In another twist involving the public protector’s office‚ the Minister of Co-operative Governance an.
THE recent public spat between proponents of nationalisation and those vehemently opposed to the programme has missed the point of what needs to be done to revolutionise our country.
It is a good thing when the state intervenes in the economy to change the plight of the workers and the peasants. But that is the point - the state has to intervene on behalf of an oppressed and exploited stratum of our society. We shall be making a great mistake if we would labour under the impression that nationalisation is equal to socialism.
Nothing could be further from the truth as some capitalist countries have been prone to nationalise certain industries.
An example is Margaret Thatcher's Britain which nationalised the railways. Recently the US wanted to bail out its companies by intervening in their affairs in monetary terms.
Can we say that Thatcher's Britain was socialist? Can we even claim that today Barak Obama's America is socialist? Definitely not! Even a recent student of history will answer in the negative in both cases. What does this mean? Capitalism has in its nature the ability to adapt to changing conditions. If it needs to nationalise it will.
However, do we really need to undergo the torturous nature of the capitalist system for one more day? The answer provided by the oppressed workers all over the world is a big NO. The system relies on greed to make profits at all costs.
On the other hand, the history of revolutionary socialist countries has taught us that what we need is the socialisation of the means of production.
This is a logic that seeks to usurp the social labour of the people to benefit them and not some investor who is sitting in a cushioned office and is made "boss" on the basis of having contributed some capital into the business.
Lehlohonolo Shale, Pimville, Soweto