UK Politics

Thatcher's funeral

Published 15 July 2008

Playwright Ed Waugh, who co-wrote Maggie's End, attacks the news of a state funeral for Conservative ex-PM Margaret Thatcher as "an unforgiveable betrayal" of Labour voters who suffered under her rule

Gordon Brown’s announcement that he and his acolytes have drawn up a £3m plan to give Margaret Thatcher a state funeral is a disgrace and an unforgivable betrayal of the millions of Labour and trade union people who have constantly cast their votes for the party.

Thatcher’s elevation to prime minister in 1979 unleashed an unprecedented attack on the living standards and democratic rights of working people in this country; market forces guided every aspect of British life, lining the pockets of her cronies under the guise of “rolling back the frontiers of the state”.

Her centralised government completely undermined UK manufacturing, destroyed jobs and local democracy and decimated communities. In the pursuit of greed, state assets were privatised, trade union activities were outlawed and council houses sold off. Even the lives of older people in care homes were auctioned off to the highest bidder.

November 22, 1990, will forever be etched in the collective memory of working people - it was the day a tearful Thatcher left Downing Street having been dumped by her own party.

History, they say, is written by the victors and hence Sir Geoffrey Howe gets the credit for bringing her down by saying something nasty about her European policy. Rubbish!

The millions of us who were on the extra-parliamentary front line campaigning against the iniquitous policies of the Conservatives throughout the 1980s, know that the more astute sections of her party realised after the selfless miners strike of 1984/85, the heroic battle of Liverpool City Council and the fortitudinous struggle of the anti-poll tax campaign she was a lame duck head of state. Howe’s historical role was merely to administer the knife in her back. Give him his due, he did it beautifully.

The scars of Thatcher’s decade still run deep and her name is often followed by the sound of spit hitting the floor, especially in the major cities of the UK.

Having experienced eleven years of New Labour attacks on the rights of working people, the creeping privatisation of education and health, and a reactionary foreign policy, it comes as no surprise that the New Labour leaders are keen to give their mentor a state funeral.

After all, Thatcher was hardly an ogre to Tony and Cherie Blair (they attended her 80th birthday party) and Gordon Brown, who last September invited Thatcher for tea at 10 Downing Street.

Of course this little state funeral arrangement had been discussed at the top level of New Labour for a few years now but brushed under the carpet and denied when raised by concerned MPs like Ronnie Campbell.

Mr Campbell, a former miner, was last year prevented from putting forward an Early Day Motion asking the government to publicly confirm that they would “never commemorate her cruel and divisive reign in this manner".

It was two years ago that I first heard a report at around 2am on Radio 5 that New Labour were considering giving Thatcher a state funeral. I couldn’t believe my ears. The report was subsequently dropped but amid my anger I told my writing partner, Trevor Wood. We wondered what the consequences would be if New Labour were determined to give her a state funeral.

The end result of that initial conversation was our play, Maggie's End, which premiered at the Gala theatre in Durham last October and attracted nearly 2,000 people.

The play, which explored the repercussions of such a crass betrayal across the nation and in one particular family, foresaw spontaneous and mass popular demonstrations against the funeral.

While mainly ignored by the London-centric theatre critics, Maggie’s End attracted a great deal of interest in the local media, though ironically many people believed that the initial premise was too far-fetched!

Now that it has become a reality, this initial reaction reflects just how out of touch New Labour’s leaders are with ordinary people, especially as they do not realise their misguided state funeral proposal will divide the country and re-open the social and political sores of the 1980s.

It seriously raises the question whether New Labour can now legitimately claim any semblance of representing working people.

Their embarrassment will be complete when a million people hit the streets of London to prevent the charade from going ahead.

The upshot of Maggie’s End, incidentally, sees the New Labour government arrest the socialist organisers of the state funeral protest under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Don’t bet against these traitors doing that, also!

For more information email Ed Waugh

Ed Waugh and Trevor Wood have: Dirty Dusting on at the Fortune Theatre, New Zealand, until July 26

Son of Samurai on at the Latitude Festival (July 18 and 19)

Waiting For Gateaux at Winchester Theatre Royal (July 22 and 26)

Post this article to

134 comments from readers

JAS55
15 July 2008 at 11:35

Load of rubbish. Thatcher rescued Uk from Union and Labour anti wealth creation suffocation. New Labour are worsethan old labour. who stole our pensions? Gordon!!

Viscount Firm
15 July 2008 at 11:39

By slaughtering a substantial number of Argentinians and IRA members she gave us back our national pride

djo635
15 July 2008 at 11:43

Can I ask you... how many elections did she lose? Because I do't think she ever did! She must have done something right because she kept on winning with bigger majorities than the lot weve got now! Does that not possibly make you think that she was a democratically elected leader who had the support of a majority of the population. Would you therefore not agree that you are a minority opinion?

I know it was tough at times under Thatcher. I grew up in Chesterfield in Northern England and I know all too well how hard it was to find work, how communities were damaged or destroyed but I also look at the progress that has been made since.

The country she inherited was all but dead, she breathed new life in to it. Today we see cities like birmingham and manchester booming, we see a stable and secure economy and consistent employment. That wasnt 'Blue' Labour that was Thatcher.

In my humble opinion as a 20 year old politics student at Birmingham Uni Thatcher did what needed to be done because no one else would do it. They were weak she wasnt.

If you get gangrene in your leg you cut it off. Its not nice but you do it. She cut our leg off because it was rotten and we are stronger for it. I am proud the government is affording her a state funeral, I admire leaders like her who are just that, leaders.

I am sick of sad old men moaning about how bad it was rather than just getting on with it. It was 20 years ago move on. She made this country what it is, for good and bad.

She is flawed of course she is and she made many mistaks but ultimately she is adored by many millions in this country, not just the ones 'she made rich' which is a flippant exaggeration but the ones she gave hope to.

Thatcher is the one of the greatest PMS we have ever had. War time leader, first female Prime Minister, revived a nation on its knees so why shouldn't she recieve a state funeral?

Anyway if the left hate her so much you can all watch in sick joy as she is put in the ground.

Robert Powell
15 July 2008 at 12:08

Thatcher's majority in 1979 was 43, in 1983 it was 144 and in 1987 it was 101.

Jonny Mac
15 July 2008 at 12:17

"the heroic battle of Liverpool City Council" - good one. Derek Hatton was such a hero, wasn't he.

"millions of us who were on the extra-parliamentary front line campaigning against the iniquitous policies of the Conservatives throughout the 1980s" - millions? You're hysterical. How could she hope to win three elections in a row if "millions" were actively campaigning against her? A few hundred SWP-ers, plus the poor old doomed miners, more like.

"History, they say, is written by the victors and hence Sir Geoffrey Howe gets the credit for bringing her down by saying something nasty about her European policy." - er, Ed mate, that sentence doesn't make any sense.

"Their embarrassment will be complete when a million people hit the streets of London to prevent the charade from going ahead." - no, really, stop it, you're killing me.

Oh, and well done NS. A semi-literate paint-by-numbers Trot attack piece headed "Thatcher's Funeral" when she hasn't yet died. Very classy.

Ned_Kelly
15 July 2008 at 12:18

And when they finally put you in the ground/

I'll stand on your grave and tramp the dirt down

(Elvis Costello)

JAS55
15 July 2008 at 12:21

Good old Ned, if you can't win the intelligent argument resort to abuse. Such fun.

Ned_Kelly
15 July 2008 at 12:52

eh, what are you jacka55, Thatcher's thought police? Come right ahead and arrest me, I didn't succumb to the torture.

anstruther
15 July 2008 at 13:12

And give her a nice marble tomb - in the shape of a public toilet.

Jonny Mac
15 July 2008 at 13:25

"And give her a nice marble tomb - in the shape of a public toilet."

Marvellous incisive stuff. .

Meanwhile, no doubt Ned and the delightful anstruther, as well as Mr Waugh, will be pious and tearful when that old dictator Castro finally dies.

Ned_Kelly
15 July 2008 at 13:44

johnnymac/jacka55 - poetry is wasted on you guys. What's Castro? He was more of a proper leader than Pinochet, Maggie's mate. (Inevitably, the next pro-Thatcher remark will compare one to a Nazi.)

Carl Jones
15 July 2008 at 14:25

I think there should be a massive state funeral with a nationwide procession so the public can show their appreciation by throwing anything they like at her and I do mean "anything".....the whole thing should be televised to a global audience, then she should lie in state....

....this would be good practice run for Blair`s funeral.LOL

Devonchap
15 July 2008 at 17:10

Cheer up|! Unless she pegs it in the next couple of years it won't be Labour organising it. You can feel happy and clean as Cameron et al declare a month of offical morning and renaming St Pauls St Margaret's Catherdral.

bethemedia
15 July 2008 at 18:08

Thatcher getting a state funeral. Ridiculous. She did nothing but damage to the UK. PROTEST PROTEST PROTEST

cat osb
15 July 2008 at 19:38

"A million people hit the streets of London to prevent this charade going ahead". Oh please Comrade, do get a grip; it's sad listening to you. Though I am not an admirer of Thatcher and believe that a state funeral would be over-kill, your sub-Spartesque sloganising is so moribund that it deserves a funeral of its own.

sylvia
16 July 2008 at 07:48

Coming from South Yorkshire I remember the absolute misery this horrible women and her government caused. She was a bad 'un. Can't wait to dance on her grave.

cat osb
16 July 2008 at 08:49

And this was Red Pepper on your play:

"With much of the material re-treading old ground, it’s just not especially innovative as a piece of satire".

bexdad
16 July 2008 at 09:38

And these were the other reviews

“Wonderful… as controversial as it is funny… go and see it” Daily Mirror

“A play which will resonate with many… some wonderful comic touches” Evening Chronicle

“A daring play… cannot fail to strike a chord with audiences” The Journal

“A play that’ll put the fire back in your belly. A darkly comic satire with great humour and equal measures of passion” Morning Star

“Fascinating… their best work yet” Shields Gazette

“Hard-hitting, thought-provoking and sure to be popular all over the country…top Marx” – The Northern Echo

“Powerful and fast-moving with plenty of laugh-out-loud moments” Durham Times

“Destined for a national stage” Sunderland Echo

Jonny Mac
16 July 2008 at 10:39

bexdad, you are "Ed" Waugh and I claim my five pounds.

PS Still chuckling, like cat osb, over your "million in the streets" line. Dave Spart indeed.

Winston101
16 July 2008 at 11:12

I've seen the play and it was fantastic! This corrupt, inept, "New" Labour governent would indeed resort to any measures to keep an iron grip on its power. Sadly some of the New Labour lackeys on this page fail to see that.

Good one Ed!

cat osb
16 July 2008 at 11:39

Winston101 you were lucky indeed to get a seat; I understand that for each performance there are a million people on the streets queuing for tickets such is its 'daring', 'hard-hitting' and 'laugh-out-loud' script. Social anarchy will surely ensue when the play fulfils its destiny on 'a national stage'.

Winston101
16 July 2008 at 11:57

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." - George Orwell (Animal Farm).

'Maggie's End' perfectly demonstrated there is no difference between any of the pro-capitalist parties!

LionelBear
16 July 2008 at 12:09

How about a special commemorative CD as well? The track-listing could include some of the following

Dick Gaughan ‘Ballad of 84′

Attila the Stockbrocker - Maggots 1 Thatcher 0

Gonna Laugh When Margaret Thatcher Dies - The Forlorn Hope

Pinochet and Margaret Thatcher - Deborah Holland

Margaret Thatcher, We Still Hate Her - Terry Edwards

Miss Maggie- Renaud

The Pogues, Birmingham Six

Heaven 17, ‘We don’t need this fascist groove thang’

Ewan MacColl, ‘What did you do in the strike Daddy?’

Magi Thatcher - Daffyd Iwan a’r Band

Thatcher F*cked the Kids - Frank Turner

Thatcher - Ad Nauseum

Still Hate Thatcher - The Horror

Still Fighting Thatcher - Hard Skin

Merry Christmas Maggie Thatcher - Billy Elliot Soundtrack (” we all =20

celebrate Christmas, cos’ it’s one day closer to your death”)

Angelic Upstarts-”Two Million Voices”

The Blow Monkeys-”She Was Only a Grocer’s Daughter” (whole album)

Billy Bragg-”Island of No Return”

Billy Bragg-”Waiting for the Great Leap Forward”

Kate Bush-”Army Dreamers”

Elvis Costello/Robert Wyatt-”Shipbuilding”

Elvis Costello-”Tramp the Dirt Down”‘

Crass-”How Does It Feel to be the Mother of 1000 Dead?”

Crass-”Sheep Farming in the Falklands”

Crass-”Yes Sir, I Will” (the whole album)

The English Beat-”Stand Down Margaret”

The Exploited-”Maggie”

Fine Young Cannibals-”Blue”

Hefner-”The Day That Thatcher Dies”

Iain Dale-”The Falklands Hymn”

Inner City Unit-”Blue Rinse Haggard Robot”

Iron Maiden-”Como Estais Amigos”

The Jam-”Town Called Malice”

Jethro Tull-”Hard Times”

Kitchens of Distinction-”Margaret’s Injection”

The Levellers-”Another Man’s Cause”

Kirsty MacColl-”Free World”

Christy Moore-”Taking Tea With Pinochet”

Morrissey-”Margaret on the Guillotine”

New Model Army-”The Spirit of the Falklands”

The Notsensibles-”I’m in Love with Margaret Thatcher”

Pink Floyd-”The Final Cut” (the whole album)

The Specials-”Ghost Town” and cover of ‘Maggie’s Farm’

Sting-”We Work the Black Seam”

The The, ‘Heartlands’ ‘The Beat(en) Generation’, ‘Armageddon days are here again’

Richard Thompson-”Mother Knows Best”

UB40-”Madame Medusa”

cat osb
16 July 2008 at 12:21

Yes Winston101, Eric Blair could write decent prose with clarity and perspicacity without recourse to the threadbare cliches of what passes for left wing discourse, couldn't he? (Guess it was being educated at Eton).

cat osb
16 July 2008 at 12:25

Hey LionelBear, thanks for the list - think my dad has most of these tracks; I'll dust off the cassettes and give them a listen.

strebor
16 July 2008 at 12:27

margaret thatcher should not be given a state funeral; she destroyed the power of the unions, the unions being us, the workers, thereby destroying the power we had to change our working conditions and renumeration.

LionelBear
16 July 2008 at 12:42

Cat-osb -your dad was into Crass? I would have thought he would be more of an Eric Clapton man.

Viscount Firm
16 July 2008 at 12:44

Margaret Thatcher. Well you would, wouldn't you?

cat osb
16 July 2008 at 13:09

Hey LionelBear,

He had eclectic tastes & a very young girlfriend.

But actually Clapton would work - 'No reason to Cry'?

Gerishnakov
16 July 2008 at 15:06

Supporters of Thatcher say what you will, I'm still going to party when she's dead whether you like it or not.

Jonny Mac
16 July 2008 at 16:13

Noted, Dave, cool, thanks for letting us all know. How will I recognise you among the million people due to hit the streets of London to prevent the charade from going ahead, though? And what's the form - does one party before or after h the s of L to p the c from g a?

Jonny Mac
16 July 2008 at 16:14

Oh, David Austin, you've become "Gerishnakov", even cooler.

knave
16 July 2008 at 17:57

Jonny mac

So you and jonty aren't Tories. Yes look at that pig in the sky.

Also what is this fuss about Thatcher.

Her rhetoric was more interesting than her deeds.

She won a war that she created by showing weakness to the Argies in late 81 when she put the Endurance into mothballs and sent out signals to the Argies that the Falklands were up for takes.

She brought in union laws that makes union hating Tories like Jonty and Johnny go into a foaming lather but in reality had little impact on the economy.

Privatised the state industries , so now foreign companies many owned by foreign states that charge prices well over inflation. This of course effects the poor.

Sold off all the council houses and now no young couples can get cheap housing.

Spent all the North sea oil revenue on unemployment benefit because of failed policy of moneterism , which she had to abandon.

Invited Muslim fanatics to number 10 who just killed women and children in a terrorist attack.

Told the the world that we were been swamped by immigrants and yet allowed more immigrants in than any other PM.

State funeral. My arse.

Maybe the Thatcherites can put on their union jack hankies and cry over the death of the old fraud.

But I don't see why the tax payer has to put the bill

Also what person alive in the UK deserves a state funeral ?. I can think of only two. Stephen Fry and Stephen Hawking

Also Jonny more people voted against your heroine that voted for her. So she wasn't that popular

redharry
16 July 2008 at 18:00

Can she be buried under a dance floor or urinal?

knave
16 July 2008 at 18:54

Also the last state funeral was Churchill.

Of course he was a great war leader but he was god awful in most of his other jobs. One of the reasons he was given a state funeral was that it was a thank you to that brave generation who defeated Hitler.

They believed in self sacrifice and society.

Thatchers children are the greedy and self centred little tikes who think the only person that counts is themselves.

So to represent her decade she should have a honour guard of the likes of Jonnymac, Chilean dictators, city traders, and Yuppies holding up tenners as she passes.

It would then be worth the money to see that site.

Also what about Benn and Healey. At least they put on uniforms and fought for their country unlike Jonnymac's and DJ's heroine.

RosaLuxemburgII
16 July 2008 at 22:52

Where's she being buried, could graffiti her tombstone.

EM 17 July 2008 at 00:28

"Thatchers children are the greedy and self centred little tikes who think the only person that counts is themselves." Well said.

I had a nervous breakdown trying to understand how poisonous the air was becoming, she smashed so much that was good. And the influence was global. Much of today's horror has evolved because she and her crassness were so admired. She appealed to the worst in people. Now look at us. If we aren't ashamed of those who rule us and the part we're playing in the charade, then we're blind and deaf.

Con air
17 July 2008 at 03:27

Am I losing my mind but is it not obvious that this woman is a vile representation of all that it is rancid and morally discpicable about modern Britain. Apparently its okay to waste billions on an obviously flawed poll tax scheme then replace it with something just as crap. Plunge millions of people into unemployment, increase interest rates, lead the country into a recession and yet be heralded as an economic visionary. To inadvertendly promote the IRA through being such an obstinate twat and yet be procalimed an heroic no-nonsense diplomat. Finally and this is what really gets me, entrenches the idea that nothing matters but your own back yard. Whatever persuasion you are is it not fucking obvious how stupid and short-sighted that is, on so many levels. But apparently she was the unifying ballsy leader that made Britain the 'great' country it now is. Bullshit

Realist 78
17 July 2008 at 07:26

Sylvia, the damage to the mining community was ignited by that prat Scargill's refusal to ballot his own members. Had he done so, he would probably have had everyone behind him.

Realist 78
17 July 2008 at 07:29

EM, agree with your comments re- the selfishness today which is, in my opinion, the root of all our ills. However, what good did she smash up? I recall power cuts, rubbish piling up in the streets etc.

Jonny Mac
17 July 2008 at 09:42

knave - no, I'm not a Tory. I have mixed views about Mrs Thatcher. In my view she did a lot that was necessary, and a lot that wasn't and that was damaging.That's not inconsistent with me saying that (a) this article is cut-and-paste trot agit-prop that has not one interesting thing to say (and incidentally was clearly writtent to give the writer a chance to plug his plays (b) it's bad taste to publish it when Mrs Thatcher is still alive (c) everyone who says "yeh, she was really bad, I'm going to party when she's dead/spit on her grave/etc etc" is about as original as Rik out of the Young Ones.

Rush-is-Right
17 July 2008 at 11:51

You guys have all got the wrong end of the stick.

"the iniquitous policies of the Conservatives throughout the 1980s, know that the more astute sections of her party realised after the selfless miners strike of 1984/85, the heroic battle of Liverpool City Council ......."

Yes, those self-less miners and the heros from Liverpool City Council; this just has to be a wind up. And you all fell for it.

Cybertiger
17 July 2008 at 14:36

It would be nice to see the odious Mark Thatcher commit “sutti” on her funeral pyre … or be extradited to Equatorial Guinea to be served as dinner to His Excellency Teodoro Obiang. Perhaps that repast could be arranged before the great lady dies.

Winston101
17 July 2008 at 14:43

Thankyou Ed and The New Statesmen for igniting this worthwhile debate! Just remember, the taxpayer will be stumped with the bill this grotesque charade. I just hope she doesn't go private otheriwse she'll never get buried on time!

Maggie, Maggie, Maggie!

Out! Out! Out!

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 15:28

Knave’s comment about Churchill was a good one as he helped put down the national strike in the 20's Churchill, not Knave!). He famously said "either the country will break the General Strike, or the General Strike will break the country."

Sadly that was the only comment by the left that I liked.

She may have caused misery to some working people but does anyone remember the misery of 'the winter of discontent' in 79/80? And how many people bought there first home (often ex council) because of her?

And as for anyone who supposidly hates Thatcher but supports New Labour, Tony Blair and half of his cronies were ex Communists or Marxists who took most of her policies just to win power and once in power have tried to take apart the very fabric of our society with their 'Socialist experiment'. This hurts the working classes (me included) more than any other as our wages are lowered and our schools and hospitals swamped by immigrants, crime scars our lives on a daily basis, the traditional family is destroyed, our meagre wages are taxed to death to pay for all the scroungers (including our real masters, the EU).

Sorry to sound like a Daily Mail colomist but if she stood today, even with all her many faults, I'd vote for her again!

Cybertiger
17 July 2008 at 16:03

@EnzoF1

"Sorry to sound like a Daily Mail colomist but if she stood today, even with all her many faults, I'd vote for her again!"

Give me strength! We’re taxed to death to pay for American wars – the wars on Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan – and the monstrous war on cholesterol – now costing the British taxpayer an absurd £2 billion per year.

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 17:56

Cybertiger, you've got me on the war in Iraq, It was and still is a pointless conflict. It seems that we can't think for ourselves, if we're not doing what the USA tells us to then we're doing the EU's bidding.

The war in Afghanistan though was 100% justified given the country's support for terrorists.

War with Palestine? Eh?

bethemedia
17 July 2008 at 18:21

Love her or hate her (and personally I fall into the latter category) how she could be afforded the honour that a state funeral brings is beyond me. what is the justification? If she should have one I suppose Blair should too and thats equally abhorrent. A ridiculous idea and hopefully one that the Unions will make sure doesnt happen. If it does, then mayhem is sure to ensue on the day. Churchill had one as he was the leader throughout world war 2 and united the nation against the Nazis no matter what his politics and faults thats a fact. Thatcher divided the country and caused co workers and neighbours in mining towns in particular to fall out with hideous results that is also a fact... she is more akin to General Franco in that respect and many others for that matter...PROTEST its our money after all.

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 19:09

bethemedia "Thatcher . . . . . caused co workers and neighbours in mining towns in particular to fall out with hideous results that is also a fact."

You can hardly blame a prime minister for neighbours falling out!

If one was a union member but ignored the strike anyway and crossed picket lines and the other resorted to violence to stop him then the blame lies with two individuals who made their choices (both had good reasons) and must live with them.

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 19:16

bethemedia *PROTEST its our money after all.*

If you are so worried about how 'our' money is spent, how about the billions we give to the EU every year (more since Blair squandered our rebate) that goes to pay farmers who grow food no one wants This is bad enough but then it is dumped in the third world at less than cost price putting the local producers out of business and condeming millions to poverty and starvation. Puts the fuss about Thatchers funeral into perspective doesn't it.

geoff97
17 July 2008 at 19:41

"a lame duck head of state."

Hmm. I always thought the queen was head of state.

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 20:35

16 July 2008 at 11:57 Winston101 wrote;

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." - George Orwell (Animal Farm).

'Maggie's End' perfectly demonstrated there is no difference between any of the pro-capitalist parties!

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 20:39

You do realise that George Orwell's Animal Farm was about communist Russia don't you? Maggie, for all her many faults, was hardly a commie!

raggedyman
17 July 2008 at 21:03

EnzoF1:

You do realise that you don't know what you're talking about don't you?

George Orwell was satirising totalitarianism in Animal Farm and 1984 and the inspiration for both came from his experiences working for the Ministry of Information and the beeb broadcasting propaganda to India during WW2.

George was a die-hard international socialist to the end bless him. It was totalitarianism in all its incipient forms that scared the pants off him. Oh and imperialism too of course.

It seems likely that the Thatcher brand of neoliberalism that Mr Brown so enthuses about is likely to go belly up in the not too distant future. Mr Brown like Mr Hoover before him may stubbornly go down with the vessel saluting but, as then, the economic fall-out could lead to another seismic shift in political philosophy ushering in a whole new 'paradigm' so to speak.

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 21:38

What do Orwells political persuasions have to do with my main point - Animal Farm is satirising totalitarianism in one specific setting, communist Russia, so quoting it to describe a Capitalist (who many credit with helping end what Marx & Lenin had started) is clearly nonsense!

Apparantly Orwell approved of the revolution but didn't like what it turned into, especially under Stalin. How many of Thatchers fiercest critics and enemies would love to have bought about a 1917 style Revolution in this country?, Scargill for instance. The miners were striking to save their jobs but he wanted anarchy.

I have to confess thogh that you're nearly right, I don't understand what you're talking about in your last paragraph.

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 21:41

Apologies for my terrible Spelling and grammar, one day I'll leave a post with no mistakes!

mcumcu
17 July 2008 at 22:02

What a hideously biased article.

It seems the shadow of ignorance cast by the author's political narrow mindedness, most unfortunately, voids any (seemingly vaguely) intellectual or logical argument whatsoever.

EnzoF1
17 July 2008 at 22:07

well said mcumcu. I wish I could of put it like that myself.

maryb
17 July 2008 at 22:11

If a cardboard box and a woodland burial is good enough for me, then they are more than enough for her.

knave
18 July 2008 at 00:02

"knave - no, I'm not a Tory."

Two points Jonny.

1.Although I think your are a very eloquent poster. I have yet to read a post from you that isn't from the central office handbook. If I 'm wrong would you name one difference between yourself than the Tory party.

2.What is wrong with been called a Tory. Many of mates are tories and I call them so. They call me an old labour dinosaur. Which I accept. So when i call you a Tory it is not a insult but a view.

"I have mixed views about Mrs Thatcher. In my view she did a lot that was necessary, and a lot that wasn't and that was damaging."

Name the hthings you like and dislike about Thatcher

"That's not inconsistent with me saying that (a) this article is cut-and-paste trot agit-prop that has not one interesting thing to say (and incidentally was clearly writtent to give the writer a chance to plug his plays (b) it's bad taste to publish it when Mrs Thatcher is still alive (c) everyone who says "yeh, she was really bad, I'm going to party when she's dead/spit on her grave/etc etc" is about as original as Rik out of the Young Ones."

Why not have a bit of agitrop. Christ we hear enough about Brown. Also you have made a few comments in that direction.

Enzo

don't quite undertand your point. I wasn't old enough to put down the strike. Also Churchill made the stike worst. If any individual who came out with any honour was, and I hate to say it, George V. Who did try to mediate.

"Sadly that was the only comment by the left that I liked. "

I'm sorry this right wing gibberish

Yes and no others were built because of the policy. The whole point of council housing was to give the poor affordable housing. Not a way for estate agents to make fortunes.

Now you are ranting

Sorry to sound like a Daily Mail colomist but if she stood today, even with all her many faults, I'd vote for her again!

Yes you probably would.

raggedyman
18 July 2008 at 00:37

EnzoF1 FYI:

Poor Orwell must be turning in his grave.

No, Orwell was not specifically targeting his satire at 'communist' Russia - that is the point.

Orwell was a complex man living in complex times which may help to explain why the author of 1984 was employed by Churchill in 1942 to deliver propaganda to the British colony of India in the furtherance of British war aims. Ironic innit? Orwell believed this was the surest way to usher in the new revolutionary socialism.

Hoover was a strong believer in American Individualism and nineteenth century laissez-faire capitalism - his overseeing of the 1929 crash and subsequent economic depression in America was viewed by many as disastrous. At one point Hoover was preaching the doctrine of self-help to 30 million destitute Americans. They were not impressed.

The 1929 crash was a seismic event with far-reaching consequences for the whole planet. More than any other event it, and its fall-out, triggered the rise of Hitler and Nazism as well as the crucial self-doubt that characterised the allied response to Germany's renewed militarisation. It created worker militancy as well as a deep disillusionment with the prevailing system. Among ruling elites in the west it prompted a growing predilection for forms of fascist-style capitalism.

It also marked the point of transition from free-market doctrine to a mix of Keynesian supply-side economics and a new corporatism with its emphasis on welfare that would strongly influence the political thinking of post-war governments; until, that is, the economic crisis of the 1970s.

It usually takes such a crisis in the system to shake the current thinking and bring about a major change of policy.

Neoliberalism is Mrs Thatcher's true legacy and it stalks the world in the form of deregulation, liberalisation of markets, reduced public spending, and the rise of privatisation. The truth is that in the face of the challenges likely to be presented to humanity in the 21st century it is the exact opposite of what we need. Since the 1980s the global economy has been in crisis on average every 5 years - this volatility in the world system stems directly from the implementation of the neoliberalist doctrine of this period.

In short, EnzoF1 , this is your and my wake-up call. So, are you with me or are you not?

Carl Packman
18 July 2008 at 02:18

Thatcher's Funnel; she's a scientist (Mr. Whippy ice-cream - yum) it's what she would have wanted.

A lot of people forget she at once condemned the windrush, but also folded manual jobs into more profitable globalised jobs, single handidly creating the need for migrant workers. Die ya bugger!!!!!!

EnzoF1
18 July 2008 at 04:49

Knave - I thought my point on Churchill was very simple. He was an elitist who hated the working classes and put down the national strike and he had a state funeral too. See, a bit of humour on my part aimed at Mrs Thatcher (whom I admire greatly and improved my life) & Churchill (whom I dislike greatly as he would of hated me for being working class union member & ex shop steward).

Raggedyman - the simple fact is Animal Farm is definately specifically targeting Russia before, during and after the 1917 revolution as every character in the book can be attributed to real life people, Trotsky, Lenin & Marx etc. It describes the revolution (the aims of which Orwell approved of) and the way the new leaders treated the working classes the same way as, or worse than, the old regime. I'm sorry if this doesn't sit well with your political views but thats the way it is.

As for deregulation, liberalisation of markets, reduced public spending, and the rise of privatisation. these are mostly a good thing. Sadly, letting market forces decide everything as Thatcher and Reagan did is not good as even I have to concede. If you want to know what a mess 'tax and spend' gets you into, look at us now! The healthy economy handed down from the Thatcher years in taters, wealth from the good years squandered away, public services still falling apart and tax increasing by the day. Where is the new Mrs Thatcher for this generation? It certainly isn't Cameron.

raggedyman
18 July 2008 at 10:49

EnzoF1:

Was it Darwin who claimed he was no Darwinist or Marx who claimed he was no Marxist?

Perhaps Thatcher was not a true Thatcherite - perhaps she retained some doubts concerning the magical restorative powers of free markets like her philosophical mentor - Fred Hayek.

Brown on the other hand is a true Thatcherite.

As if proof were needed consider that a significant proportion of overseas aid administered by the DfID is paid to the Adam Smith Institute, which as you probably know is a right-wing think-tank, to advise developing countries on how to open up their markets to competition and the private sector. Blair/Brown choosing Claire Short to head up this,O so Thatcherite, policy was a stroke of pure genius in getting the rump of die-hard political lefties to go along with this clandestine project of so-called 'New Labour'.

One triumphal example of this forced liberalisation masquerading as aid took place in Andhra Pradesh where the DfID funded the Adam Smith consultants to advise this region on its transition to full privatisation. India's small peasant farmers have since bore the brunt of this misguided privatise and liberalise policy. The immediate consequence of exposure to the full force of the global markets - something no European politician would do to its own agricultural sector - was to drive thousands of farmers out of business. For those that didn't take to drinking pesticide (the suicide rate soared amongst such farmers) they joined the global army of slum-dwellers who now disproportionately make up the populations of the new cities of this experiment in modernisation. As one commentator put it the inequalities and instability of markets is now playing havoc with their lives as they pay high rents for huts whilst searching for scarce work.

Make no mistake about it Brown and Blair are more Thatcherite than Thatcher - which may go some way to explaining this 'pet project' of a state funeral.

And makes a nonsense of your argument by the way.

bethemedia
18 July 2008 at 11:54

EnzoF1

You can hardly blame a prime minister for neighbours falling out!

The comment was a description of how her policies divided the country. Therefore demonstrating why she shouldnt have a state funeral

EnzoF1 If you are so worried about how 'our' money is spent, how about the billions we give to the EU every year (more since Blair squandered our rebate) that goes to pay farmers who grow food no one wants This is bad enough but then it is dumped in the third world at less than cost price putting the local producers out of business and condeming millions to poverty and starvation. Puts the fuss about Thatchers funeral into perspective doesn't it.

funny how the people like you who back Thatcher getting a state funeral go way off point...whats that got to do with it and no it doesnt. WHY does she DESERVE ONE? Impossible to argue as she simply doesnt...

Toff
18 July 2008 at 12:21

Posterity will ne'er survey

a Nobler grave than this:

Here lie the bones of Thatcher !:

Stop, traveller, and p----- !

Anyone up for organising coach trips from the mining areas?

knave
18 July 2008 at 16:00

Enzo

“As for deregulation,”

Well if you mean a decline in health and safety standards or the deregulation of credit and mortgages. Some might say that helped increases credit and people buy homes that they could not afford. Hence a credit problem. This problem is worst in the US conservative tax cutting admin than our present Thatcher wanabies that run our economy

“ liberalisation of markets,”

So that really helped the working class. The gap between the poor and rich has increased. I bet they love you in your working class circles.

“reduced public spending,”

Absolute nonsense. Public spending went up in real terms under Thatcher. Only one government since the war has decreased public spending in real terms and that was Callaghan’s

“and the rise of privatisation. these are mostly a good thing”.

So gas, and energy companies are now in the hands of foreign firms. That charge prices that well over inflation to improve their profits. All we have done is replaced an accountable state monopoly with an uncountable private monopoly. Personally I would have changed the public utilities into privately run trusts or charities, that made sure all profits were ploughed into reinvestment or schemes in which the poor and old were subsidized.

“Sadly, letting market forces decide everything as Thatcher and Reagan did is not good as even I have to concede. If you want to know what a mess 'tax and spend' gets you into, look at us now! “

Maggie, taxed and spent. That is what government do.

“The healthy economy handed down from the Thatcher years in taters, wealth from the good years squandered away, public services still falling apart and tax increasing by the day.”

What healthy economy ?. She used all the North sea revenue and credit to make money for the upper middle classes. That is why Journalists and traders love her. Heard of black monday and the housing recession in the late 80s.

“Where is the new Mrs Thatcher for this generation? It certainly isn't Cameron.”

Enzo it could be you

EnzoF1
18 July 2008 at 16:48

bethemedia - "the people like you who back Thatcher getting a state funeral "

At what point did I say I think she deserves a state funeral? I'm merely arguing the points made by various people made about her which differ from my own opinions formed from my experiences during the Thatcher years. I don't care whether she gets one or not, there are much more worrying things going on in the world right now.

If one of your children joined the growing list of pointlessly snuffed out lives from knife crime would you still care about this argument? Oh yes, you'd blame Thatcher for that too. You'd never think of blaming the current socialist experiment that makes a mother and father bringing up a child together and teaching them right and wrong such an unusual thing in todays society by encouraging any lifestyle choice other than having children in a stable marriage and actually taking responsibility for them. Responsibility is whats missing, all we hear about from our leaders are 'our rights'.

Maggie had her inspired moments and her terrible flaws, just like most leaders. I just have to wonder what this country would have been like if Labour had won that 79 election and I'm sure I/we would be worse off now.

gnuneo
18 July 2008 at 17:13

"she's a bitch, she's a Bitch, she's a BIG FAT BITCH!!!!"

i hope she lives long enough to see her son go to prison for his crimes in africa, i hope she lives long enough to see *actual* democracy come in the UK in the form of electronic democracy and local communities, i hope she lives long enough to see the mass ownership of companies by the people (not the Feudal Few). I hope she lives long enough to see Britain stop being the american's poodle, and i hope she lives long enough to see the 'new labour project' overturned by some REAL social democrats.

then i hope she comes back as a poor child in the 3rd world.

bethemedia
18 July 2008 at 17:23

Enzo F1

Quite a bizarre debate with you that seems to fly off point. Well if you dont care if she gets a state funeral or not I dont really see why you are on this subject trail arguing with people about the subject?

Very odd.

Anyway I am able to seperate issues in my mind so I dont think that in your hypothetical situation of my child getting murdered that it would ultimately change my opinion of whether Thatcher should have a state funeral or not...strange

anyway to answer your other point I would not BLAME her directly but I would argue that thats were the rot set in...only to be finished by Blair and Brown...Current SOCIALIST government...sorry have I missed something I thought New Labour or Tory lite were in power? Cant see any Socialist values in their agenda. Although I do agree that parental and familial responsibility is paramount in sorting societys ills...you dont do that by aping thatchers ham fisted sledgehammer responses...The very reason I am against a state funeral and it is important as an issue to many, is that she simple doesnt deserve it.

knave
18 July 2008 at 19:17

If one of your children joined the growing list of pointlessly snuffed out lives from knife crime would you still care about this argument? Oh yes, you'd blame Thatcher for that too.

No, I blame the media and most important the individuals involved.

You'd never think of blaming the current socialist experiment that makes a mother and father bringing up a child together and teaching them right and wrong such an unusual thing in todays society by encouraging any lifestyle choice other than having children in a stable marriage and actually taking responsibility for them. Responsibility is whats missing, all we hear about from our leaders are 'our rights'.

How can you blame any government for parental choices ?

How do you know ?

EnzoF1
18 July 2008 at 19:57

“As for deregulation,” Well if you mean a decline in health and safety standards. . .

What decline? The health and safety gestapo run every aspect of our lives. No, I mean government regulating less and leaving people free to get on with their lives without too much interference.

"Maggie, taxed and spent. That is what government do"

Yes, obviously. She taxed less and spent more sensibly. Perhaps if people today did that there wouldn't be a credit crunch (thats her fault too apparantly).

"liberalisation of markets,” So that really helped the working class. The gap between the poor and rich has increased. I bet they love you in your working class circles

Well we all have well paid manual jobs with a big mutlinational employer, great pensions, full sick pay, lots of profit from our sharesave scheme, new cars in the car park, nice homes (some have bought their council houses, God bless Maggie) to live in and a recognized union to fight our corner. Life's good for the working class (the ones who actually want to work hard and succeed and aren't stupid enough to borrow huge amounts of money they'll never afford to pay back) and we have Thatcher to thank for it.

"Heard of black monday and the housing recession in the late 80s"

I believe it was John Major who joined the ERM and caused black Monday. Any way that just goes to show what closer ties to the EU(SSR) can do. The housing boom and bust cycle in this country will never end until we follow the rest of the western world and see houses more as a place to live and bring up a family rather than as an investment. Borrow what you can afford to pay back and stop trying to live like Posh & Becks and you won't go far wrong.

"All we have done is replaced an accountable state monopoly with an uncountable private monopoly"

Accountable? thats a joke right? Privatised firms give much better service. I've swapped my gas, electric and phone and got a great deal. Nationalised utilities would now be charging us even more as there would be no competition and the usual civil service idiots running them. You have a very short memory!

The worst privatisation in my opinion was the railways. That was only done because the EU decided the tracks, signals and rolling stock had to be owned and operated by different entities or it was an illigal monopoly and for some reason Major took the blame and did as he was told.

bethemedia - "Well if you dont care if she gets a state funeral or not I dont really see why you are on this subject trail arguing with people about the subject? "

I enjoy a good debate (not just to wind anyone up, honest) and couldn't believe how poor the original article was so I thought I'd add my 10cents worth. Someone else said it best;

"mcumcu

17 July 2008 at 22:02

What a hideously biased article.

It seems the shadow of ignorance cast by the author's political narrow mindedness, most unfortunately, voids any (seemingly vaguely) intellectual or logical argument whatsoever."

EnzoF1
18 July 2008 at 20:12

How do you know ?

Its quite obvious (or so I thought) I don't know and never will.

This country was known as the sick man of Europe and was struggling with 3 day weeks, power cuts, rubbish piling up and no end in sight. Maybe if Labour had won in 79 it would all have turned out wonderfully and we'd now live in a socialist paradise where the phrase 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' would ring true. . . . . no, I can't believe I actually just wrote that either!

gnuneo
18 July 2008 at 20:16

whats so wrong with working 3 days, and having full employment?

maggie, monetarism, union-bashing, financial deregulation Privatisation, and Poll-Tax: didn't work for pinochet's chile, and it didn't work here.

knave
18 July 2008 at 20:19

“As for deregulation,” Well if you mean a decline in health and safety standards. . .

What decline? The health and safety gestapo run every aspect of our lives. No, I mean government regulating less and leaving people free to get on with their lives without too much interference.

That is such a bland statement. Give examples.

"Maggie, taxed and spent. That is what government do"

Yes, obviously. She taxed less and spent more sensibly. Perhaps if people today did that there wouldn't be a credit crunch (thats her fault too apparantly).

Yes because she derugulated the credit industry and anybody could get instance credit or mortgages they could ill afford.

The idea that regulation is bad thing is a myth.

"liberalisation of markets,” So that really helped the working class. The gap between the poor and rich has increased. I bet they love you in your working class circles

Nonsense the gap between the poor and very rich has increased since the seventies.

I live in Holland and their working classes have a much better standard of living than us. Also the quality of life is much better on the continent, without the free market individualised ethic of Thatcher

"Heard of black monday and the housing recession in the late 80s"

The housing recession was caused by Thatchers government and poor major was left to deal with the mess.

"All we have done is replaced an accountable state monopoly with an uncountable private monopoly"

No they don't. Complaints have tripled under privitisation.

You got gas, electricity and telephones when they were state owned. Now you pay 5 times over inflation for the same service.

That is anti EU nonsense. Show a thread in which the EU made that rule.

bethemedia - "Well if you dont care if she gets a state funeral or not I dont really see why you are on this subject trail arguing with people about the subject? "

I enjoy a good debate (not just to wind anyone up, honest) and couldn't believe how poor the original article was so I thought I'd add my 10cents worth. Someone else said it best;

"mcumcu

17 July 2008 at 22:02

What a hideously biased article.

It seems the shadow of ignorance cast by the author's political narrow mindedness, most unfortunately, voids any (seemingly vaguely) intellectual or logical argument whatsoever."

Just blather using a thesaurus

neilliebhoy
19 July 2008 at 03:46

I wil be happy when she dies. I am Irish and I remember the hate and bile that she that she spewed towards my fellow countrymen/women. I don't know about your personal struggles under her rule in UK and I really don't care, but I am just sorry ( for once) that the Provos missed her in Brighton.

EnzoF1
19 July 2008 at 08:20

In 1991 the European Union issued EU Directive 91/440. This required of all EU member states to separate 'the management of railway operation and infrastructure from the provision of railway transport services,

EnzoF1
19 July 2008 at 09:15

The EU is also responsible for 2,500 post offices being closed.

Up to now, small local post offices have been kept alive by the £150m Social Network Payment. But the government has been steadily removing services from post offices (vehicle licences, pension payments etc.) and this subsidy is no longer enough.

Article 88 of the Treaty of Nice, signed by this Labour government, gives the EU the power to decide what state aid is allowed. And while the government apparently has EU permission to continue the £150m subsidy for the time being, it does not have permission to increase it.

In this way it will be worth less and less every year as it cannot take inflation into account.

The new confusing regulations on sizes and weights of letters and packages are directly imposed under the Postal Directive (97/67/EC), which also forces postal services into greater competition with firms such as the German controlled DHL.

Apparantly that is anti EU nonsense!

knave
19 July 2008 at 11:10

Privatisation of the railways was planned way before1991. Also we have the same anti monopoly laws as the EU.

As for the post office

So you are anti an EU that are insisting on Thatcherite policies. She hated state subsidies.

So your herione would have approved on any removal of state subsidies even from the EU.

Also Enzo, as a Thatcherite you should applaud any measure to get rid of state subsidies

EnzoF1
19 July 2008 at 13:19

"So your herione would have approved on any removal of state subsidies even from the EU."

I am not a Thatcherite and she was most definately NOT my heroine and had a lot of faults as I have already said more than once. She was, however, a great leader and better than the opposition of the day. unlike some people I am capable of examining her good AND bad points together. Just because I supported her on one issue doesn't mean I didn't disagree with her on others as I am blessed with a mind of my own.

I believe certain industries should NOT be privatised. The Royal Mail, Railways and the national health service for instance. All three of these suffer a dreat deal from EU meddling.

This is what the RMT think;

"19 June 2008 17:01

The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), the UK's largest transport union, has condemned EU directives to privatise Europe's railways, which it says will lead to fragmentation and less democratic accountability.

In a meeting of railway executives in London this week, RMT representatives outlined the detrimental consequences of "privatisation", "liberalisation" and "fragmentation".

The RMT said the recent judgments on privatising the rail industries in the European Court of Justice "represent a fundamental attack on collective bargaining and the right to strike"."

"Privatisation of the railways was planned way before1991."

Thats entirely correct. Mrs Thather commissioned the ‘Serpell Report’ in 1982 but she bowed to the public outcry that resulted and shelved the idea, proving she did listen to people occasionally!

"So you are anti an EU that are insisting on Thatcherite policies. She hated state subsidies."

If only the EU was anti-subsidy (& pro democracy for that matter)!

knave
19 July 2008 at 14:07

I have no support for the EU. I voted against it unlike your herione.

Also she signed, the Single European Act was signed by the foreign ministers on the 17 and 28 February 1986 in Luxembourg and the Hague respectively. In a single document it dealt with reform of institutions, extension of powers, foreign policy cooperation and the single market. It came into force on 1 July 1987.[11] The act was influence by work on what would be the Maastricht Treaty, which was agreed on 10 December 1991, signed the following year and coming into force on 1 November 1993 establishing the European Union.

I would prefer my country to be social democracy like the non EU Finland

But Maggie hated state subsidies. So she would have approved of the EU directive.

EnzoF1
19 July 2008 at 16:47

"I would prefer my country to be social democracy like the non EU Finland "

At last we agree on something! I'd prefer the Swiss political model of political power being from the bottom up rather than top down like most others but I'd settle for Finland.

Mrs Thatcher has since siad she regrets signing some of the agreements with the EU but that her advisors said it was ok and she never had time to read them all, one of her biggest faults in my book.

knave
19 July 2008 at 20:29

Enzo you sound an intelligent cove. Do you honestly believe that nonsense about not reading the documents before signing them. In some ways if that is true it is worst.

gnuneo
20 July 2008 at 00:24

"I would prefer my country to be social democracy like the non EU Finland "

i think you mean Norway, Finland has even adopted the Euro, so its even more part of the European Project than we are.

in fact the UK has done far more harm to the EU than it has had done back, its vetoes and insistence upon exclusions has been part of the process that moved the EU from a social democracy model, to a neo-liberal US model. You should ask any Poles around you what it feels like when a welfare state like the UK and pre-velvet-revolution Poland falls into the hands of the technocrat neo-liberals.

in fact you already know it, who has not felt the quiet hand of privatisation and reduced services, higher costs? Who has not been aware that the living standards of those at the poorer end of society have fallen constantly, in absolute as well as relative terms?

no, the truth is the 'inner states' of the European Project would probably have been better off without the UKs entry!

as for the EU v Downing St - it would be very hard to judge who has done most damage to the UK between them, or indeed who has done most benefit. The EU has created a peaceful Europe, has immeasurably increased our economic performance and given us stable local trading partners (be a lot more important when the cost of oil goes over $5, unless we build hydrogen powered airships to transport cargo for long distances), and has allowed Britons to emigrate and move abroad freely, as the 100s of thousands to Spain shows. On the other hand, the same freedom of movement has let 100s of thousands of young Europeans come here to work and travel, has created Europe-wide regulations to attempt to standardise across the continent, and has become a source of High-Modernist inspired legislation.

Downing St has taken us into 2 illegal wars, has sucked us up to the US in a most disgraceful and embarrassing manner, has put electronic surveillance of the UK population as top priority, and has removed many historic rights under the implausible reasoning they are 'protecting us' by doing so...

You know, i am sitting here, and trying really *hard* to find something good New-Labour has done (or indeed the Tories before them), and i just can't. So i will balance the comparison by pointing out that a Govt in Westminster is a lot easier to control if it is 'losing touch' than one in Brussels. Not that the one in London is particularly listening right now, it seems.

personally, i would remain in the EU, but INSIST that all policy discussions are held on publicly open forums, with attached open discussion groups for the European Public to take part as well as read them. I would also strongly emphasise the role of Social Democracy in the new constitution, with the Ideals of the Social Chapter in greater display, including the provision to slowly transfer ownership of the large companies into the hands of the workforce, to create a Citizens Democracy.

The UK is in the EU, and we get far more out of it than it takes (ATM - this could change as the neo-libs take over), and we would have an extremely hard job of it out of the EU. We are not Norway or Switzerland - we have a strong Class Culture that almost ensures bad leadership, we could have had as high a living standard as Norway already, in or out of the EU - it is entirely the fault of our 'Leaders' that we do not.

as i said on another page:

"gnuneo

18 July 2008 at 16:55

EU or downing st? Both as bad as each other."

http://www.newstatesman.com/europe/2008/07/italian-police-bo...

knave
20 July 2008 at 05:45

Your converting me G

EnzoF1
20 July 2008 at 09:40

We get more out of the EU than we give, thats simply not true. We are a net contributer which means we pay more in than we get out because we are one of the richest EU nations (Nothing to do with Thatchers reforms eh?) and more goes into the poorest.

Brussels and Westminster are as bad as each other, very true but at least we elected the MP's in Westminster and we can get rid of them - its called democracy. Far from being neo-liberal, the EU gets more like the old USSR every year.

antileft
20 July 2008 at 14:42

Oh what a crappy, backward-looking article. Thatcher did what she had to to make the country function again. You know why labour became a thatcherite new labour? Because they realised that the people of britain arent a bunch of whining socialists, that this is what they want, and most importantly, that thatcherism more or less works, unlike the miserable, stale, left wing alternative that these idiotic castro-loving, cardigan-wearing, tramp-kissing, hoodie-hugging, Carl-Jones-supporting losers keep asking for. Get over it. And if you lost your job as a result of her policies- maybe you should have learnt to do something USEFUL and needed by society- instead of something which the tax payer had to fund like a damn hobby.

Cybertiger
20 July 2008 at 16:40

"And if you lost your job as a result of her policies- maybe you should have learnt to do something USEFUL and needed by society ... "

To cheer us up, I think people like timmyantileft should be placed on top of a state network of bonfires ... when the old harridan finally shuffles off this mortal coil.

antileft
20 July 2008 at 16:45

Try yahoo chat, cybertiger. As Ive told you again and again, youre not intelligent enough to post here.

gnuneo
20 July 2008 at 18:02

" We get more out of the EU than we give, thats simply not true. We are a net contributer which means we pay more in than we get out because we are one of the richest EU nations (Nothing to do with Thatchers reforms eh?) and more goes into the poorest."

what we 'get' out of the EU is trade, social mobility, and peace. Do you think another European war would be beneficial to the UK?? We may not get as much direct investment as say Ireland, Spain, Poland etc, but do i also hear you whining about the North of the UK receiving more money than the South? No, because you realise the common economy between North and South is more important than the few millions bunged its way.

and it is RIGHT that there should be investment into these poorer countries and regions to bring up their living standards, not only because of economic reasons, but also moral ones. Or do you not have any morals?

"Brussels and Westminster are as bad as each other, very true but at least we elected the MP's in Westminster and we can get rid of them - its called democracy. Far from being neo-liberal, the EU gets more like the old USSR every year."

yes, as i said the best thing about Westminster is that we can (supposedly, allegedly) have more control oevr the Govt. And it is the neo-liberal 'reforms', in the High Modernist fashion, that are indeed turning the EU into another USSR. Top down, minority control, highly inefficient. The 'Washington Consensus' to a T.

Kna: ty! ;) (btw, been reading some of MBs statements on Islam... you may have a point in your criticisms after all. :'( )

knave
20 July 2008 at 20:20

Antieft look at Enzo posts.

He made the same points in a very articulate fashion without the insults and this ridiculous intelligent comments.

Try to,learn. That is the first rule of evolutionary development.

But we love you, our little Captain Hook.

EnzoF1
20 July 2008 at 21:27

"what we 'get' out of the EU is trade, social mobility, and peace"

Absolute nonsense. We buy more than we sell so are worse off, we have always had the opportunity to live and work in 95% of the nations in the world and The EU only has 27 of the 47 countries of Europe as members! NATO has secured peace in Europe since the second world war, not the EU. Great Britain and the USA also funded the German (& other European countries) economic revival after the war to avoid any invasion by Russia or revolution.

"In many parts of the EU we see signs adorned with the EU's yellow crown of thorns on a blue ground, telling us that projects have been supported by EU money. Here at last we have a clear, undeniable benefit from EU membership - don't we? Well no, actually. We get back from the EU far less than we put in. If we compare the net amount we get back with the payments we make, and take off a discount for the cost of administering EU funds, we find that each pound we receive in EU grant funding costs us about £2.60.

Even this isn't the end of the story. The money we get is hedged around with bureaucratic restrictions and conditions, so we end up spending it on things we would probably not have chosen to do ourselves.

They give us back a little of what was our own to start with. They tell us how to spend it. Then they expect us to be grateful.

It is true that many jobs and a large slice of our exports depend on trade with the EU. But they do not depend on our membership of the EU. Millions of jobs in the US, in China, in South East Asia depend on trade with the EU - but these countries are not EU members.

In any case, we import far more from the EU than we export to it. We are a net customer. It is inconceivable that we would not be able to negotiate a free trade deal even if we were not members. After all, Switzerland, Norway, even Mexico have free trade deals with the EU - and arguably get most of the benefits of membership while avoiding many of the burdens."

Not my words, I'm quoting Roger Helmer (an MEP, so he should know!).

How dare you lecture me on morals. The EU pays various African nations to use their waters for fishing as we've depleted our own causing unemployment, starvation and death. WWF say "West Africa has suffered massive overfishing by EU fishing fleets - with local small fishing boats being forced to seek fish further and further out to sea at growing risk to life". Another quote from Planetark.org "Conservation group WWF International slammed the European Union yesterday for buying fishing rights from poor African countries like Angola, saying it was depleting stocks vital to poor coastal communities." And that doesn't include paying EU farmers to grow food no one wants and then dumping it on third world countries at below cost thereby devastating their own farming industry.

The Institute of Directors estimates that the cost of EU membership amounts to between £15 and £25 billion a year. I would take some of that money and help the truly poor of this world, like the various African and West Indian countries England's old empire screwed up in the first place. If only all the 'rich' EU nations would do this.'

Cybertiger
20 July 2008 at 21:54

@Enzo

"NATO has secured peace in Europe since the second world war, not the EU."

Pillock! The EU makes war in Europe impossible. The special syphilitic relationship with the USA makes us all vulnerable to the terminal disease of war.

knave
21 July 2008 at 07:04

As an EU agnostic.

I feel that membership has secured peace alongside NATO.

Also I am not too bovered about joining the Euro. In fact would love see an international currency purely to see the power taken away from trading markets.

Unfortuntely the EU can look like an impersonal monolith without democratic tendencies.

EnzoF1
21 July 2008 at 10:04

I may indeed be a pillock, but the following facts show that my point is correct. They come from the Bruges Group and were writen by Dr Richard North and Dr Helen Szamuely. The Bruges Group was set up after Mrs Thatchers famous Bruges speach on the future of the EU so are particulary relevent to this topic.

Fact number one: peace was kept only in a small part of Europe, which happened to be under NATO protection and the nuclear umbrella.

Fact number two: this part of Europe also had American troops stationed in it and was amply provided with American military hardware. Like it or not, and many in western Europe, particularly France do not like it, but a great deal of American foreign policy in the fifty years after the World War II was taken up with the problem of protecting Western Europe.

Fact number three: the countries that contributed most to the protection of Western Europe and keeping the peace in it were not always those involved in the European project. Apart from the UK, the main contributions came from Turkey and Norway.

Fact number four: the main crises of the post war period happened outside the whole European project even if they happened in Europe. Where was the peace-keeping qualities of "Europe" when the Berlin blockade was defied, when Eastern Europe rose in revolt, when the Berlin wall went up? Discussing the Common Agricultural Policy, that's where. There is no need even to mention problems outside Europe, like the Cuban crisis, the Vietnam war, the wars in Africa and Latin America.

Fact number five: the actual creation of a European Union in the Treaty of Maastricht coincided with the break-up of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. While the EU's influence on events in the former USSR was strictly limited, in the former Yugoslavia it played a baneful part: by trying to construct a common foreign policy through encouraging Serbia under Milosevic to keep the "country" together at whatever cost and by imposing an arms ban on all the other participants, the EU helped to prolong the war and increase the number of victims. Fierce hostilities and massacres were taking place on European soil once again as the European Union was entering what was perceived to be the final stage of integration and, as expected, it was NATO, led by the Americans that imposed some kind of a temporary solution.

Fact number six: The EU is now systematically undermining the one successful alliance that did keep the peace in Western Europe: NATO, without putting very much by way of protection in its place. And all for what? To give itself a notional and structural foreign and security policy.

This is me again now. I think the most powerful of these facts is number five dealing with the former Yugoslavia.

"The special syphilitic relationship with the USA makes us all vulnerable to the terminal disease of war."

I wonder what the families of all the dead Yugoslavians feel about this statement considering the US had to step in and clear up the mess the EU helped to create!

knave
21 July 2008 at 10:09

Enzo so why did Mrs T actively campaign for membeship and did more than any other PM to integrate the UK into the EU.

Please don't say she didn't read the document that she was going to sign. Especially one that involved the the UK constitution.

It is like Chamberlein coming back form Munich and saying "Christ, Czechoslovakia, I thought he keeping Bavaria"

EnzoF1
21 July 2008 at 12:19

Margaret Thatcher rejected a centralised, unaccountable, federal Europe, she proposed instead a wider, decentralised, outward-looking democratic Europe of independent, freely- trading and cooperating nation states.

In her book Statecraft, Thatcher warns against the creeping loss of sovereignty to unaccountable EU bureaucrats who have only contempt for democracy. She looks at the current situation of the UK by investigating all the options of how her country might extricate itself from this mess. She advises Britain to stick to the Pound and to renegotiate the structure of the EU.

Robert Powell
21 July 2008 at 13:23

Thanks for reading to us from Thatcher's book Enzo. Really, really illuminating!

knave
21 July 2008 at 14:47

Enzo why did she then sign those documents that gave more sovereinity then any other PM in history.

BoroLefty
21 July 2008 at 15:44

I'd be surprised if a Tory government would have the brassneck to suggest a state funeral. That a Labour Government should contemplate it is, to underline the main thrust of the artcicle, a disgrace and a betrayal.

Not only was she a divisive and despicable woman, she was incompetent as well.

Someone earlier mentioned that if you have gangrene in the leg, you cut the leg off. Fair enough, but if the gangrene is in the lower leg, you cut it off at the knee and you use anaesthetic You don't chop both legs off at the groin (and then say get on your bike).

If they do have a state funeral then, if I'm not too hungover, I shall attend and in tribute to the grocers daughter I shall shower her with fruit and veg.

BoroLefty
21 July 2008 at 15:45

By the way, I've seen the play and it is damn good.

EnzoF1
21 July 2008 at 22:42

"Enzo why did she then sign those documents that gave more sovereinity then any other PM in history."

Stupidity, ignorance, complacency or downright dishonesty, who knows? Its only a guess but she must have thought she was doing the right thing at the time but only she really knows for sure. She certainly claims to regret it now.

"Thanks for reading to us from Thatcher's book Enzo. Really, really illuminating!"

Actually it was from a review of the book but it certainly has made me consider buying it.

"You don't chop both legs off at the groin (and then say get on your bike)."

I quite liked the 'get on your bike' speech. The generation that lived through the great depression would look at us now and not believe how easy we have things.

knave
22 July 2008 at 08:00

"She certainly claims to regret it now. "

Because it is easy to say those things when not in power. All part of the great "Thatcher myth"

"I quite liked the 'get on your bike' speech. The generation that lived through the great depression would look at us now and not believe how easy we have things."

Tebbit later claimed it based on a speech, apart from the bike references, from the 30's aimed at the shiftless Jarrow marchers.

Who said history isn't cyclic ?

Cybertiger
22 July 2008 at 10:29

"Who said history isn't cyclic ?"

Well, Mark Twain said that "history doesn't repeat itself but it rhymes" ... and Cybertiger says "history doesn't revolve but it rhymes like a bicycle" ...

Rajeeve
22 July 2008 at 13:35

one ought to be ashamed of people like viscount firm. but no surprise, thatcher's, blair's and brown's political england should consist of such venoumous reptiles. he talks of getting the national pride back, by having KILLED others..most probably, he is an illegal son of bush or blair...

Viscount Firm
22 July 2008 at 16:22

Sir, I may come from a long line of bachelors but I assure you my lineage is not to be traced to Bush or Blair. At least not the Bush you are thinking of!

One ought to be ashamed, but one isn't which is what made Britain great.

jharrison
22 July 2008 at 19:53

I find it both shocking and sickening, that people who widely and loudly proclaim themselves as liberal, free-thinking, humanitarians, in favour of free speech, equality and democracy (i.e. namby-pamby, wishy-washy, leftie commies), can possibly take part in or even support the degredation of, and hatred of, a woman who conducted her career in politics with a geat deal more integrity than anyone on the left has ever done before or since.

It is only too typical that the politically left, who traditionally label the political Right as intollerant, hateful and discriminatory towards others, would heap such hate on Mrs. Thatcher and those of similar thinking. The same is to be said of the current government in all its forms (whether that be under Blair or Brown), which has bullied into submission anyone who dared to oppose it and speak out (sound familiar students of History?).

Any complaints about my grammar, please direct them to the labour government that has systematically destroyed any competetive (to any lefties, that isn't half a dirty word isn't it) state education system.

God save the Queen

Jeremy Clarkson for PM

For those of you wondering, this isn't a skit or mic take in any way, shape or form

KB13
22 July 2008 at 21:27

If dear old Maggie does get a £3 million funeral I think it’s a fitting tribute by the people she created. She made money the new morality and systematically destroyed community after community. I am from Glasgow and today the effects of her discriminatory policies inflicted upon Scotland are still felt. I am not a 'lefty' or a liberal stooge, yet neither am I in favour of 'electing Clarkson as PM' or 'saving the Queen,' I simply believe that greed should not be celebrated.

maggiemaggiemaggie-outoutout
22 July 2008 at 21:37

i totally agree with borolefty

i have seen the play and its so accurate and rings a hollow truth that the government we elected in promising us new labour has lead us down the garden path of tory-esque spin and lies.

thatcher - a woman who destroyed lives and more importantly took away people's dignity - getting a state funeral is a final insult to those who believe(d) in the red rose of labour.

EnzoF1
22 July 2008 at 23:08

"I find it both shocking and sickening, that people who widely and loudly proclaim themselves as liberal, free-thinking, humanitarians, in favour of free speech, equality and democracy (i.e. namby-pamby, wishy-washy, leftie commies), can possibly take part in or even support the degredation of, and hatred of, a woman who conducted her career in politics with a geat deal more integrity than anyone on the left has ever done before or since."

Hear, hear. Love her or hate her, agree or disagree with her policies and aims, she said what she was going to do and then did it and won three elections because of it! Also, most Conservative ministers 'caught with their pants down' in the Thatcher and Major years had the decency to go quickly and quietly. Witness the difference with the whiter than white, anti sleaze years of New Labour when seemingly every week a new 'cash for something or other' scandal came out and the ministers just kept their jobs and carried on as normal or quit only to be welcomed back a short while later (more than once in Mandelsons case!). I don't recall Thatchers government hounding a critic till he killed himself. Cherie is still hurting Dr David Kelly's family to this day by using his death to make her husband sound good in her book.

"God save the Queen"

Don't mention God to left wingers, the state replaced God years ago in their eyes.

"Jeremy Clarkson for PM "

Mmmm, I'm sure we'd live to regret it but he seems like the best bet if you compare him to the Lib-Lab-Con.

knave
23 July 2008 at 09:58

So anybody who believes in those things are commies.

Stalin must be turning in his grave

can possibly take part in or even support the degredation of, and hatred of, a woman who conducted her career in politics with a geat deal more integrity than anyone on the left has ever done before or since."

So much integrity. Having tea with muslim terrorists and chilean dictators. Dodgy deals with saudi and south african buisnessmen, shoot to kill policies.

Yes the list goes on.

As a part of thatchers generation. Greedy, self centred and hate filled. Jharrison you sound just the type of person who maggie help create in the eighties.

Unfortunately, the future belongs to you., as the song goes

"Hear, hear. Love her or hate her, agree or disagree with her policies and aims, she said what she was going to do and then did it and won three elections because of it! Also, most Conservative ministers 'caught with their pants down' in the Thatcher and Major years had the decency to go quickly and quietly. Witness the difference with the whiter than white, anti sleaze years of New Labour when seemingly every week a new 'cash for something or other' scandal came out and the ministers just kept their jobs and carried on as normal or quit only to be welcomed back a short while later (more than once in Mandelsons case!). I don't recall Thatchers government hounding a critic till he killed himself. Cherie is still hurting Dr David Kelly's family to this day by using his death to make her husband sound good in her book."

I don't know her hounds in the press did a good job at humiliating any body who disagreed with her.

jharrison
23 July 2008 at 15:11

In response to Mr Knave, the people I refer to as "namby-pamby, wishy-washy, leftie commies", or you refer to as communists are not the only people to hold such views on equality and democracy, it is simply becasue of such communists that i wrote my response in the first place, people (such as our current labour government) who have done everything they can to silently destro the democracy we have so long enjoyed in this country; think ID cards, detention without charge or arrest and limitations of movement (HIllary Benn telling us high petrol prices are a good thing because we will travel less).

I am very much in favour of democracy and equality for all, which is why I am so sickened by the response of people to the impeding death of a woman who, no matter what you think of her policies, is still a human being.

And finally in response to Mr Knave's accusations that I am one of the people who helped Mrs. Thatcher (show her the respect any human being deserves please - 'Maggie') create the 80's, coincidentally the decade that did the most to reverse Britain's post war decline, I was born in the dying days of John Major's government, and so the earliest memories I have of politics are of the incompetence and mistakes of the Labour Government, so I strongly resent any accusation that my political views have been formed by anything other than common sense and experience (especially as I live in the north east, in areas affected by the closure of the coal mines, which I will admit were a dreadful if necessary act by the Tory Government, and i am part of a family who are for the most part left of centre).

God Save the Queen

Jeremy Clarkson for PM

p.s. Thankyou Mr. EnzoF1 for your support, and by the way, I saw the play 'Maggie's End' at it's premiere in Durham, and thought it a brillient play that both accurately and eloquently portrayed the attitude to Margaret Thatcher in the North East

knave
23 July 2008 at 15:41

Well your herione said her greatest feat was the creation of new labour. Balir adored her and kept and e3xpaqnded her policies

think ID cards, detention without charge or arrest and limitations of movement (HIllary Benn telling us high petrol prices are a good thing because we will travel less).

Of course in the eighties we didn't have internment, shoot to kill, use of the police as a political weapon, and trades unionists arrested on motorways.

The argument is whether she deserves a state funeral.

That is a matter of debate, some might say the waste of the North sea revenues, set up by Tony Benn on a failed moneterist experiment.

It also has created the me generation, which unfortunately you seem to be spawn of. Greedy and self centred

I was born in the dying days of John Major's government, and so the earliest memories I have of politics are of the incompetence and mistakes of the Labour Government, so I strongly resent any accusation that my political views have been formed by anything other than common sense and experience (especially as I live in the north east, in areas affected by the closure of the coal mines, which I will admit were a dreadful if necessary act by the Tory Government, and i am part of a family who are for the most part left of centre).

So you are at the most 17 years old. So what is your experience of life.

Why necessary ?

They might reopen them.

Who cares if your family is left of centre. Has no relevance in the debate.

God Save the Queen

Why, what has she done for you ?

Jane Greene
23 July 2008 at 17:12

jharrison says he was born in the dying days of the Major government so he strongly resents suggestions his views have been formed by anything other than experience or common sense. Sorry, how much experience then? You must be, what, 15? Younger perhaps? Not much experience there then! I commend your interest in politics but I think you should look up what some of the words you use mean. Communists in power were seldom namby pamby - Stalin accounted for more dead in 1941 than Hitler in his entire career. I suggest you look up Mao and Pol Pot too. If you are going to critique the left, to have any credibility at all, you have to be accurate. For a start, don't blend everyone from liberal to communist into one homogenous blob. And then try to find out what Thatcher really did when she was in power. You're in favour of democracy and equality, are you? So what do you think about the way Thatcher - despite all her rhetoric - ruthlessly centralised power at every opportunity? What do you think about the way she destroyed social mobility? Like I say I commend your interest but without knowledge or study it's worth very little.

gnuneo
23 July 2008 at 18:19

as the saying goes - follow the money.

under the thatcher regime (and yes, that IS the correct word, consider the State's reaction to the public's opposition to the poll tax, and how little her Govt ever listened to the People, it is a matter of historic record the only effective opposition to her Govt was the Lords, and massive, MASSIVE public civil disobedience) millions of normal working people were made unemployed when her economic policies destroyed entire industries and communities, but the wealthy started their meteoric rise in wealth ownership that has continued ever since.

she was the most unpopular PM in British history soon after she was elected, until she deliberately instigated the Falklands war (again, its on the historic record), and rode the murdock press back in to popularity on the basis of murdering Argentinian conscripts, and she enabled the credit 'boom' that we are now starting to wake up to - it is quite easy to create an 'economic miracle', if you allow people to borrow endless amounts of money and sell off all your assets - sell your house, and borrow a £M, and you can have quite a party until the debt-collectors arrive. Which they are now, if you hadn't noticed.

...follow the money.

under new-labour, who both camoron, thatcher, blair and brown have all admitted are merely continuing her policies, there has been some small tinkering with benefits to 'reduce poverty', yet at the same time home-ownership has fallen, more companies are owned by tax-avoiding multi-nationals, the tax-burden is now falling ever more heavily on the lower earners, there is far more 'shift-work', or agency temping with no employment rights (such as paid holidays, or even the right not to be fired at will by the employer), and we are now paid up poodles of the neo-con american agenda.

and under new-labour, the top 10% of british wealthy, have doubled their holdings of British wealth, whilst the poorest have seen their incomes fall year on year.

...Follow-The-Money.

we have been living under anti-democratic neo-conservative feudalist High Modernists since 1979, not a single one of them has done anything for the benefit of the British People, it has all been about centralising power and wealth (in their and their sponsors hands), and destroying any kind of democratic grass-roots activism, the life-blood of a real, FUNCTIONING democracy. Who *really* put them into power? Given a choice between 60,000,000 possible leaders, how many would really choose to vote for camoron or brown? The people who put them into power are the ones who benefit from them being in power - really bloody obvious when you think about it.

the People have been shafted, and the ultra-wealthy enormously enriched.

...Follow-The-Bloody-Money.

jharrison
23 July 2008 at 20:28

a few points before i depart this page never to return:

1. Miss/Mrs Greene, when i refered to communists being 'namby-pamby', i refered to socialists who force themselves to be blind to all other systems that oppose their own, remember that Mrs. Thatcher's most popular policy was that of selling council houses to their owners, which actually helped social mobility, rather than destroying it

2. Miss/Mrs Greene also refers to Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot as Communists who were not 'namby-pamby', I however would argue that they were not communists, but rather Stalinists, Maoists, and Pottists respectively, Karl Marx never advocated violence and suppression in his writings.

3. Mr. knave, I never suggested that such policies were not in place in Thatcher's era, but rather that they were not covered with a veneer of lies, as politicians tried to persuade people that they were put in place for thier own good - but thankyou for reminding me that this is supposed to be a discussion about a state funeral

4. Who can ever really say they have a total experience of life, I have however had the broadest possible experience i could possibly have had. I have been able to experience the luxury many in london are able to live in, while at the same time seeing the polar opposite in many other parts of the country, and i have also travelled to countries such as South Africa and see the even greater gaps there

5. The political allignment of anyone's family has an influence on what they believe, or what they choose not to, but this is not a 'Nature or Nurture' debate

6. What has the Queen done for me? nothing, but at least her presence as head of state prevents us from having what is essentially an elected dictator with power to ignore any other political body, such as is the case in the USA.

7. I have tried not to allow this to degenerate into personal attacks but you're right, I am Greedy and Self-centred, that is why i work in charity shops for no pay because it is the only work i can get because the present SOCIALIST government has made hiring employees so buerecratic it is the only work i can get, I'm sure this is what Cherie Blair (a self proclaimed socialist) was thinking when she bankrupted a charity in return for her services.

Both Mr Knave and Miss/Mrs Greene seem to be very angry people, a trait i have found in many people who proclaim themselves socialists; and while i cannot vouch for this trait in Mr Knave and Miss/Mrs Greene, Money grabbing

"Taking away people's responsibility makes them Irrisponsible", this is the work of the all powerful socialist state

one last time

God Save the Queen

Jeremy Clarkson For PM

and anyone else who wishes to plagurise my writing to try and show the evils of anyone who dares to oppose the all powerful right, please have the good grace and the knowledge of grammar to put it in quotation marks (Mr Knave and Miss/Mrs Greene)

gnuneo
23 July 2008 at 21:24

jharrison: a pleasant, well written post there. I hope you come back, for i would like to respond.

". Miss/Mrs Greene, when i refered to communists being 'namby-pamby', i refered to socialists who force themselves to be blind to all other systems that oppose their own, remember that Mrs. Thatcher's most popular policy was that of selling council houses to their owners, which actually helped social mobility, rather than destroying it "

yes, it would have done, had her Govt not had the sister policy of not allowing the councils to build more affordable housing with the money they then received. Instead the policy had the long-term effect (we can see it now) of getting people into unsustainable debt, to a great extent because her other policies ensured that wages for the majority would be stagnant or fall. This will lead to a collapse in home-ownership, and concentration of Land in fewer hands, without even the safety net of social housing for those at the bottom of society. This she well knew, she had absolutely no love for the common Briton, as her hard-on for the Poll Tax shows, along with virtually every other policy she brought in.

"2. Miss/Mrs Greene also refers to Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot as Communists who were not 'namby-pamby', I however would argue that they were not communists, but rather Stalinists, Maoists, and Pottists respectively, Karl Marx never advocated violence and suppression in his writings."

karl marx should not be seen as a Communist, but instead an industrial age High Modernist, the theories of 'revolutionary vanguard', alongside his rejection of social democratic peaceful evolutionary change, his very clear distaste of the 'normal citizen' (which ran through his entire class during the Victorian age, note that Engels never turned his factory into a cooperative), led his writings to be rejected by many leading communists, such as Rosa Luxembourg. So i am to some extent agreeing with you, just minus the marx-worship.

"4. Who can ever really say they have a total experience of life, I have however had the broadest possible experience i could possibly have had. I have been able to experience the luxury many in london are able to live in, while at the same time seeing the polar opposite in many other parts of the country, and i have also travelled to countries such as South Africa and see the even greater gaps there"

good for you! (and no, i'm not in the slightest being sarcastic!). With intelligence such as yours (and you clearly are), i would regard it as likely you will be going to uni, possibly to study political science? Trust me, as you delve further, you will reject many 'mainstream'/Murdockian analyses of Thatcher, and indeed about our polity in general. This is the glory of further/higher education, and why those who wish to control us (on the left, right or liberal) tend to despise a decent, free, education.

"6. What has the Queen done for me? nothing, but at least her presence as head of state prevents us from having what is essentially an elected dictator with power to ignore any other political body, such as is the case in the USA. "

i could write a whole essay about this! :)

suffice to say that having a non-elected head-of-state allows the PM too much lee-way, as she is fundamentally only a rubber stamp, the US executive branch could not do jack-shit if the Legislative branch (congress) were to stand up to them and demand their constitutional rights back (they handed them over lock, stock and barrel to the Bush Admin by giving them literal free rein to do anything they wish to secure Iraq) - Congress could effectively end the war tomorrow, if it wished, by cutting off immediately all funds for the Admin's war machine.

that it has not, is incredibly indicative of how much pork-barrelling is going on within the American Elite from this 'war'.

the 'Separation of Powers' is explicit within the US Constitution, they only seemingly have a dictator because the other members of the Elite agree with the policies, no matter what they may claim publicly for electoral reasons.

having said that, considering the appalling choices ' we the People' are given by the political parties to choose between, there IS something to be said for the present system. And i'm even politically/philosophically biassed towards republicanism myself!

"7. I have tried not to allow this to degenerate into personal attacks but you're right, I am Greedy and Self-centred, that is why i work in charity shops for no pay because it is the only work i can get because the present SOCIALIST government has made hiring employees so buerecratic it is the only work i can get, I'm sure this is what Cherie Blair (a self proclaimed socialist) was thinking when she bankrupted a charity in return for her services."

they are not socialists, they are High Modernists. If you want to see REAL social democracy in action, nip over to Denmark for a while and see how the system there works. There is still regulation (i doubt there is ANY country in the world where its citizens do not despair about bureaucracy), but it is far more efficient, and aimed primarily at benefiting the citizens (and is astonishingly open in its workings), not hidden corporate machinations, or secretive class-based careerist bureaucratic power-grasping like in the UK.

btw, good for you for working for a charity - you should be proud of this, not begrudgingly blame it on some ills in our society. And again, consider uni, if you can afford it after the lab/cons education budget cuts that have ensured that it is primarily a middle/upper class privilege, not a right of all citizens. As a side note regarding Denmark and REAL social democracy again, the Danes not only still have free education at all levels (no tuition fees), but they still pay student grants to their students!

because, like REAL socialists, they believe that a society's strength and productivity lie in the People, not the blood-sucking ultra wealthy sitting on top. Therefore they invest in the People, and do not bleat about 'trickle down' effects, cutting taxes on the Vampires like our own bunch of misanthropes in Govt AND Opposition.

""Taking away people's responsibility makes them Irrisponsible", this is the work of the all powerful socialist state "

change the word "socialist" to "High Modernist Feudalist", and this insight is precisely why i would suggest you go to uni to continue studies. Very well said!

if you can afford it, i would like to recommend to you a couple of books:

"seeing like a state", by james c scott, and "freedom as development" by amartya sen.

as for jeremy clarkson being PM... man, doing drugs at your age is VERY VERY *VERY* BAD, you should be ashamed of yourself! :D

kna: he is right, it makes it a lot easier to read if you use quotes, i know its a bit tricky for you, but it would be extremely beneficial for everyone else. Please?

jharrison
23 July 2008 at 22:25

i know i said that i wouldn't be back but i would just like to thank Mr. gnuneo (i'm assuming it's Mr. but 'gnuneo' is a bit ambiguous) for the well crafted, intelligently written and fairly even handed response, so in contrast to some responses that have been given. I was doubly suprised as i normally find people who use ';D' and other such symbols in messaging incredibly annoying.

In response to Mr. gnuneo's comments about Jeremy Clarkson, firstly you have been reading the Daily Mail a bit too much if you suddenly assume all young people are on drugs (although it is a damn good newspaper), and secondly, if you have read his collumn in the sunday times, you would know that if he did ever come to power, his first act would be to call an indefinite holiday for the government, no bad thing i should think

knave
24 July 2008 at 08:20

jharrison have you've been on a Jane Austin writing course.

You sound like a cross between Mr Darcy and harry Enfields toryboy.

"Damn good newspaper"

Your not Colonel Blimp

Get out son, nick a few cars, get a girlfriend, cheer on wor kev.

Most of us on this site are old saddos and yet you write prose like a drunk Paul Johnson.

As for Clarkson been PM.

I can live with that

Colonel Blimp
24 July 2008 at 11:45

No, I'm Colonel Blimp damn your impudence.

jharrison
24 July 2008 at 22:56

Mr. Knave, I expect that you are the kind of person who finds it very easy to write about people who you yourself must have read, have said that they will not be returning. I would also expect you to realise that you don't need to go on any kind of writing course to write with politeness. On both of these above mentioned points I will make an exception.

As you say Mr. Knave you are quite clearly an old Saddo, you are also an incredibly annoying twat (I would continue in more detail, but apparently the New Statesman only allows abuse against people whose death is impending, but fingers crossed eh), and the kind of person i would happily crawl over broken glass in order to avoid. As for the other stuff you suggest I do, you obviously don't quite realise how long the day is do you?

and by the way, if you think that everyone in the north east is cheering for "wor kev", I hope you come here one day, because i am certain that you would get the beating of a life time - great

peace out dudes

jharrison
24 July 2008 at 22:57

btw. learn to check your grammar

gnuneo
25 July 2008 at 04:22

jharrison: he is dillsexic, have some mercy please. Do you think he spells like that deliberately?

kna: on the topic, do you know if you are using firefox you can install dictionaries, i don't know if they will help, but here is the link:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browse/type:3

scroll down for British English.

knave
28 July 2008 at 08:53

"Mr. Knave, I expect that you are the kind of person who finds it very easy to write about people who you yourself must have read, have said that they will not be returning."

What are you going on about Toryboy?. Also Mr , how do you know I'm not Mrs or Ms

I would also expect you to realise that you don't need to go on any kind of writing course to write with politeness.

I'm sorry to have upset your sensitive early 19th Century manners.

On both of these above mentioned points I will make an exception. As you say Mr. Knave you are quite clearly an old Saddo,

True.

you are also an incredibly annoying twat (I would continue in more detail, but apparently the New Statesman only allows abuse against people whose death is impending, but fingers crossed eh),

Bad langauge and Death eh. Are you threatening me little boy. Mrs Bennett won't be happy when you court Elizabeth

and the kind of person i would happily crawl over broken glass in order to avoid.

I don't know we might get on when you grow up and get a life.

As for the other stuff you suggest I do, you obviously don't quite realise how long the day is do you?

Again is this some type of Geordie or Mackem lingo.

and by the way, if you think that everyone in the north east is cheering for "wor kev", I hope you come here one day, because i am certain that you would get the beating of a life time - great

Violence again.

G man, I like you and your posts and thanks for the tip but after reading some of your prose, you might need the software as well.

knave
28 July 2008 at 09:14

Thank you G man, the software may help

niceguy
28 July 2008 at 14:58

jharrison is just another product of a generation brought up on Thatcher's materialistic vision of society; where community is defunct, and personal thirst for immediate gratification is paramount to the needs of the greater good. He's obviously blind to the chaos around him, and as such, has created a palatial image of England-of-old from the novels of Austin, imagining Thatcher and the Conservatives as a reactionary-vanguard to turn back the hands of time for albion.

I'm safe in the knowledge however, that this little Tory boy is a minority in this age group, with his nasty little snipes, and obvious a need to cling to an indentity, which Cameron and his youthful looks grants him.

Me and my friends, brought up in Merseyside, all know the evils of Thatcherism, the jobs that were lost amonst family members being the fault of her ruthless economic policies, and look forward to the day we know longer have this evil woman with us.

And, p.s. jharrison, "Saddo" is like so last year!

Snailtram