On Sep 29, 2008, at 7:28 PM, James Heartfield wrote:
> Was it Shane who wrote
>
> "Revolutionary socialists have always, always, always advocated
> nationalization of the banks and democratic accountability of the
> Central Bank." ?
>
> But nationalisation is by no means incommensurate with capitalist
> rationalisation.
>
Nowhere did I say it was a "socialist" measure. In Trotsky's
terminology, it was a *transitional* demand. What I said is:
"...That is what should be meant by fundamental change in the monetary
system..isn't it time for fundamental change?" and in another posting
on the same thread " [nationalization plus elimination of fractional-
reserve banking] is vital to any real economic planning and supremely
so to socialist economic planning."
>
> ...Shane hedges the point by saying that the banks, once
> nationalised, must be under democratic control...
I didn't say democratic *control*--I said democratic *accountability*. Popular election and recall of central-bank governors might or might not be a good idea under some stage of a transition to communism, but democratic *accountability* (accountability to an elected parliament or soviet) can be either "bourgeois democratic" or "worker democratic." In the present social conjuncture that means radicals should propose "bourgeois democratic" accountability as long as that is the form of democracy understood as such by the people.
Shane Mage
"Thunderbolt steers all things...it consents and does not consent to be called Zeus."
Herakleitos of Ephesos