302.
5. Baretta, Silvio D. and Douglass, Helen E. (1977), ‘Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America: A Review Essay’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 513-524.
6. Collier, David and Collier, Ruth B. (1977), ‘Who Doesw What, to Whom, and How: Toward a Comparative Analysis of Latin American Corporatism’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 489- 512.
7. Hammergren, Linn A. (1977), ‘Corporatism in Latin American Politics: A Reexamination of the “Unique” Tradition’, Comparative Politics 9 (4): 443-461.
8. Johansen, Lars N. and O. P. Kristensen (1978): “Corporatist Traits in Denmark: 1946-76,” paper presented at the International Political Science Association Conference, Uppsala, 33p.

9. Kaufman, Robert R. (1977), ‘Corporatism, Clientelism, and Partisan Conflict: A Study of Seven Latin American Countries’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 109-148.
10. Karaman, L. (2008), Revisiting ‘Liberal’ Corporatism in Western Democracies: Couple of Decades-Back Historical Travelling. Civilacademy: Journal of Social Sciences/Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, vol.6, no.2 , 137-160.
11. Kvavik, Robert B. (1974): “Interest Groups in a ‘Cooptive’ Political System: the Case of Norway,” in M. O. Heisler (ed.), Politics in Europe: Structures and Processes in Some Postindustrial Societies, New York: David Mc Kay.
12. Landry, David M. (1976), ‘Resurrection of the Corporate Model in Latin American Politics’, Studies in Comparative International Development 11 (3): 70-83.
13. Lehmbruch, Gerhard (1977): “Liberal Corporatism and Party Government,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol.10, No.1 (April): 91-126.
14. Lehmbruch, Gerhard (1977): “Liberal Corporatism and Party Government,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol.10, No.1 (April): 91-126.
15. Lehmbruch, Gerhard (1983): “Interest Intermediation in Capitalist and Socialist Systems,” International Political Science Review, Vol.4, No.2: 153-72.
16. Malloy, James M. (1977), ‘Authoritarianism and Corporatism: the Case of Bolivia’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 459-485.
17. Malloy, James M. (1974), ‘Authoritarianism, Corporatism, and Mobilization in Peru’, Review of Politics 36 (1): 52-84.
18. Marsh, David and Grant, Wyn. (1977), ‘Tripartism: Reality or Myth?’ Government and Opposition 12 (2): 194-211.
19. Mericle, Kenneth S. (1977), ‘Corporatist Control of the Working Class: Authoritarian Brazil since 1964’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 303-338.
20. Metcalfe, Les and McQuillan, Will. (1979), ‘Corporatism or Industrial Democracy?’ Political Studies 27 (2): 266-82.
21. Nedelmann, Birgitta and K. G. Meier (1977): “Theories of Contemporary Corporatism: Static or Dynamic?” Comparative Political Studies, Vol.10, No.1 (April): 39-60.
22. Newton, Ronald C. (1974), ‘Natural Corporatism and the Passing of Populism in Spanish America’, Review of Politics 36 (1): 34-51.
23. O’Donnell, Guillermo A. ‘Corporatism and the Question of the State’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 47-87.
24. Panitch, Leo. (1977), ‘Development of Corporatism in Liberal Democracies’, Comparative Political Studies 10 (1): 61-90.
25. Pike, Fredrick B. (1974), ‘Corporatism and Latin American – United States Relations’, Review of Politics 36 (1): 132-170.
26. Schmitter, Philippe C. (1974), ‘Still the Century of Corporatism?’ Review of Politics 36 (1): 85-131. Schwartzman, Simon. (1977), ‘Back to Weber: Corporatism and Patrimonialism in the Seventies’, in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 89 -106.
27. Spalding, Rose J. (1981), ‘State Power and its Limits: Corporatism in Mexico’, Comparative Political Studies 14 (2): 139-161.
28. Stevens, Evelyn P. (1977), ‘Mexico’ PRI: the Institutionalization of Corporatism?’ in J. M. Malloy (ed.) Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America, Pittsburgh: University Press: 227-258.
29. Wiarda, Howard J. (1973), ‘Toward a Framework for the Study of Political Change in the Iberic-Latin Tradition: the Corporative Model’, World Politics 25 (2): 206-235.
30. Wiarda, Howard J. (1974a), ‘Corporatism and Development in the Iberic-Latin World: Persistent Strains and New Variations’, Review of Politics 36 (1): 3-33.
31. Wiarda, Howard J. (1974b), ‘Social Change, Political Development, and the Latin American Tradition’, in H. J. Wiarda (ed.) Politics and Social Change in Latin America: the Distinct Tradition, Amherst: University of Massachusets Press: 3-22.
32. Wiarda, Howard J. (1974c), ‘Law and Political Development in Latin America: Toward a Framework for Analysis’, in H. J. Wiarda (ed.) Politics and Social Change in Latin America: the Distinct Tradition, Amherst: University of Massachusets Press: 199-229.
33. Wiarda, Howard J. (1974d), ‘Social Change and Political Development in Latin America: Summary, Implications, Frontiers’, in H. J. Wiarda (ed.) Politics and Social Change in Latin America: the Distinct Tradition, Amherst: University of Massachusets Press: 269-292.
34. Wiarda, Howard J. (1978), ‘Corporative Origins of the Iberian and Latin American Labor Relations Systems’, Studies in Comparative International Development 13 (1): 3-37.
35. Winkler, J. T. (1976), ‘Corporatism’, European Journal of Sociology 17 (1): 100-136.
36. Wolfe, James H. (1974), ‘Corporatism in German Political Life: Functional Representation in GDR and Bavaria’, in Martin O. Heisler (ed.) Politics in Europe: Structures and Processes in Some Post-industrial Democracies, New York: David McKay: 323-340.
37. Wolfe, James H. (1974): “Corporatism in German Political Life: Functional Representation in the GDR and Bavaria,” in M. O. Heisler (ed.), Politics in Europe: Structures and Processes in Some Post-industrial Societies, New York: David Mc Kay.