Skip to main content

Jeremy Corbyn is wrong about nationalisation

Jeremy Corbyn is wrong about nationalisation.  He is carried away by the reception he gets in the bubble of left wing politics.  It was a mistake made by Michael Foot as leader of the party.  He convinced himself that the public mood was swinging his way because of the rapturous reception he received at rallies up and down the country.  The faithful cheered, but voters turned away and Labour became unelectable.

Nationalisation isn't socialism.  There is more socialism in 'wider share ownership' than in nationalising major companies.   In that sense Mrs Thatcher was more socialist than any party wishing to nationalise major companies. Jeremy Corbyn seems intent on taking the Labour party backwards whilst what the country needs is a forward looking party that recognises and understands the changed economic and social landscape, and has real answers to the problems we face.  Nationalisation isn't the answer.  What people need is enhanced opportunities for education, for work, for housing and social and health care.  Reverting to the politics of the 1970s doesn't offer that.  It fights old battles with old and tired ideas.

Labour can do nothing if it reverts to being a party of opposition and protest.  It needs to reach out to voters who are not 'socialist'.  It demonstrated it could do this and win in 1997.  Jeremy Corbyn is critical of New Labour, but New Labour introduced the minimum wage,  reduced pensioner poverty, increased spending on the NHS and brought waiting lists and times down.  Labour could not have achieved that by sitting on the opposition benches remaining 'pure'.   Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters regard New Labour as a 'cancer' or 'virus' in the Labour party.  Symbolic of this was the change in Clause 4 section 4 of the Labour party constitution.

Clause 4 was itself symbolic.  No modern Labour government had any intention to nationalise banks and major companies.  The problem with Jeremy Corbyn is that he would have such intention. He makes nationalisation an objective rather than a means.

State ownership of the means of production and exchange isn't 'public ownership'.  True public ownership involves more than that.  John Lewis Partnership has more socialisms in it than does nationalisation.  If Jeremy Corbyn had ideas about how to promote such approaches to business structure and ownership he would do well.

Jeremy Corbyn appealed to my heart, but my head told me different.  Now his position on nationalisation has lost my heart.  I won't be voting for him.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services.

It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared.

Utilitarian ethics considers the balan…

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well.

No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing.

The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party.

That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team.

Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more widel…

No evidence for vaccine link with autism

Public health bodies are worried that an alarming drop in childhood vaccinations is leading to a resurgence of diseases in childhood that we had all but eradicated.  Misinformation and scare stories about the harmful effects of vaccines abound on the internet and in social media.  Where they are based on 'science', it is highly selective, and often reliance is placed on falsehoods. 
Conspiracy theories also abound - cover-ups, deception, lies. As a result, too many parents are shunning vaccinations for their children.  So, what does the published, peer-reviewed literature tell us about vaccincations? Are they safe and effective, or are there long term harmful effects? 
A new report now provides some of the answers.

New evidence published in the Cochrane Library today finds MMR, MMRV, and MMR+V vaccines are effective and that they are not associated with increased risk of autism.

Measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (also known as chickenpox) are infectious diseases caused by …