What is nationalization. The meaning of the word nationalization

the transition of private enterprises and sectors of the economy to state ownership. One of the mechanisms of economic policy.

For supporters of liberal approaches to the economy, nationalization is completely unacceptable. The basis of the liberal model of the economy is the non-interference of state structures in the activities of economic entities, the maximum absence of the state in the economy.

Since the time of A. Smith, the belief about the self-organizing elements of the market, about its “invisible hand”, which itself will correct everything, has dominated here. The market itself is a powerful regulator of economic life and is able to ensure its development without any state involvement. The role of the state in the economy should be limited to the adoption of the necessary laws and the provision of the necessary conditions for their rigorous implementation.

According to one of the leading ideologists of liberalism, L. Mises (1881–1973), “The position that liberalism takes regarding the functions of the state is a consequence of its protection of private ownership of the means of production ... Thus, the protection of private ownership of the means of production already means a severe restriction of the functions of the state.” However, the main thing is missed here: the right to private property is not taken from heaven, it is possible only in the state! In the wild pre-state state, the right to private property theoretically also existed, but in practice everyone owned his thing exactly until the stronger one came and took it away. About any kind of long-term rights, especially about the mechanisms of pledges, capitalization, and so on. there is no speech at all if there are no systems of law and laws that are possible only in the state.

The course towards the weakening of the state most often leads to anarchy and the impossibility of precisely capitalist development, the guarantee of rights and freedoms. The richest countries in the world have a strong state. And vice versa, as the studies of the economist E. De Soto (the book "The Riddle of Capital") have shown, where the state is weak, the market does not develop. There is an illegal market that has limited growth limits.

The underestimation of the role of the state as the leading factor in economic development led to the fact that in no country in the world did the supporters of the liberal model stay in power.

The monetarist version of the development of the economy in the 1980s–90s. failed everywhere - from Argentina to Russia. As a rule, a weakened state was completely privatized by one or more financial and industrial groups, which made it a mechanism for guaranteed preservation of their property and forcible or deceitful appropriation of someone else's. The concentration of capital reached exorbitant heights. The country was impoverished, social programs were not carried out by private oligarchs, and the state was also deprived of the opportunity to pursue social policy, since it had no sources of replenishment of the budget (after all, according to the liberal model, it should not own anything). This led to revolutions, an explosion of discontent, the coming to power of radical politicians who announced large-scale nationalizations of the property of the oligarchs. One of the latest examples of Latin American politicians U. Chavez and E. Morales.

The very practice of nationalization is as old as the world, it was abused by both Roman dictators and European monarchs when it was necessary to replenish the treasury, please the people, and punish contenders for power. As a tool for creating a new, socialist economy, the Paris Communards tried to use it in 1871 during a short 72 days of their experiment.

But the biggest nationalization in recent history was certainly the one carried out by the Bolsheviks after they came to power. In 1918, after the relevant decrees of the Council of People's Commissars, all the main branches of industry, the financial sector, transport, and communications were nationalized, that is, they were declared the property of the state. The transfer of land to the peasantry in practice resulted in collectivization, which meant the de facto approval of state ownership of land resources, and those that arose in the late 1920s and early 1930s. collective farms became state-owned enterprises, despite the formal status of cooperative institutions created by the owners - owners of land shares.

The total nationalization of the entire economy, including the service sector, processing and agriculture, has proved its economic inefficiency. The lack of incentives to increase labor productivity, material motivation for the worker, the inflexibility of the planned economy, which inevitably arise with the total nationalization of the means of production, its inability to innovate - all this led to the economic crisis and the collapse of socialism in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

But also countries where the ruling elite professes liberal views in the economy, when the crisis came, used the mechanism of nationalization. This is what F. D. Roosevelt did when the United States fell into the Great Depression. Similar, although not so radical measures were taken in a number of other leading capitalist countries.

In 2008, in the context of the beginning collapse of the American and closely related European financial system, the United States took a number of forced steps to urgently support the stock market and, in general, the national economy. On October 4, President George W. Bush signed the so-called. The Paulson Plan (named after the Secretary of the Treasury) would allocate $700 billion to buy illiquid assets from the country's banks so that they could lend to support economic growth. Thus, the US administration actually carried out the nationalization of some American companies.

The American auto industry found itself in a difficult situation in a crisis. The famous "big three" - General Motors, Crysler and Ford, unable to compete with Japanese and Chinese automakers that opened their assembly lines in the United States, were on the verge of bankruptcy, and over three million employees of the automotive industry were threatened with dismissal.

Supporters of the preservation of the American auto industry insist on state intervention and assistance to factories in economic distress from the federal budget. This problem was designated as one of the key problems in his economic program by the elected President of the United States B. Obama.

The goal of nationalization, no matter how much it is carried out, is to strengthen the social aspect in the economy. With a monetarist approach, social programs "hang" because the sources of their financing disappear and, as a result, social tension increases. The implementation of liberal reforms by the government of E. Gaidar in 1992 led to this.

The thesis of the liberals: “a private owner is always more efficient than the state” turned out to be true only for small and medium-sized enterprises, while in other sectors all indicators fell by 2–3 times compared to the Soviet ones. And it's not just that many enterprises have turned out to be uncompetitive. Quite competitive oil production also fell by 2 times and has reached the Soviet level only now. Moreover, "effective owner" is a vague concept: you can steal a plant, sell it and run offshore with the money, it will be entrepreneurial and efficient. But such efficiency of a private owner is too costly for society. Therefore, the return of many enterprises to the state in Russia has become almost a natural reaction of society for its self-preservation.

The fact that the Russian state has regained control over a number of strategically important sectors of the economy - mainly oil and gas production, the revenues from which are the main ones in the formation of the budget, is not an attempt at secondary large-scale nationalization of the 1918 model. It is simply a tool that will allow both to ensure the implementation of social programs and create conditions for the development of an innovative economy.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

19Dec

What is Nationalization

Nationalization - This the process of transferring to the government full or partial control of a company, bank or industry that was owned by private individuals.

Depending on the situation, the state can compensate the owners for part or the full cost of the nationalized property. But this is not the rule, sometimes there are cases when the property passes under the control of the state without any payments to the owners.

Why is nationalization taking place?

There can be many reasons why the state decides to capitalize a particular area. In some cases, the government takes such measures in order to "protect" the state economy. This happens when a certain strategic area, which is under the control of private individuals, begins to dominate its sector, which significantly affects the economic processes in the country.

In other cases, this may occur for the security of the state itself. For example, after September 11, 2001, George W. Bush decided to nationalize the airport security industry in order to improve the quality of security. But it should be understood that this measure is a forced, and not a common practice.

It should be noted that such processes as nationalization are common mainly in developing or frankly depressed countries. whose government and economy are weak and unstable.

There are cases in history when the nationalization of certain industries saved them from bankruptcy, but these are rather exceptions that occurred in developed countries.

In developed countries, this phenomenon occurs as an exception, and then in a situation of emergency or war.

The negative impact of nationalization.

In the world of a free market economy, nationalization creates huge risks for business development among investors. This is explained by the fact that an enterprise built by a foreign investor can be nationalized by a decision of the government of that country, and the investor will suffer partial losses or be left with nothing at all.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nationalization- transfer of land, industrial enterprises, banks, transport or other property belonging to private individuals to the ownership of the state. Nationalization can be carried out through gratuitous expropriation - confiscation, as well as through full or partial redemption - requisition.

In the Russian Federation, according to Art. 235 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, nationalization must be carried out in the manner prescribed by federal law. Since such a law has not yet been adopted, nationalization in Russia cannot be carried out. However, in practice this applies only to gratuitous nationalization. Full or partial redemption by the state is quite possible on the basis of ordinary purchase / sale agreements.

A number of reference publications (for example, The Newest Encyclopedic Dictionary. ISBN 978-5-271-08330-3) also indicate that the differences in nationalization depend on what historical era, by whom and in the interests of which classes it was carried out.

Nationalization in history

• Nationalization of large industry, real estate and banks in Soviet Russia as a result of the Bolsheviks coming to power.
• Nationalization of oil production in Mexico in 1938 by the government of Lazaro Cardenas
• Nationalization of a number of industries in the UK by the government of Clement Attlee in the 1940s
• Nationalization of the Suez Canal by the Egyptian government in (see Suez Crisis)
• Nationalization of American enterprises in Cuba in 1959-1960
• Nationalization of the mining industry in Chile in the 1970s (under President Salvador Allende)
• Nationalization of oil production in Venezuela in 1976
• Nationalization of Fanni Mae and Freddie Mac Mortgage Corporations by the US Treasury Department in 2008

Modern Russian interpretation

New definition of nationalization - velvet reprivatization- was first used by the head of Finansgroup Oleg Shvartsman in an interview with the Kommersant newspaper. In an article entitled “For us, the party is personified by the power bloc headed by Igor Ivanovich Sechin,” he said that under the guise of the government administration, there is a structure whose goal is to seize profitable enterprises from their owners by legal or other methods.

see also

• Secularization is the nationalization of church property.

Write a review on the article "Nationalization"

Notes

Literature

• Blyumin I. G. Capitalist nationalization of industry in the interests of monopoly capital // Criticism of bourgeois political economy: In 3 volumes. - M .: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1962. - T. II. Criticism of modern English and American political economy. - S. 137-145. - 519 p. - 3,200 copies.

An excerpt characterizing Nationalization

- Andrey lies? He is sick? - Natasha asked with frightened fixed eyes looking at her friend.
- No, on the contrary - on the contrary, a cheerful face, and he turned to me - and at the moment she spoke, it seemed to her that she saw what she was saying.
- Well, then, Sonya? ...
- Here I did not consider something blue and red ...
– Sonya! when will he return? When I see him! My God, how I’m afraid for him and for myself, and I’m scared for everything ... - Natasha spoke, and without answering a word to Sonya’s consolations, she lay down in bed and long after the candle was put out, with open eyes, lay motionless on the bed and looked at the frosty, moonlight through the frozen windows.

Soon after Christmas, Nikolai announced to his mother his love for Sonya and his firm decision to marry her. The countess, who had long noticed what was happening between Sonya and Nikolai, and was expecting this explanation, silently listened to his words and told her son that he could marry whomever he wanted; but that neither she nor his father would give him blessings for such a marriage. For the first time, Nikolai felt that his mother was unhappy with him, that despite all her love for him, she would not give in to him. She, coldly and without looking at her son, sent for her husband; and when he arrived, the countess wanted to briefly and coldly tell him what was the matter in the presence of Nikolai, but she could not stand it: she burst into tears of annoyance and left the room. The old count began to hesitantly admonish Nicholas and ask him to abandon his intention. Nicholas replied that he could not change his word, and his father, sighing and obviously embarrassed, very soon interrupted his speech and went to the countess. In all clashes with his son, the count did not leave the consciousness of his guilt before him for upsetting affairs, and therefore he could not be angry with his son for refusing to marry a rich bride and for choosing Sonya without a dowry - he only on this occasion more vividly recalled that, if things had not been upset, it was impossible for Nikolai to wish for a better wife than Sonya; and that only he and his Mitenka and his irresistible habits are guilty of the disorder of affairs.
The father and mother no longer talked about this matter with their son; but a few days after that, the countess called Sonya to her and with cruelty, which neither one nor the other expected, the countess reproached her niece for luring her son and for ingratitude. Sonya, silently with lowered eyes, listened to the cruel words of the countess and did not understand what was required of her. She was ready to sacrifice everything for her benefactors. The thought of self-sacrifice was her favorite thought; but in this case, she could not understand to whom and what she should sacrifice. She could not help but love the countess and the entire Rostov family, but she could not help but love Nikolai and not know that his happiness depended on this love. She was silent and sad, and did not answer. Nikolai could not, as it seemed to him, endure this situation any longer and went to explain himself to his mother. Nicholas then begged his mother to forgive him and Sonya and agree to their marriage, then threatened his mother that if Sonya was persecuted, he would immediately marry her secretly.
The countess, with a coldness that her son had never seen, answered him that he was of age, that Prince Andrei was marrying without the consent of his father, and that he could do the same, but that she would never recognize this intriguer as her daughter.

Nationalization is the transfer of property to state ownership. It is the reverse process of privatization. In historical retrospect, there was both paid and free privatization.

• the nationalization of land, real estate, production facilities and financial institutions in Soviet Russia by the power of the Bolsheviks;
• nationalization of oil companies in Mexico (1938) and Venezuela (1976);
• nationalization of the Suez Canal by the Egyptian authorities (1956);
• nationalization of large mortgage corporations by the US Treasury (2008).

Nationalization can mediate:

• redemption of property under a civil contract;
• expropriation - compulsory alienation, which can be:

royalty-free();

payable().

Nationalization in Russia

The Civil Code mentions nationalization in the context of grounds for the forced termination of private property rights. It has been established that nationalization is the conversion to state ownership of property owned by private individuals. The mechanism of nationalization must be issued by a federal normative act at the level of law.

In the event that an order terminating the property comes into force, the state undertakes to compensate the former owner for the real value of the property previously owned by him and other losses. Dispute resolution in this regard is within the jurisdiction of the courts. Nationalization and other legal methods of seizure of property in favor of the state in Russia

• paid withdrawal of a land plot for state needs (for example, for laying a road, building social facilities);
• requisition - paid seizure of property that the state or municipality needed in emergency circumstances (for example, an accident, epidemic, natural disaster);
• confiscation - gratuitous seizure of customs confiscation; object or instrument of administrative tort; property of persons who have committed certain types of acquisitive crimes.

Stay up to date with all important United Traders events - subscribe to our

Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. D.N. Ushakov

nationalization

nationalizations, (fr. nationalization) (polit.).

Seizure of property from private property and its conversion into state ownership. Nationalization of the land. Nationalization of factories and plants.

Organization of something. on a national basis, by the forces of a given nationality (new). nationalization of the apparatus. Nationalization of the press. School nationalization.

Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova.

nationalization

Transfer from private ownership to state ownership of enterprises and entire sectors of the economy, land, banks, residential and public buildings.

Organization of something. on a national basis.

New explanatory and derivational dictionary of the Russian language, T. F. Efremova.

nationalization

and. Transfer from private ownership to the ownership of the state or society of enterprises, banks, industries, etc.

Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998

nationalization

the transition of private enterprises and sectors of the economy to state ownership.

Big Law Dictionary

nationalization

a measure of the socio-economic policy of the state, by virtue of which property in private ownership is transferred to the ownership of the state; one of the grounds for termination of ownership. The state's right to N. private property, including that owned by foreigners, is an indisputable prerogative of a sovereign state. In democratic states, nationalization is carried out only on the basis of the law and subject to adequate compensation to the owner of the property being nationalized.

Nationalization

transition from private ownership to state ownership of land, industry, transport, communications, banks, etc. N. has a different socio-economic and political content, depending on who, in the interests of which class and in what historical epoch it is carried out. In the feudal era, nationalization served to centralize power in the struggle against individual feudal lords, to strengthen the monarchy, and to concentrate the main wealth, land, in the hands of the state. In the course of bourgeois revolutions, the nationalization of the lands contributed to the elimination of the economic base of feudalism and the acceleration of capitalist development. In the 2nd half of the 19th century. The rapid development of capitalist productive forces has led individual spheres and branches of the economy to outgrow the scope of private property, which has led in a number of countries to the development of means of communication and means of communication in the interests of developing the economy or for political (military-strategic) and fiscal purposes. By its nature, innovation under capitalism can be both progressive and reactionary, as F. Engels pointed out. Only that innovation is progressive that is caused by the needs of the development of productive forces, “... since only in the case when the means of production or communication really outgrow the control of joint-stock companies, when their nationalization becomes economically inevitable, only then - even if it is made by the modern state - will it be economic progress, a new step towards society itself taking all the productive forces into its possession" (K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., v. 20, p. 289, note). Engels emphasized that nationalism under capitalism does not abolish the capitalist character of the productive forces and production relations, for the bourgeois state “... is in its very essence a capitalist machine, a state of capitalists, an ideal total capitalist” (ibid., p. 290). However, already at that time he showed that the innovation of large enterprises was evidence that the bourgeoisie was useless for the management of modern productive forces.

The transition from capitalism to socialism provides for the elimination of private capitalist property and the establishment of public ownership of the means of production. An obligatory prerequisite for carrying out socialist nationalism is the victory of the socialist revolution and the establishment of the power of the working class and the working peasantry. Theoretically, the need for socialist nationalism is deeply substantiated in the works of K. Marx, F. Engels, and V. I. Lenin; it is developed in relation to the modern era in the program documents of the CPSU and communist and workers’ parties; it is confirmed by the experience of socialist construction in the USSR and other socialist countries. After the victory of the socialist revolution, ≈ wrote Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto, ≈ “the proletariat uses its political dominance to wrest all capital from the bourgeoisie step by step, to centralize all the instruments of production in the hands of the state, i.e., the proletariat organized as the ruling class, and to increase the sum of productive forces as quickly as possible” (ibid., vol. 4, p. 446).

When capitalist property is liquidated, the proletarian state allows compensation to be paid to the owners of the nationalized means of production. Marx and Engels pointed out that, under certain conditions, redemption is not only possible, but expedient. Scientific communism considers the very fact of the transfer of the means of production to public ownership as a regularity of the socialist revolution, and the forms and methods of this transition depend on specific conditions. This important position was fully shared by VI Lenin. He believed that the transformation of bourgeois private property into socialist public property could be carried out in a peaceful way, without depriving the bourgeoisie of all property rights and involving it in the service of the state of workers and peasants. V. I. Lenin pointed out that during the period of revolution the resistance of the capitalists could be broken by nationalizing the property of several hundred, at most one or two thousand millionaires. “Even this handful of rich people need not be deprived of ‘‘all’’ of their property rights; they can be left with property in many consumer goods and property in a well-known, modest income” (Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 32, p. 122).

Marxism-Leninism strictly distinguishes between large and small private ownership of the means of production. If large-scale capitalist property, which has a non-labor character, is subject to nationalization in the course of socio-economic transformations, then the small property of peasants, handicraftsmen, and artisans is not nationalized, but socialized in the process of cooperation. Marxism not only substantiated the regularity of the liquidation of capitalist ownership of the means of production and its replacement by social property, but also indicated the ways of carrying out this revolutionary upheaval in socio-economic relations. Marx and Engels took into account that private property cannot be abolished all at once, that the expropriation of expropriators is not a one-time act.

Lenin, working out the program questions of the socialist revolution in the new historical conditions, determined the main ways and methods of the socialist socialization of the means of production: the ownership of large and medium capitalists and the gradual transformation of the private property of the petty bourgeoisie into public property. The modernization of the main means of production carried out by the proletarian state is the most important revolutionary measure that brings production relations into line with the level and nature of the development of the productive forces. It transfers the means of production into the hands of the true owners, the working people, and ensures their real emancipation from exploitation. Using nationalism, the working class seizes the production apparatus, gains commanding positions, deprives the bourgeoisie and landowners of the economic base of their dominance, and carries out radical transformations of the socioeconomic structure of society. The proletarian state first of all wins key positions in the economy by means of nationalization of the most important branches of the economy.

The most important role in the creation of socialist property is played by the nationalization of banks, without which it is impossible to deprive the bourgeoisie of its economic might and organize socialist production and distribution of products according to a single plan. The regulation of foreign trade and the establishment of a monopoly of foreign trade enable the socialist state to protect itself from the penetration of foreign capital and its economic subversion, and to strengthen its independence and self-sufficiency. An important place is occupied by the nationalization of the land, which eliminates the remnants of feudal and capitalist relations in agriculture and creates great opportunities for the development of socialist agriculture on the basis of peasant cooperatives. The nationalization of industry, transport, and communications is a necessary measure without which it is impossible to create the material base of a socialist economy. The nationalization of the most important branches of the national economy lays the foundation for the economic independence of the socialist state and accelerates its socioeconomic development.

Nationalization in Soviet Russia. After the victory of the October Revolution of 1917, the working class set about implementing socialist transformations. The N. of the Earth and its subsoil, waters and forests was proclaimed by the Decree on Land. Private ownership of land was abolished. The land is declared state (public) property. 150 million hectares were transferred to the use of the peasants free of charge. The socialist nationalization of the land was carried out in the interests of the working and exploited masses of the countryside. It became the economic basis for the cooperation of peasant farms (see Collectivization of agriculture). The socialist nationalization of the land "... ensured the completion of the bourgeois-democratic revolution... moreover... gave the proletarian state the greatest opportunity for the transition to socialism in agriculture" (V. I. Lenin, Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 37, p. 327). It was of great importance not only for the period of building socialism, but also for the further development of Soviet society, for solving contemporary problems of agriculture.

The most important event was the N. banks, which began with the acquisition of the State Bank of Russia and the establishment of control over private banks. Lenin saw in such control only a transitional form to N., which would enable the working people to master the management of finances for socialist construction. However, as a result of the sabotage of the bankers, the Soviet government was forced to speed up the N. banks. Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of December 14 (27), 1917, private commercial banks were nationalized. A state monopoly on banking was established. By a decree of the Council of People's Commissars of January 23 (February 5), 1918, their capital was transferred in full and free of charge to the State Bank. The merger of the nationalized private banks with the State Bank into a single People's Bank of the RSFSR was completed by 1920. Such links in the banking system of tsarist Russia as mortgage banks, mutual credit societies, and others were liquidated. N. banks made it easier for the Soviet state to fight famine and ruin. In the process of N., a socialist banking system began to be created (see Banks).

N. banks was the most important step in the preparation of N. industry. In the hands of the state was a powerful lever of influence on the development of industry, transport, and other branches of the economy. On November 14 (27), 1917, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars issued the Regulations on Workers' Control, which was a preparatory measure for the nationalization of industry, which had gone through several stages.

The first stage (November 1917 ≈ February 1918) was characterized by a rapid pace, the initiative of local authorities in carrying out the N. The first was nationalized on November 17 (30), 1917, the factory of the association of the Likinskaya manufactory of A. V. Smirnov (Vladimir province). In all, from November 1917 to March 1918, according to the industrial and occupational census of 1918, 836 industrial enterprises were nationalized. During this period, known as the "Red Guards attack on capital", the pace of alienation of factories and factories overtook the pace of establishing management of nationalized enterprises.

During the second stage of nationalism (March–June 1918), the center of gravity of the Party’s economic and political work was shifted from expropriating the bourgeoisie to consolidating the positions it had won, establishing accounting and control, and organizing the management of nationalized industry. A specific feature of this stage of nationalization was the socialization of entire branches of industry and the creation of conditions for the nationalization of all large-scale industry. On May 2, 1918, the Council of People's Commissars adopted a decree on the nationalization of the sugar industry, and on June 20, on the oil industry. In May 1918, a conference of representatives of the nationalized machine-building plants, in which Lenin participated, adopted a decision on the nationalization of transport machine-building plants. In total, 1222 industrial enterprises were nationalized during this period.

The third stage of nationalization lasted from June 1918 (decree of June 28) to June 1919. It was characterized by the strengthening of the organizing and leading role of the Soviet state and its economic bodies in carrying out socialist nationalism. By the autumn of 1918, 9,542 enterprises were concentrated in the hands of the state. All major capitalist ownership of the means of production was nationalized by confiscation without compensation. Since the summer of 1919, the rate of N. has increased dramatically. Not only large, but also medium-sized and most of the small industrial establishments passed to the state. The acceleration of the process of nationalization was caused by the need to mobilize all the available productive resources during the Civil War of 1918–20. In the territories liberated from counter-revolutionary forces and interventionists, the operation of laws related to N.

N. the main means of transport was implemented in a short time 1917-18. This was facilitated by a high level of concentration of capital and the predominance of state (state) railways. In January 1918, the N. sea and river transport was completed; in the fall of 1918 private railroads were nationalized.

N. initiated the creation of a socialist structure in the economy of the Soviet country, the establishment of socialist production relations, and contributed to the formation of a system for the planned development of the national economy. Along with the monopoly of foreign trade and the annulment of foreign loans, it laid the foundation for the economic independence of the USSR.

Nationalization in foreign socialist countries has features determined both by the international position of these countries and by the specifics of the transition to socialism, the alignment of class forces, and historical and economic features. In these countries (with the exception of the Mongolian People's Republic), due to a long tradition and deep attachment of the peasants to private ownership of land, the sale of land has been carried out only partially. The land of the landlords and large landowners confiscated in the course of the agrarian reforms was for the most part transferred to the ownership of working peasants (see Land Confiscation).

The N. of banks was carried out taking into account the experience of the USSR. In most countries, it took place in two stages. At the first stage, when democratic, anti-imperialist and anti-feudal transformations were carried out, banks of emission and large commercial banks belonging to the bourgeoisie associated with foreign capital were nationalized. All other credit institutions were taken under the control of the state issuing banks. At the second stage, the stage of socialist transformations, the nationalization of banks was completed and the state monopoly of banking was established. In Bulgaria in 1946 all foreign and private banks belonging to the bourgeoisie collaborating with the fascists were nationalized, and in December 1947 all private banks were nationalized. In Hungary, a bank of issue was nationalized in 1945 and control over private banks was introduced; in 1948, their nationalization was completed. In Rumania the Bank of Issue was nationalized in 1946 and control was introduced over more than 450 private banks and banking offices, which were nationalized in 1948. After the formation of the GDR, private banks continued to operate under the control of the people's power. With the transition to the construction of socialism during the period 1952-53 they were nationalized. In Poland, during the period of fascist occupation, most banks ceased their activities. By a decree of October 25, 1948, all private credit institutions were liquidated and a state monopoly on banking was established. In Czechoslovakia, the nationalization of banks was implemented in 1945. In Yugoslavia, banks belonging to the fascist occupiers and collaborators were nationalized in 1944, and in 1945 all private commercial banks were nationalized. In China, most of the banks were nationalized immediately after the establishment of people's power, some small private banks were transformed into mixed public-private banks, which operate under the control of the People's Bank of China. In Cuba, all private banks in the country, including branches of the largest American banks, were nationalized immediately after the establishment of people's power (1960). In the DRV, the state banking system began to be created during the period of the anti-imperialist revolution, when foreign banks began to cease their activities. The peculiarity of N. banks in a number of countries (in particular, in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania) was that the owners of banks who supported the measures of the people's power received partial compensation in the form of a buyout of shares by the people's state.

In industry, in most countries the enterprises that were owned by the monopolies of Germany and its allies, collaborators, were first of all nationalized. As a result, the economic power of big capital was largely undermined, which facilitated the preparation and implementation of the further socialization of the means of production. As a result of the nationalization of industry, the economic gains of the working people made in 1944–45 during the period of liberation were consolidated by law. The big industrial bourgeoisie lost its means of production. The pace of nationalization of industry in individual socialist countries varied. In contrast to the USSR, where large-scale and medium-sized industries were nationalized almost simultaneously, nationalization in foreign socialist countries was carried out gradually, as a rule, in stages, with wider use of workers' control, state capitalism, and other transitional forms. N. laws in the European socialist countries provided for the payment of certain compensation to the owners of enterprises.

Thanks to N., a socialist structure was created, which became dominant in the national economy.

Nationalization in the developed capitalist countries≈ one of the manifestations of state-monopoly capitalism. It is caused by a number of reasons - the concentration of production, the pressure of the working masses, etc. The strengthening of state monopoly capitalism in connection with the general crisis of capitalism activates the intervention of the bourgeois state in the process of reproduction in the interests of the monopolies and the financial oligarchy. First of all, branches of the military industry, the most important branches for the national economy, as well as branches that require huge capital investments for a long period (fuel and energy, including nuclear power, transport, and other branches of infrastructure) are nationalized. As a rule, the former owners of enterprises are paid significant compensation, sometimes exceeding the value of the property being nationalized. Bourgeois nationalism does not change the essence of the capitalist system, because it does not turn the nationalized means of production into public property, and therefore does not ensure the planned development of the national economy and does not change the nature of the distribution of the product. Often it is a way of shifting the burden of financing capital-intensive and inefficient industries and industries onto the shoulders of the working masses.

Communist parties proceed from the possibility of using nationalism under certain conditions to limit the omnipotence of the monopolies and improve the conditions of the working people, to exercise democratic control over the nationalized sectors of production and to democratize their management. In the 50≈60s. The communist parties of the capitalist countries have drawn up reform programs, an important component of which was the demand for democratic nationalism. The consistent implementation of these programs through class struggle is designed to undermine the power of capital and create the prerequisites for socialist transformations.

The theoretical basis of land rent under capitalism was K. Marx's doctrine of land rent. Under capitalism, private landed property of large landowners hinders rational management of the economy, diverts from production a significant part of the social product, which comes to them in the form of rent, and lowers the average rate of profit. Marx showed that under capitalism, only the right to own land, that is, the right to receive land rent, is transferred to the state through nationalism. Although under capitalism the bourgeoisie gains first and foremost from land acquisition, the proletariat is also interested in it, since it destroys the remnants of feudalism and accelerates the development of capitalism in agriculture with all its inherent contradictions. Land reform under capitalism sets the task of strengthening the positions of the bourgeoisie and has the character of a bourgeois reform. However, the bourgeoisie in no country has dared to sell the land, because it owns a large part of the land and is afraid of any encroachment on it.

V. I. Lenin established that land acquisition is possible only in a young bourgeois state, since with the development of capitalism, and especially in the era of imperialism, the interests of the financial bourgeoisie and the big landowners intertwine and coalesce. Developing the Marxist theory of the agrarian question, Lenin emphasized that land acquisition in the course of the bourgeois revolution is a consistent democratic measure that finally destroys the remnants of feudal relations and creates broad opportunities for the development of the productive forces in agriculture. However, depending on the degree of development of capitalism in agriculture, the correlation of class forces, and the existence of certain traditions of private ownership of land, the terms and forms of land acquisition may differ significantly in different countries.

N. banks are carried out as part of a general set of measures for state-monopoly regulation of the economy. It is partial, does not affect the basic principles of the organization of credit systems and does not entail significant changes in their policy, structure, nature of relations with other credit institutions. Large shareholders closely associated with financial capital remain on the boards of directors and in senior positions. As a rule, only issuing banks are nationalized; commercial banks, with rare exceptions, remain in the private sector. Thus, in Great Britain, when the Bank of England was nationalized in 1946, commercial banks were not nationalized. In France, which has the most developed public sector in the banking system, in 1945, along with the Bank of France, only 4 commercial banks out of more than 300 were nationalized.

N. of private enterprises was practiced by many states as early as the 19th century. The nationalization of individual industrial enterprises was carried out in Great Britain, France, Belgium, and other capitalist states in the 1920s and 1930s. The 20th century was carried out without the participation of the working class and was accompanied by the state buying out the means of production from the bourgeoisie. Such N., of course, did not affect capitalist production relations.

The nationalization of industry was originally of a somewhat different character in a number of Western European countries after the end of World War II (1939–45). In the political and economic situation then prevailing, the working class became the most important driving force of nationalism. In 1944–46, a number of branches of production were carried out in France. The communists, who were part of the government, sought to carry it out in the interests of the working people. In December 1944, the first step along this path was taken - the mines of the largest coal basin in the departments of Nord and Pas de Calais were nationalized. In January 1945, Renault car factories were confiscated, the owner of which actively collaborated with the Nazis during the years of occupation. In March 1945, the N. of the Gnome and Ron aircraft engine plants was carried out. In 1946, all large enterprises for the production of electricity and gas were nationalized in France, and the nationalization of the coal industry was completed. Trade unions gained access to the administrative councils of nationalized enterprises. N. made possible the improvement of working conditions, a partial increase in wages.

A sharp struggle unfolded after the war around the N. industry in Austria. As a result of the defeat of fascist Germany, the labor movement rose here. Austrian workers in mid-1945 demanded the confiscation of the property of war criminals, N. industry, and banks. Carried out in accordance with the laws of June 26, 1946 and March 26, 1947, the National Revolution, although it created fairly extensive state-capitalist property, did not affect many of the key positions of the Austrian monopolies and foreign capital.

The nationalization in Great Britain, carried out by the Labor government in 1945-51, embraced the coal, energy, and gas industries, communications enterprises, transport (railroads, almost all of them by air, partly by rivers, and automobiles), and part of the metallurgical enterprises. The owners of the nationalized enterprises received significant compensation.

In the developed capitalist countries, railways are the most affected by railways. and air, to a small extent - sea, river and road transport. N. transport is widespread in Western Europe and Japan, less than ≈ in North America (USA, Canada). Main railway transport everywhere, except for the USA and Canada, is owned mainly by national companies (state or mixed). In the USA, everything is railway. companies are private; in Canada, about half of the main network is owned by a state-owned national company, which combines a number of railways built by the state. In Japan and in some Western European countries, only local railways are privately owned. In all developed capitalist countries (except the United States, where all airlines are private), most of the air transport is concentrated in the hands of large national companies (state-owned, rarely mixed). N. slightly affected sea and river transport, but inland waterways, river and sea ports, as a rule, belong to the state or local authorities. State enterprises (national companies) of road freight transport exist in a few countries of developed capitalism (Great Britain, the Netherlands). But even there they cover only a small part of the fleet of trucks and transportation. Bus transport has been nationalized much more widely. The main bus companies in capitalist countries other than the US are owned by the state or municipalities. Most of the pipeline network in the developed capitalist countries is owned by private companies. State-owned pipelines in Western Europe are of strategic importance, serving NATO bases.

Nationalization in developing countries directed, as a rule, against foreign monopolies and the policy of neo-colonialism. As a result of the nationalization of industrial and other enterprises, a state sector is being created, which plays an important role in the formation and development of the national economy and in strengthening independence. N. in these countries is carried out, as a rule, with the provision of compensation to the former owners. The nationalization of banks makes it possible for young states to create a national credit system and free themselves from the pressure of foreign capital. In most of these countries, after gaining independence, state issuing banks were created to regulate the circulation of money and implement the government's policy in the field of credit. As economic development proceeds in a number of countries, not only foreign, but also domestic private banks and other credit institutions are being nationalized. Thus, for example, in Syria the nationalization of private banks was carried out from 1961 to 1963; in Burma, in 1963; In the course of the agrarian reforms carried out here, part of the land was transferred to the state sector, however, the wide real estate of the land is hindered by landownership. Transportation in the developing countries is an important means of combating the dominance of foreign capital, which in the past owned the main facilities and means of transport. In these countries, the N. transport contributes to the development of the public sector, the achievement of economic independence.

Lit.: K. Marx and F. Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 4; Engels F., Principles of Communism, ibid.; Marx K., Nationalization of the land, ibid., vol. 18; Lenin, V.I., The Agrarian Program of Social Democracy in the First Russian Revolution of 1905-1907, Poln. coll. soch., 5th ed., v. 16; his own, Impending catastrophe and how to deal with it, ibid., vol. 34; his, Report on the land of October 26 (November 8), ibid., vol. 35; his, Speech on the nationalization of banks at a meeting of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on December 14 (27), 1917, ibid., vol. 35; his own, Theses of banking policy, ibid., vol. 36; his own, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky, ibid., vol. 37; Fundamentals of the land legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics, Vedomosti of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, 1968, ╧ 51, p. 485; Collection of documents on the land legislation of the USSR and the RSFSR. 1917≈1954, M., 1954: Nationalization of industry in the USSR. Sat. dok-tov and mat-lov, M., 1954; Vinogradov V. A., Questions of the theory and practice of the socialist nationalization of industry, M., 1965; Atlas M. S., Nationalization of banks in the USSR, M., 1948; her, Development of the banking systems of the countries of socialism, M., 1967; Gindin A.M., How the Bolsheviks took possession of the State Bank, M., 1961; his, How the Bolsheviks nationalized private banks, M., 1962; Dyachenko V.P., Soviet finance in the first phase of the development of a socialist state, part 1, M., 1947; Yavorsky V., Credit system of people's Poland, trans. from Polish., M., 1961; Kochetkovskaya E., Nationalization of land in the USSR, 2nd ed., [M.], 1952; Turubiner A. M., The right of state ownership of land in the Soviet Union, M., 1958; Yakovets Yu. V., Theory and practice of the socialist socialization of the land, M., 1960; Lenin's Decree "On the Land" and Modernity, M., 1970; Ardaev G. B., Nationalization in Austria, M., 1960; State property in the countries of Western Europe, M., 1961; Inozemtsev N. N., Modern capitalism: new phenomena and contradictions, M., 1972; State property and anti-monopoly struggle in the countries of developed capitalism, M., 1973; Krasavina LN, New phenomena in the monetary system of capitalism. On the material of France, M., 1971; Political economy of modern monopoly capitalism, vol. 1≈2, M., 1971; Selikhov E. I., International banks and banking groups, [M., 1973]; Transport system of the world, M., 1971; Rozin M. S., Vasilevsky L. I., Volf M. B., Geography of the World Economy (Leading Industries), M., 1971 (Ch. "Transport").

G. B. Ardaev, M. S. Atlas, V. Z. Drobizhev, L. I. Vasilevsky, N. K. Figurovskaya, O. M. Shelkov.

Wikipedia

Nationalization

Nationalization- transfer of land, industrial enterprises, banks, transport or other property belonging to private individuals to the ownership of the state. Nationalization can be carried out through gratuitous expropriation - confiscation, as well as through full or partial redemption - requisition.

In the Russian Federation, according to Art. 235 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, nationalization must be carried out in accordance with the procedure established by federal law. Since such a law has not yet been adopted, nationalization in Russia cannot be carried out. However, in practice this applies only to gratuitous nationalization. Full or partial redemption by the state is quite possible on the basis of ordinary purchase / sale agreements.

A number of reference publications (for example, The Newest Encyclopedic Dictionary. ISBN 978-5-271-08330-3) also indicate that the differences in nationalization depend on what historical era, by whom and in the interests of which classes it was carried out.

Examples of the use of the word nationalization in the literature.

In addition, the confiscation of landed estates was supposed, nationalization of all lands in the country, the transfer of the right to dispose of the land to the local Soviets of laborers' and peasants' deputies, the allocation of Soviets of laborers' deputies.

After nationalization enterprises, on the authority of workers and employees, he goes to Moscow to petition for the start-up of factories and achieves success.

Created in the summer of 1917, the Union of Moscow Janitors from morning till evening was engaged in a mass of the most diverse and most urgent matters: actively participated in municipalizations and nationalizations households, collecting rent from tenants, which partially went to the maintenance of the Union, bombarded the Council of Deputies with petitions for the issuance of weapons to the janitors and an increase in their rations.

A favorite method of such glossing over is the reference to nationalization land and the growth of cooperation, which supposedly in themselves are unshakable strongholds of socialism in the countryside.

good faith conduct nationalization Soviet, as well as party, professional and cooperative apparatuses, with actual consideration of class and international relations.

Do you find in these actions themselves similarities with the actions of the leaders of Georgia and Moldova, who announced nationalization military property on the territory of the republics?

In England, for example, land-based enslavement prevails, and the question nationalization land is only to tighten the screw of the tax, so that the screw of land enslavement is loosened.

Nationalizations along with banks, loan and savings banks, insurance companies, pawnshops and safes of private individuals are subject.

Nationalization land in the Soviet state, even on paper, is far from being carried out in full, because no law has so far formulated with sufficient accuracy the ownership of land by the state, and the latest drafts of the basic principles of land use go along the line of reducing and narrowing the concept of state ownership of land.

It is necessary that our requirements - nationalization mines, factories and plants, the division of land among the poorest peasants - found their way to the heart of every worker, every dock worker, every farm laborer.

Stalin saw one way out and carried it out radically: the collectivization of peasant property and nationalization peasant labor.

At a meeting chaired by Lenin, Stalin, speaking in a debate on the agrarian question, did not support either Lenin's concept nationalization land, nor the Menshevik plan for its municipalization, but spoke in favor of the confiscation of the landlords' lands and their distribution among the peasants.

In London, ordinary Englishmen, absorbed in strikes, economic problems, questions nationalization, municipalities, etc.

Lozovsky, who defended the slogan nationalization individual branches of industry: Neither nationalization for the capitalist countries, nor the transfer from private capitalists to the hands of the state, nor the slogan of workers' control, nor this entire complex of state-capitalist slogans are acceptable from the point of view of the Comintern.

We have managed by a correct policy to conduct matters in such a way that the greatest intrusion into the field of private property, namely nationalization industry, was carried out as a defensive measure in the war against intervention, i.