Dear VC, Thanks for your attempt to rescue the debate and I doubt if cadres have been able to explore this piece in the broader context of nationalisation versus socialisation. Some have called for a discussion paper but without terms of reference. Be as it may, nationalisation policy will not yield a desired state in SA. Correctly so, nationalisation will only serve the interests of the bourgeoisie. We all know that problems of distressed mines are not necessarily the result of the financial crisis but class interest and crony capitalism in the form of BEE deals that backfired - an act of insolvency and thereby exposing the BEE shareholding to liquidation. For instance, the call for the state to take over 60% ownership of the mines remains very much ambiguous - it does not make business sense. Where would this money come from? The Land question remains unresolved and the state is no where near to meet its 2014 target of redistributing 30% of all agricultural land as a result of the recession. Economically speaking, what would be the rationale of the nationalising mines, when you have recession - economy is depressed and firms are not making profit? It's equal to call for the state to use good money to keep bad business in business which never benefitted ordinary people. This is not only counter revolutionary but compromise development in its entirety. Correctly so, nationalisation will only serve the interests of the bourgeoisie. By the way, there is no where Marx or Lenin endorsed nationalisation unless comrades have a particular reference where this was premised. Engage us on the subject matter. To this end, I submit that the state should not nationalise the mines. Rather call for the state to establish a mining company to carry out its political mandates in a sustainable manner. Comradely Morgan Phaahla Ekurhuleni
"Sometimes, if you wear suits for too long, it changes your ideology." - Joe Slovo --- On Fri, 11/27/09, Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> wrote: From: Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [YCLSA Discussion] Julius and Floyd Must Be Recalled Enough is Enough To: [email protected] Date: Friday, November 27, 2009, 5:22 AM Dear fellow-students, Since Comrades want to call themselves Marxists, and Cde Segage wants documentation, it must be a good idea to start with Karl Marx, I suppose. If you search in Google like this: nationalise site:http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/ You will get a list of pages containing all the instances of the words “nationalise” and “nationalisation” that occur in all the works of both Marx and Engels, i.e from the 1840s to the 1890s, including about 50 major works and hundreds of other items, large and small. The number of mentions is precisely two, of “nationalisation”. If you change to the American spelling (“nationalize”) you get another, different two. Three of the total of four instances are about land, and the fourth is about “nationalization” in a different, now-unfamiliar sense of generalising something across the country. So, people, to be honest, Karl Marx was not terribly interested in nationalisation! If you do the same in Google for Lenin, like this: nationalise site:http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/ you get 20 examples, from about 30 years of writing (1890s to 1920s) in 4,170 documents including all of Lenin’s books. Here is one of them, from “Left-Wing Childishness” (1918): “Dear ‘Left Communists’, how determined they are, but how little thinking they display. What do they mean by pursuing “a most determined policy of socialisation"? “One may or may not be determined on the question of nationalisation or confiscation, but the whole point is that even the greatest possible “determination” in the world is not enough to pass from nationalisation and confiscation to socialisation. The misfortune of our “Lefts” is that by their naïve, childish combination of the words “most determined policy of socialisation” they reveal their utter failure to understand the crux of the question, the crux of the “present” situation. The misfortune of our “Lefts” is that they have missed the very essence of the “present situation”, the transition from confiscation (the carrying out of which requires above all determination in a politician) to socialisation (the carrying out of which requires a different quality in the revolutionary). “Yesterday, the main task of the moment was, as determinedly as possible, to nationalise, confiscate, beat down and crush the bourgeoisie, and put down sabotage. Today, only a blind man could fail to see that we have nationalised, confiscated, beaten down and put down more than we have had time to count. The difference between socialisation and simple confiscation is that confiscation can be carried out by “determination” alone, without the ability to calculate and distribute properly, whereas socialisation cannot be brought about without this ability.” The above quotation from Lenin is particularly useful because it (correctly, of course) places “socialisation” in a higher, more serious position than mere “nationalisation”. The other 19 quotations that the search of Lenin throws up are also of interest but I will not go through them all. Others can share that task, perhaps. Another time-saver that can be used when you get to the actual document is the browser’s “Find in page” facility, which will take you to each instance of the actual word. [Please note these ways and means, comrades. If you ever need to find an apt quotation, this is one way you can do it. People will be amazed by your detailed knowledge of the classics!] My own personal opinion about nationalisation is that, as always, it is a question of the state. In a bourgeois dictatorship, under a bourgeois state, nationalisation will only attach the nationalised enterprise to the bourgeois state, and hence to the bourgeoisie. This has been very obvious to anyone who has lived in “social-democratic” countries, such as Britain . Historically, nationalisation has typically been a bourgeois act, by the bourgeoisie and for the bourgeoisie. In South Africa the bourgeoisie is still in the ascendancy. For as long as that remains the case, nationalisation simpliciter will have to serve the interests of the bourgeoisie. It is the degree of socialisation that is crucial, and socialisation is a more difficult, and not an automatically-answered question. VC Ranney Segage wrote: NB: This email and its contents are subject to the Eskom Holdings Limited EMAIL LEGAL NOTICE which can be viewed at http://www.eskom.co.za/email_legalnotice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Comrades I think everyone will agree with comrade Sabelo . He has provided terms of reference in terms of how and what we need to look at when entering into this debate . Comrade Sabelo I propose that we therefore need to structure the debate since you have provided terms of reference . We shall then have to identify some documentation on the subject matter . Yours for Socialism Ranney Jomo Segage Credit and Revenue Management Tel : 013 6934158 Fax : 013 6934186 Pax : 82214158 Cell : 0824710085 The denial of social contradictions leads to the denial of dialectics as a logical theory sabelo gina <[email protected]> 2009/11/27 10:33 AM >>> Comrades, I meant "commend" Jeremy Cronin, sorry for the wrong spelling! -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] .
<<inline: MortarBoardCUsmallCaptioned.jpg>>
