Nationalization

nationalization is the expropriation from private property to favour of the state. Contrary to the landläufigen opinion that each national enterprise was put under state control , it stands the idea of the social economy.

States were suitable private property in history usually with the reason on, vital goods of controlto have to subject the public, in order to promote thereby the public interest. Always also political reasons had great importance for nationalization, like for example for the expropriation of Renault in France due to the Kollaboration with the national socialists. Furthermore it is not clearly to differentiate between private propertythe public hand and public property.

In the former socialist states companies, great land owners and capitalists so mentioned, in addition, farmers were expropriated. These decisions are seen multiple in the today's iurisdiction as injustice.

Expropriations for the execution of infrastructure measures are usual in all states andaccepted. From social reasons they come only very rarely, into Germany as well as not at all forwards (although after the Basic Law possible), the current policy set to a large extent rather on privatisation (Neoliberalismus). Usual are however expropriations because of mining industry and because of road construction.

Characteristic of legal nationalizationthe law-conformal consideration of private and common interests is, the appropriate remuneration or the expropriated ones as well as the independent judicial examinableness of the measures. Numerous historical examples occupy meanwhile that the nationalization again and again mainly the extension and strengthening the political-economical power base of the state-basic groupings and/or thatElimination of their competitors served. The transitions here are flowing. On the one hand also legislative legislation like controlling Judikative parts of the state apparatus are thus indirect and profit your a nationalization. On the other hand straight in the countries of the Trikonts governments justify the nationalization thereby, the country from the dependence on to want to solve transnational enterprises. After their argumentation common weal and power safety device lie together.

Practice is usual to put strategically important sources of raw material or key industries under state control of a country in order to secure a political change of power taken place before.

historical nationalization measures with special effects (selection)

• already in times of the republic was it in antique Rome politics of individual ruling powers like for example Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix to set political opponents on pro script ion lists so mentioned,with which these were “bird-free” and their possession purged to the state. This proceeding was later also in the empire likes, in particular because the person of the emperor and the state were equated and nationalizations benefitted thus directly the Imperator personally.

• The gradually accomplished complete nationalization (collectivization) the entire private property at industriellen and agricultural means of production in the Soviet Union first the maintenance of the political economy led was in the consequence predominantly only by the stalinistische system possible and led in the long run to the political-economical collapse of the society to economic chaos and hunger emergencies.

• ThoseNationalization of the economy in the SBZ (Soviet zone occupied; late GDR) so-called “war criminal” began in the autumn 1945 with instructions of the SMAD for the expropriation of the large-landed property and the enterprises of Nazis and. These measures became in June 1946 in Saxonia in a popular voteconfirmed. In the agriculture the country was distributed by land reform at Kleinbauern and new settlers (“June chap and in farmer hand”) and/or. converted into state-owned goods (VEG). In several steps (after view obligatory prevailing today) of the collectivization the farmers were united into agricultural production cooperatives (LPG). In contrastto VEG and to VEB however no nationalization represented, but transition to genossenschaftliches property. In the industry the expropriated enterprises were put under state control 1948 finally, converted to state-owned one enterprises (VEB) and integrated into the national planned economy. End of the 50's and beginning that70's were put under state control likewise most remaining smaller and middle private business. (see. also the criticism at the national property).

• The nationalization of the Kupferminen in Chile under president Salvador all end was legal, however possibly led in the counterreaction to the brutal Putsch of the general Pinochet. Whetherthe Putsch by the omission of the ideologically motivated and economically doubtful nationalization could have been prevented, remains however undecided, because under Pinochet she was not cancelled.

• As example of legal expropriations in the Federal Republic of Germany: The expropriation of agricultural landed property in Bavaria toPurpose of the building of the Rhine Main Danube channel.

• In Bolivia 2005 large parts of the poorer indigenen population demand (again) a nationalization of natural gas resources, which leads to a state crisis.

advantages of the nationalization

proponents of measures according to the nationalization and the large socialization offer these following advantages:

• Justice/philosophy: Many resources or means of production, which always occurred in nature without or without substantial achievement of humans, should benefit according to proponents all parts of the population equally (e.g. Oil, natural gas, precious metals, in addition, water, etc.). A privateProperty at them would not result naturally from the nature right (as for instance the liberalism assumes), but is consequence of historical processes, and politically as philosophically quite disputed.
• Other ranges such as power supply, traffic, hospitals, education or culture would totalsocially fulfill to important tasks,it denationalizes a market logic (Kommodifizierung) to be surrendered was allowed, is justified this in thinking the human. The public interest, thus the interests of the population (instead of individual individual interests of profit) is example of economic acting. The technical progress (automation) raises new questions: Ifbefore 100 employees for the production of a product necessarily were, now however only 5 employees e.g.Production engineering supervise, must a reorientation take place.
• - Appropriate in-plant structures presupposed, employees of the enterprises a by far larger influence on conditions of work, remuneration, in addition, in-plant have democratization (e.g. Strategy -)Decisions (innovation from downside)
• customer orientation - if the obligation to the profit maximization escapes, can also necessary economically unattractive products and services be offered, the logic of the market must not be corresponded
• marxism: Marxist proponents refer the capital, the further to Marx' writingfundamental arguments against the private property at means of production supply. The nationalization in material socialism is not a negative example, from which must be learned, a fundamental argument against other forms of nationalization.

disadvantages of the nationalization

of points of criticism result particularly from the material experiences in Material socialism and in the state enterprises of the west:

• Justice: Critics reject measures of the nationalization as expropriation of the previous owners, whose interests arrange her more highly. The principle of the private property of conditions over other considerations.
• A nationalization without real socialization sets only abstractly the state as an ownerin place of the entrepreneur ; for the employees such as customers means this then mainly more bureaucracy, further advantages are missing.
• Offer: Depending upon organization of the nationalization (e.g. guided production in the five-year plan) is not the demand in the population, but is defaults of appropriate planning staffsconsiderably for the offer. This passes then material needs, it comes to lack and from it following a black market, as for instance in the GDR. If no competition of different offerers or locations is present, the state enterprises have actually a monopoly on the produced goods,which causes that incentives for the improvement of quality and other forms of innovation are void. In particular in material socialism these phenomena would have shown up.
• The competition of private-economical enterprises promotes also customer orientation, in place of an official mentality steps service - a culture. No form of nationalization can do this equallyreach.
• Responsibility: Frequently stated as argument also that contrary to the entrepreneur, who is not responsible personally for the risks (as with the exempt private company), which managers of a state enterprise like also the employees responsibility for their enterprise would feel, there individual achievement and innovationwere not recompenced.
• Aesthetics: A further fundamental problem results for critics from the theory of the value in use, how it represented for instance Karl Marx: Products are arranged only on (purely rational ) use . Luxury is rejected. The aesthetics of the products in material socialism was frequently accordingly unattractively. Also product Design as part of the applied art is underestimated and prevented as cultural expression means. E.g. became frequent. the product world of the GDR as grey and boringly described.

see also

common land, Kibbuz, state State of, privatisation, means of production, private property, Cooperative, national property, Subsidiarität in the state theory