Return to: Home | Politics | UK Politics

Margaret Thatcher: still guilty after all these years

Published 26 February 2009

Cartoon by David Simonds

Margaret Thatcher: still guilty after all these years

It is 30 years since Margaret Thatcher entered No 10, setting in motion a revolution that would destroy the quasi-socialist political consensus of the postwar decades and, after much strife, turn Britain into the country it is today: riven, atomised, debt-stricken, hugely unequal, its prosperity excessively dependent on financial services, its public spaces degraded, and its towns, at least at night, the preserve of the binge drinker and the brawler.

Many of us may have grown more wealthy during the Thatcher and the New Labour years but, somehow, we seem as a society more spiritually bereft, more restless, unhappier even. This is not to deny that Britain, at the end of the 1970s, was dismal. We had a failing Labour government, which had already begun to experiment with monetarism and to cut public spending; a union movement that had become too complacent and too powerful, a huge obstacle to reform; a punitive taxation system that served as a disincentive to enterprise; a wider culture that was largely racist, homophobic and misogynistic. The political and social cultural consensus had to be broken, one way or another. And, in retrospect, the necessary transformation, or counter-revolution, could only have come from the right. The Labour Party was too exhausted, and soon, irresponsibly, it would split in defeat and self-hatred, opening the way for 18 years of Conservative rule.

Yet how brutal and destructive that counter-revolution proved to be, as whole communities were destroyed, especially in the industrial heartlands of northern England, Wales and Scotland, communities that have not recovered to this day. And how unbending was the doctrine that came to be known as Thatcherism.

Thatcherism, as our columnist Martin Jacques reminds us on page 10, was akin to a Bolshevik movement: a group of ideologues emerged from the margins to seize control of the very centre and effect radical change. The path was fixed. There could be no turning back. All opposition had to be crushed. The human casualties were as necessary as they were inevitable. Mrs Thatcher may have purported to believe in the High Tory, Burkean values of tradition, organic hierarchy and the accumulated wisdom of past generations, but she was no pragmatist or gradualist. "Economics are the method," she said; "the object is to change the soul." No Marxist would have disagreed.

And Mrs Thatcher did change the soul - of the country, of its people and of the Labour Party. New Labour was as much her creation as it was Tony Blair's and Gordon Brown's. Today, her shadow still looms large over British politics: it is to the fury of at least 125 Labour MPs that one of her most lasting legacies - that of privatisation - is now threatening the Post Office. Remarkably, on its return to power, not only did New Labour refuse to reverse any of the utility privatisations, it extended them with the selling of air-traffic control.

Mrs Thatcher herself was a moralist. She believed in probity, thrift, personal responsibility, the family. At the beginning of her premiership she spoke of the need to bring harmony where there was discord and of the need to heal. At the end of her premiership, however, after three general election victories and 11 years in power, she had created, with bloodshed and war, a thin-spun, debased consumer society, the engines of which were vacuous acquisition and an obsession with celebrity. That remains the case today.

Yet we should never forget that Mrs Thatcher was adored by millions, not least because of her resolution and courage. She was a conviction politician; you knew what she believed in and, because of this, she was trusted. She demonstrated that ultimate power could be gender-neutral. And encouraging working people to buy their own council homes was hugely popular, as was her brand of English nationalism.

A theme of this special issue of the New Statesman is forgiveness. Writing on page 12, Oona King asks, rhetorically, if she can forgive Mrs Thatcher for all that she did and said. For Paul Routledge, whose article begins on page 26, there is no such self-questioning. There is only certainty - Thatcher is, and always will be, the unforgiven.

Our view is more nuanced. We recognise that the Labour Party was defeated at the end of the 1970s and that a social transformation was necessary. Our final verdict, however, must be this: Margaret Thatcher is guilty as charged.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

11 comments from readers

Greg
27 February 2009 at 14:52

What a huge relief for all supporters of Labour your conclusion must be after they read the opening paragraph. All those who voted for them in election after election, only to witness disastrous wars, the erosion of civil liberties, the pilling up of public and private debt, and subservience to big money, can now rest in peace knowing it was not their fault or that of their beloved party but a Conservative Party from the 1980s. I'm now going to join the rest of your readers, find a bucket of sand and stick my head in it.

Forlornehope
27 February 2009 at 16:11

Anybody who can actually remember the 1970's knows what self-deluding drivel this article is. Callaghan had given up and was trying to manage decline down the track taken by Argentina. Britain was one of the poorest countries in Europe on every measure. Thatcher turned the country round and even 11 years of Nulabour mismanagement haven't completely destroyed what she did.

fairplay
28 February 2009 at 07:48

for anyone from a working class background she was nightmare. if you happened to hail from the south east you could class her as some sort of hero i suppose but for the majority, particularly the north, she was terrible.

when you read between the lines and dig deep she failed on many issues whilst using nationalism to divert everyones attention specifically during the falklands war.

wont shed a tear when she goes, that i assure you. good riddance

firsttimer
28 February 2009 at 15:55

Greg,

you must be as tribal as the Labour loyalists you criticise if you missed the point of the article by that much.

It's not the party that is the problem here, it is the ideology - Thatcher remade the centre-ground of British politics, and Labour explicitly bought into Thatcherism, first in order to become a credible opposition, then to get elected and then to govern.

Now it has collapsed under its own contradictions, all parties, including the Conservatives, are struggling to distance themselves from it.

Most people grudgingly accept that public services and child poverty have seen some modest improvement under Labour, but the government is disliked most intensely for the three things it bought into from Thatcherism and that it empahsised in order to court the Thatcherite wings of the press: authoritarianism, the Atlanticist 'special relationship' and an economy based on credit/finance.

Thatcher's 'property-owning democracy' is as big a part of the housing boom/bust and the credit crunch as Labour's FSA...

AlfredMarshall
28 February 2009 at 18:33

The argument that the growth of the British economy between 1979-90 was higher than before or after is demonstrably false. The main change, though it was jeopardised by the Lawson boom, was a fall in inflation, but this can be attributed to the collapse in commodity prices in that period.

Policies after 1979 were based on the argument that increasing the gap between high income earners and low ones would help stimulate economic growth by increasing incentives for people to work hard and take risks. There is no evidence of any improvement in economic performance since then. On the contrary, the crash we are now experiencing is widely blamed on the behaviour of the very people high pay was supposed to encourage.

In short, we have completed a full circle in 30 years to return where we were when the experiment started.

AlfredMarshall
28 February 2009 at 18:37

Forlorne Hope,

The argument that the performance of the British economy between 1979-90 was better than before or after is demonstrably false. The main change, though it was jeopardised by the Lawson boom, was a fall in inflation, but this can be attributed to the collapse in commodity prices in that period.

Policies after 1979 were based on the argument that increasing the gap between high income earners and low ones would help stimulate economic growth by increasing incentives for people to work hard and take risks. There is no evidence of any improvement in economic performance since then. On the contrary, the crash we are now experiencing is widely blamed on the behaviour of the very people high pay was supposed to encourage.

In short, we have completed a full circle in 30 years to return where we were when the experiment started. We could of course go round the board one more time under a Thatcher for the 21st century. But what would be the point? There is evidence to suggest that the long-term real economic growth rate of the UK economy has been largely unchanged for more than a century despite all the different policy fluctuations.

Claddach
01 March 2009 at 05:16

“Now is the winter of our discontent Made glorious summer by this sun of York”

Ah yes, Maggie Thatcher, still guilty after all these years. It’s 1979 Sunny Jim Callaghan is PM The nefarious Maggie Thatcher waiting in the wings to “destroy” Britain.

There is a 12% fall in the value of the pound. Water workers, ambulance drivers, sewerage staff and dustmen are involved in industrial action, heralding a 'Winter of Discontent'. With many rubbish collectors having been on strike for months, local authorities begin to run out of space for storing waste and use local parks under their control. Westminster City Council use Leicester Square in the heart of London's West End for piles of rubbish, and as the Evening Standard notes, this attracted rats. Along with the piles of rubbish, closed factories, picketed hospitals and locked graveyards.

On 22 January the public sector unions hold a "Day of Action", in which they hold a 24-hour strike and march to demand a £60 per week minimum wage. This is the biggest individual day of strike action since the general strike of 1926, and many workers stay out indefinitely after that day.

The most notorious action during the winter is the unofficial strike by gravediggers, members of the GMWU, working in Liverpool and Tameside. As coffins piled up, Liverpool City Council hire a factory in Speke to store them. On 1 February a persistent journalist asked the Medical Officer of Health for Liverpool, Dr Duncan Dolton, what would be done if the strike continued for months, Dolton speculated that burial at sea would be considered. Although his response was hypothetical, in the circumstances it caused great alarm. The gravediggers eventually settled for a 14% rise after a fortnight's strike.

I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.

Margaret Thatcher

Joe Wright
03 March 2009 at 00:31

Need I go into the failings of the Child Support agency, created in 1993 under the Conservative government. Please check out my group link, and show your support to parents who have been let down.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=569523342&ref=name#/g...

bunzena
04 March 2009 at 11:50

It's been a while since I have read such an inept piece of editorial. For anyone who lived in the UK during the 1970s - the idea that Thatcher destroyed the country is laughable. It was already on it's knees. Stop carping on about Thatcher and really address the facts of the situation. Thatcher was right for the time - she would not be right now. In the way that Thatcher curbed the 'undemocratic' power the unions could wield on all our lives (anyone else remember the power cuts?!) - we need a political party that can reform the rotten financial system - and the bankrupt set of social values that pervade the UK.

Unfortunately we live in a Globalised economy now - so no one country can hope to revolutionise the financial system. It has to be a collective response.

In the meantime - I live in fear of what the current government is doing. I have little doubt that in 30 years time we'll be talking about Brown (and Blair) having bankrupted Britain - leaving an unimaginable legacy for our children that goes on for decades.

My bet is that enlightened Historians will paint a glowing picture of Thatcher in comparison to the blundering and arrogant Brown. We face high taxes, public services that cannot be properly funded, pensions across private and public sectors that are ‘busted’ – and all the social consequences that this will bring

fridgemagnet
04 March 2009 at 23:02

The state of the country does lie with Her, Privatize every thing for the privilege few, rich cats got fatter & now retired, must laugh at the state of the country now.

Now everything is in full circle.

Government buy outs, suddenly there is a big question? How much are they being paid? It would have carried on unless this economic decline ousted them.

Shame on you Thatcher.

Blissex
08 March 2009 at 12:49

«The argument that the performance of

the British economy between 1979-90 was

better than before or after is

demonstrably false. The main change,

though it was jeopardised by the Lawson

boom, was a fall in inflation, but this

can be attributed to the collapse in

commodity prices in that period.»

«I have little doubt that in 30 years

time we'll be talking about Brown (and

Blair) having bankrupted Britain -

leaving an unimaginable legacy for our

children that goes on for decades.»

Both comments are true, but for reasons

that have nothing to do with Thatcher or

Brown. The North Sea oil production

started almost exactly 30 years ago, and

oil exports strengthened the pound

(making imports cheaper) and oil

royalties have allowed for tax

reductions.

This graphs tells you more about the

politics of the past 30 years than many

an astute political analyst:

http://www.mazamascience.com/OilExport/output/BP_2008_Oil_Ex...

The main glory of the Thatcher and Blair

governments has been bribing their bases

(property owners, financial speculators,

middle class supervisors and

professionals) with oil money.

Unfortunately for Gordon Brown the North

Sea oil is running out and the UK is now

about to become or has become a net oil

importer (thus the "managed" collapse of

the pound).

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

Afghanistan

Doomed to failure

Two sides of the Coin

Hung parliament

Who would rule?

Doing deals in Downing Street

Interview

Seymour Hersh

The NS Interview: Seymour Hersh

Television

Paradox

Paradox

What if...

The Beatles never formed

What if .... the Beatles had never formed

Will Self

Eats at Subway

Attack of the one-foot sandwich

Iraq war

We want a trial

Iraq, Palin and building bridges

Books of the year

Our selection

Books of the Year: Part I

Newsletter

Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team

Vote!

Will the next election produce a hung parliament?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 - 2009

Tracker