Nationalizing all banks seems like the worst option of them all. There is no precedent in history of a society built around government owned banks that doesn’t include oppression and failure.
We can quibble about fiat/currency vs banking, but technically the government owns all money.
Granted, retail and last-mile banking seems a poor fit for government control.
Although from memory Japan offers retail banking services through their postal service? (for historical quirk reasons, see: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Post_Bank )
https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/emergency-banki...
Title 2 above seems to describe a government appointed regulator in case of failure.
Receivership is different from nationalisation. It’s aimed at winding down or disposing of the asset on a short timeline. For comparison, we’re FTX in receivership, its assets would be controlled by a third party whose job would be to protect it for users’ benefit.