Northern Rock is nationalised

[Zurdito]

so what's going on, I thought governments who nationaised things were dangerous dictatorships? :p this is quite good just because it really belies all that propaganda about the free market which this government itself spews out, which is why the left should jump on this and fight attempt to re-privatise it. oh and to all the British citzens here: SMILE, WE OWN A BANK!:laugh:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7249575.stm

[spartan]

I laughed at the governments attempts at privatising Northern Rock because you could tell that they were desperate to avoid the "old Labour" tag (Which stands for nationalization amongst other things).

Nationalization of course is the complete opposite of the modern day "New Labour" and their Neo-Liberal free market third way policies when it comes to the economy (Which was done when Labour decided to make their bed with big business and the middle class who are all for these stupid policies which make the rich (i.e. them) richer and the poor (Workers) poorer).

This nationalization is practically an admittance of "defeat" by Labour.

[Q]

This nationalisation is done to save capitalism, not to end it or admit its defeat.
A good article about the issue can be found here (http://socialistworld.net/eng/2007/09/21britain.html).

[TheDifferenceEngine]

It's a start.

[robot lenin]

Its not a start. Labour have already said that nationalisation is merely a short-term solution, and that they will renationalise Northern Rock as soon as the market picks up, and they've hired a businessman to run it who has already stated that it will be "business as usual". If it was going to be used as a real public bank, it would not be "business as usual", but surely some new policies would be brought in.

[Q]

Its not a start. Labour have already said that nationalisation is merely a short-term solution, and that they will reprivatise Northern Rock as soon as the market picks up, and they've hired a businessman to run it who has already stated that it will be "business as usual". If it was going to be used as a real public bank, it would not be "business as usual", but surely some new policies would be brought in.
Fixed :)

[Psy]

Its not a start. Labour have already said that nationalisation is merely a short-term solution, and that they will reprivatise Northern Rock as soon as the market picks up, and they've hired a businessman to run it who has already stated that it will be "business as usual". If it was going to be used as a real public bank, it would not be "business as usual", but surely some new policies would be brought in.

Northern Rock got in problems due to the crash of the world market, there is very recently a huge global crisis in the rate of profits due to the fall out of the crash so "business as usual" is impossible, the solution of the American government is to solve the problem by trading it for more inflation (throwing tons of new money at the market), that only is a stop-gap.

[Zurdito]

This nationalisation is done to save capitalism, not to end it or admit its defeat.

So are all nationalisations by bourgeois governments. For example Hugo Chavez's policies are also designed to save capitalism.

The actions of a reformist bourgeois government are a good barometer of the bare minimum the working class will accept. The fact that bourgeois reformists in the UK are having to resosrt back to nationalisation is a good thing. :)

[Goatse]

It's a start.

Really?

[Q]

So are all nationalisations by bourgeois governments. For example Hugo Chavez's policies are also designed to save capitalism.

The actions of a reformist bourgeois government are a good barometer of the bare minimum the working class will accept. The fact that bourgeois reformists in the UK are having to resosrt back to nationalisation is a good thing. :)
Despite the fact that there was no class struggle that led to this nationalisation. The working class didn't force this. It was the reluctant choice of the Brown government delay the upcoming capitalist crisis just for a bit longer.

They'll reprivatise it as soon as they get the chance and that by itself won't create a radicalised class struggle. What might trigger a working class response though is that Northern Rock or any other bank goes bankrupt, thusly ruining lots of working class families.

So, his nationalisation was nothing more than a manoeuvre of the bourgeoisie to save themselves by letting the workers pay ... again (taxmoney!). Besides, nationalisation by itself is not socialist at all. Nationalisation and putting the nationalised companies under worker control is.

[Zurdito]

Despite the fact that there was no class struggle that led to this nationalisation. The working class didn't force this.

To say there was "no class struggle" is not a marxist analysis: class struggle is the driving force of history, and it manifests in many different ways. The government was scared of public opinion and the increasing dissatisfaction of its popular base.The term "public opinion" is synonymous with class struggle. You are right that the working class did not storm Northern Rock. However, class struggle manifests itself in many ways.


It was the reluctant choice of the Brown government delay the upcoming capitalist crisis just for a bit longer.

That was how I would describe the decision to use taxpayers money to bail out Northern Rock. If they could have got away with it, they would have done this without nationalisation I think.


They'll reprivatise it as soon as they get the chance and that by itself won't create a radicalised class struggle. What might trigger a working class response though is that Northern Rock or any other bank goes bankrupt, thusly ruining lots of working class families.

True.


Besides, nationalisation by itself is not socialist at all. Nationalisation and putting the nationalised companies under worker control is

I didn't say it was socialist, please.

[BanderaRoja]

The difference between this nationalization and what Hugo Chavez does is the role of imperialism. Chavez is the leader of a non-imperialist country. When he nationalized the energy resources he was taking those resources back for the Venezuelan populace, away from the First World corporate exploiters. In this case, this is merely the British taxpayer bailing out a failed bank that made poor investments. The only people who come out on top in this "nationalization" are the investors whose investments have been saved and propped up by the state.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

I think we should Nationalize all rocks

[RedAnarchist]

I think we should Nationalize all rocks

Including the ones you're smoking?:lol:

[Goatse]

I hope you all realise the government plans to release it back into the public sector one it stabilises