What Americans call "corporatism", the rest of us call "capitalism". A capitalist system does not become "socialist" simply because the capitalist-controlled government makes a few concessions in terms of social welfare to avoid an all-out revolution, and a capitalist-controlled government giving profitable "contracts" to private corporations or using taxpayer money to bail out failing private corporations (i.e. enriching a few capitalists using resources collected for common use) is about as far from the definition of "socialism" as you can get.
This all stems out of confusion as to the meaning of the terms "capitalism" and "socialism" which seems quite common everywhere, but especially so in the US. "Capitalism" essentially means that means of production is in the hands of the few, the "capitalists". A hallmark of capitalism is that a minority gains more and more money from interest, rather than work. Socialism, on the other hand, means the means of production is owned by the workers themselves, whether via cooperatives, via a (truly) worker-controlled state, some other means or (more likely) from a combination of these.
A capitalist economy can never truly become a democracy simply stemming from the discrepancy in power between the workers and the capitalists. Capitalists have so much more power than workers by simple virtue of their wealth, that even if completely free and fair elections were guaranteed, the media was in no way influenced by the interests of their owners, and corruption was unheard of (i.e. an ideal fantasy world), capitalists, by virtue of their single-handed control of the means of production can still exert undue influence over society and thus put any democracy out of action by for instance threatening to withhold production of some essential good if their interests are not satisfied.