Joseph Hansen

The Real Meaning of
British Nationalization

(13 September 1948)

Source: The Militant, Vol. 12 No. 37, 13 September 1948, p. 2.
Transcription/HTML Markup: 2022 by Einde O’Callaghan.
Public Domain: Joseph Hansen Internet Archive 2022. This work is in the under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Marxists’ Internet Archive as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.

A standing subject for denunciation in the capitalist press is the nationalization of industry in Great Britain.

In contrast to the lush profits currently being shaken down by Big Business from American industry, the capitalist press points to the losses recorded by the nationalized British industries and the fear of the British government to lower those losses by increasing the speed-up.

This is supposed to illustrate the advantages of capitalism and to Shbiv that Socialism won't work. According to the editorial writers of the capitalist press, the British experience proves that the working class is incapable of running industry efficiently arid Britain had better go back to “private enterprise.”

Wrecked by Capitalism

At the first touch of the facts, this fabrication falls to pieces. British industry is not comparable to industry here. Under capitalist management modern improvements lagged in Great Britain so that the bulk of the plants are a half a century behind the times. Major replacements and re-organization are needed throughout British industry.

One of the first tasks facing a Socialist Government in Great Britain is the reconditioning of industries run into the ground under capitalist management. Thus the blame for the shape in which British industry is found today rests squarely on the capitalist class and not on the workers who suffer the Consequences of their mismanagement.

Now we come to another hard fact. The British “Labor” Government is NOT socialist. Capitalism remains in Great Britain. The so-called “nationalization” of industry was not a genuine socialist measure. The capitalists were not expropriated. They still remain in management and are continuing to rake in profits through the government bonds awarded them.

The British capitalists were in a bad way at the end of the war. They faced bankruptcy. “Nationalization” saved the coal barons and other industrialists by guaranteeing them returns from their holdings arid preventing the workers from going ahead with genuine socialist measures.

Like New York’s Subways

“Nationalization” in Great Britain resembles most closely what happened in this country when the New York City government, took over the subway. The bankers had previously mulcted huge profits out of the subway systems, saddled the system with huge debts and permitted the equipment to run down. Then they unloaded the obsolete rail system on the city and received, in return, guaranteed city bonds, thus continuing to draw their profits out of the city treasury.

As the conservative British magazine, The Economist, explains in its June 19 issue, “nationalization” simply meant “Old Boss Writ Large.” Nothing was changed fundamentally. So far as the workers are concerned, “the old enemy remains in immediate authority.”

This issue is now becoming sharper. “Organized labor,” says The Economist, “feels deeply conscious that the worker has too little to say in the direction of industry.”

When the working class kicked the Churchill regime out of office and voted in the Labor Party, they expected an end to the capitalist system and the institution of Socialism. For three years now the Labor Party leadership has refused to carry out this mandate. Instead it is acting as the caretaker of British capitalism. The growing anger of the working class over this is now becoming evident in clashes over the question of management of industry. More and more union bodies are demanding that the workers have a voice in the management of the “nationalized” industries.

The government on the other hand insists on keeping the former capitalists in the front office and is now preparing to go even further. Under prodding from Washington, they talk openly of instituting speed-ups on the “American” model and lowering wages.

Battle Lines Forming

The battle lines are clearly shaping up. As reported in last week’s Militant, 17,000. Austin workers in Birmingham staged a protest strike recently against a company attempt to speed up a gear-box cutter from 280 boxes a day to 360.

The propaganda of the American capitalists against British nationalization is solely designed to confuse the American working class arid to turn it away from any support of Socialism. The American workers have the duty of studying the British experience as it Will enable them to better understand the mechanics of capitalist rule. From this they will learn that there IS an answer to capitalist exploitation arid anarchy. Not the British Labor Government program of capitalist nationalizations, but a genuine socialist program of expropriation of the capitalists and government ownership and operation of industry under workers’ control.