AgentAxeman 164 Posted October 14, 2009 Author Share Posted October 14, 2009 Without wishing to sound a discordant note, I don't think there's any comparison between Brown and Thatcher. Thatcher was a monster, driven by idealogy and aided by big business. Brown is merely being pragmatic it seems to me because the country's bust and he needs to reduce debt. Of course it would make singing the Red Flag with his comrades a little more awkward, but I think Labour ditched that from their conferences around the time they stopped pretending to be socialists. People comparing Brown to Thatcher clearly didn't experience the 1980s, particularly the North East in the 1980s. Actually, I believe Avatar Axeman did, but he's a stupid twat. and you're a complete dick end!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 164 Posted October 14, 2009 Author Share Posted October 14, 2009 I'm 43 so I don't know how that compares to those that hate thatcher but even though I was effected by some of the boom and bust, I never found myself hating her or the government. My first real recollection of politics was the winter of discontent under labour when it seemed that everyone was on strike and blackouts used to be common place. I always saw thatcher as some kind of fitness coach trying to get this fat slob of a country into a competitive state for the new " small world" we were facing. I never quite understood how the coal ans steel industries had a future when it was cheaper to import it. It's all very well being patriotic but as consumers we all want the best price whether it is a laptop, car or heating bills. If her actions were so wrong, why has labour never undone some of her big decisions. Why have pits not been re-opened and union rights restored to what they are? I appreciate if you were effected by the pits and steel closures it will taint your view and I also realise some people are so set in their political ways that one parties policies will always be wrong. But otherwise it seems strange for straight thinking people to despise her. After all, we kept sending her back to power. this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 What a surprise that Christmas tree is a Thatcher apologist. Obvious from his personal philosophy really. didn't take long for mother teresa to arrive! Does it ever cross your mind that She was democratically elected again and again and again? Or is democracy only important when it suits YOUR agenda. As I recall a majority of people who voted didn't return her party, let alone a majority of the population. The general apathy you see now towards voting was born out of those experiences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Without wishing to sound a discordant note, I don't think there's any comparison between Brown and Thatcher. Thatcher was a monster, driven by idealogy and aided by big business. Brown is merely being pragmatic it seems to me because the country's bust and he needs to reduce debt. Of course it would make singing the Red Flag with his comrades a little more awkward, but I think Labour ditched that from their conferences around the time they stopped pretending to be socialists. Thatcher was driven by idealogy? so what is Brown driven by? Brown is being pragmatic cos the countrys skint? - Who's been in charge of the purse strings for the last 13 yrs? Stopped pretending to be socialist?? - do you mean they really are? btw, i agree that Thatcher was the biggest bitch under the sun but i dont hate her for it. at the time the country needed someone like that to drag it out of the shite which was th late 60's/70's Did you have a point? If so, what is it please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 164 Posted October 14, 2009 Author Share Posted October 14, 2009 What a surprise that Christmas tree is a Thatcher apologist. Obvious from his personal philosophy really. didn't take long for mother teresa to arrive! Does it ever cross your mind that She was democratically elected again and again and again? Or is democracy only important when it suits YOUR agenda. As I recall a majority of people who voted didn't return her party, let alone a majority of the population. The general apathy you see now towards voting was born out of those experiences. Turnout at UK General Elections: 1918-2001 Valid votes as % of electorate Northern United England Wales Scotland Ireland Kingdom *1918 55.7% 65.9% 55.1% 69.5% 57.2% 1922 72.8% 79.4% 70.4% 77.2% 73.0% 1923 71.1% 77.3% 67.9% 76.5% 71.1% 1924 77.4% 80.0% 75.1% 66.7% 77.0% 1929 76.6% 82.4% 73.5% 63.8% 76.3% 1931 76.1% 79.3% 77.4% 74.5% 76.4% 1935 70.7% 76.4% 72.6% 72.0% 71.1% 1945 73.4% 75.7% 69.0% 67.4% 72.8% 1950 84.4% 84.8% 80.9% 77.4% 83.9% 1951 82.7% 84.4% 81.2% 79.9% 82.6% 1955 76.9% 79.6% 75.1% 74.1% 76.8% 1959 78.9% 82.6% 78.1% 65.9% 78.7% 1964 77.0% 80.1% 77.6% 71.7% 77.1% 1966 75.9% 79.0% 76.0% 66.1% 75.8% 1970 71.4% 77.4% 74.1% 76.6% 72.0% 1974 Feb 79.0% 80.0% 79.0% 69.9% 78.8% 1974 Oct 72.6% 76.6% 74.8% 67.7% 72.8% 1979 75.9% 79.4% 76.8% 67.7% 76.0% 1983 72.5% 76.1% 72.7% 72.9% 72.7% 1987 75.4% 78.9% 75.1% 67.0% 75.3% 1992 78.0% 79.7% 75.5% 69.8% 77.7% 1997 71.4% 73.5% 71.3% 67.1% 71.4% 2001 59.2% 61.6% 58.2% 68.0% 59.4% * Figures for Ireland not Northern Ireland Sources: British Electoral Facts: 1832-1999, Parliamentary Research Services House of Commons Library data not really true, infact, i think you'll find that the lowest turnout ever was in 2001. lets see if i can remeber who was in power at that time........................? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 20421 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 What a surprise that Christmas tree is a Thatcher apologist. Obvious from his personal philosophy really. didn't take long for mother teresa to arrive! Does it ever cross your mind that She was democratically elected again and again and again? Or is democracy only important when it suits YOUR agenda. She was universally (well, almost apparently) reviled in the North East though, and was effectively voted in with a block vote from the South East and Midlands who happened to benefit from her 'I'm alright Jack' philosophy. She caused untold misery in the North which we haven't, and probably never will, recover from, and she really couldn't give a shit who she hurt. Her vision of society (or rather, there is no society) was callous in the extreme. I take it you did OK alright under her though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 164 Posted October 14, 2009 Author Share Posted October 14, 2009 Without wishing to sound a discordant note, I don't think there's any comparison between Brown and Thatcher. Thatcher was a monster, driven by idealogy and aided by big business. Brown is merely being pragmatic it seems to me because the country's bust and he needs to reduce debt. Of course it would make singing the Red Flag with his comrades a little more awkward, but I think Labour ditched that from their conferences around the time they stopped pretending to be socialists. Thatcher was driven by idealogy? so what is Brown driven by? Brown is being pragmatic cos the countrys skint? - Who's been in charge of the purse strings for the last 13 yrs? Stopped pretending to be socialist?? - do you mean they really are? btw, i agree that Thatcher was the biggest bitch under the sun but i dont hate her for it. at the time the country needed someone like that to drag it out of the shite which was th late 60's/70's Did you have a point? If so, what is it please? i was gonna ask you the same question but i probably wouldnt get a sensible answer. you're simply blinded by hate for the woman. theres a point for you to consider! not saying that you may not have a reason for that. just saying that its clouded you're impartiality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Kitman, ofcourse sorting out the unions was part of it, but not all of it. And the line about not being able to re-open foundrys is rubbish and you know it. Everyone knows virtually everything can be made cheaper elsewhere and that unfortunately is just life and why china has so many billionaires. Global business will always keep moving on to the next low wage country and we will always want the best price goods possible. Has labour undone the privatisations are a while host of things the Tories did. No as usual with all labour governments they have once again brought the country to it's knees and the Tories WILL be voted in next year to fix it. This is the natural way of life. No, it's not rubbish. Once you close down heavy industry, it's prohibitively expensive to re-tool and re-skill, and you've lost your market in any event. The point is it's not an economic no-brainer to close something down simply because it can't compete with the third world. You have to take the long view and form a balanced view as to what is in the country's long term strategic interest. Not just in terms of the long term reliance on resources from elsewhere but also the wisdom and economics of putting whole communities on the dole, closure costs, social unrest etc etc. If you don't believe in the long term future, you don't have to pull the plug overnight. This is the way with much of European thinking I believe. Of course, if you believe in free unfettered global markets, then of course the market will decide on the best use of resources and labour. You'll be happy to pull on your cheap jeans and trainers and bugger where they came from. I trust you've enjoyed the last 18 months and the benefits of free market global capitalism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Without wishing to sound a discordant note, I don't think there's any comparison between Brown and Thatcher. Thatcher was a monster, driven by idealogy and aided by big business. Brown is merely being pragmatic it seems to me because the country's bust and he needs to reduce debt. Of course it would make singing the Red Flag with his comrades a little more awkward, but I think Labour ditched that from their conferences around the time they stopped pretending to be socialists. Thatcher was driven by idealogy? so what is Brown driven by? Brown is being pragmatic cos the countrys skint? - Who's been in charge of the purse strings for the last 13 yrs? Stopped pretending to be socialist?? - do you mean they really are? btw, i agree that Thatcher was the biggest bitch under the sun but i dont hate her for it. at the time the country needed someone like that to drag it out of the shite which was th late 60's/70's Did you have a point? If so, what is it please? i was gonna ask you the same question but i probably wouldnt get a sensible answer. you're simply blinded by hate for the woman. theres a point for you to consider! not saying that you may not have a reason for that. just saying that its clouded you're impartiality. Not really, I wouldn't be as presumptious about you. I think you've answered my question however Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10430 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 For me it's less about the economics and more about her being the embodiement of the tipping point where this country took the path towards becoming a disparate group of self-obsessed, inconsiderate anti-social turds. Her policies fostered the "what do I get, what do I deserve" attitude that has given birth to the litigious nature of Britain today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 29491 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 (edited) Her policies fostered the "what do I get, what do I deserve" attitude that has given birth to the litigious nature of Britain today. And and the same time it asked the questions 'how can I succeed? what can I do to better myself?', none of this relying on the state shit. Edited October 14, 2009 by ewerk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 For me it's less about the economics and more about her being the embodiement of the tipping point where this country took the path towards becoming a disparate group of self-obsessed, inconsiderate anti-social turds. Her policies fostered the "what do I get, what do I deserve" attitude that has given birth to the litigious nature of Britain today. I think that's an interesting point. It depends on your outlook though I suppose. At the time we were supposed to be self reliant, getting on, making the dream come true etc. The dominant cultural theme in Britain imo seemed to become that whatever happens, it's always someone else's fault and they should pay for it. I'm not sure how that came about, unless we were just copying America all along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Don't really think Govt have the ability to change anything any longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10430 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Her policies fostered the "what do I get, what do I deserve" attitude that has given birth to the litigious nature of Britain today. And and the same time it asked the questions 'how can I succeed? what can I do to better myself?', none of this relying on the state shit. I blame her for the way parents don't bring up their kids, I blame her for so many many things. I think her ideals benefit the better off and leave the others pretty much fucked. She's more interested in the few that succeed than the millions who don't. I've yet to see compelling evidence that she wasn't, in fact, the devil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Her policies fostered the "what do I get, what do I deserve" attitude that has given birth to the litigious nature of Britain today. And and the same time it asked the questions 'how can I succeed? what can I do to better myself?', none of this relying on the state shit. True. Thatcherism was about self reliance, improvement, success, getting on yer bike and making it happen. Or make as much money as you can, by whatever means you can, and to hell with everyone else. Depending on your world view. Jonathan Aitken was the highlight of the Thatcher years for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 29491 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I blame her for the way parents don't bring up their kids Eh? She was very much pro-family iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 (edited) Most heavy industry in France and Germany (especially the auto industry) are state subsidised in various ways. Edited October 14, 2009 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10430 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I'm especially bored of the people who claim to want to lead this country, but only when they find out where we say we want to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7058 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 'all governments are liars and murderers' people who crave control should automatically be denied it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 20421 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Renton, you need to drag yourself away from your hand wringing yuppie dinner parties and see a bit of the real world outside your bubble. I grew up in the North East in the 1980s and can only describe it as being in a depression, it was that bad. I'm not arguing that reform wasn't needed after the Callaghan government, but I'm amazed anyone can endorse what Thatcher did to the North of England and Scotland during those dark years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10430 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I blame her for the way parents don't bring up their kids Eh? She was very much pro-family iirc. Her views on her own family may have been admirable. But I don't doubt for a second her "I'm all right Jack" attitude fucked communities and, in turn, families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayatollah Hermione 13595 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 'all governments are liars and murderers' people who crave control should automatically be denied it Does this apply to the bedroom? Because the 4 Algerian sex-slaves in my basement would just go to waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 What a surprise that Christmas tree is a Thatcher apologist. Obvious from his personal philosophy really. didn't take long for mother teresa to arrive! Does it ever cross your mind that She was democratically elected again and again and again? Or is democracy only important when it suits YOUR agenda. As I recall a majority of people who voted didn't return her party, let alone a majority of the population. The general apathy you see now towards voting was born out of those experiences. the general apathy you see now IMO is more down to Blair turning labour into the Tories mk 2 to get elected. The problem now is there is very little between both parties in the day to day off most peoples lives. Also politicians are more controlled by their leaders and too worried about soundbite tv and image. These days they spend a lot of time on question time agreeing with each other. Not like the days of heseltine and cook lacing in to each other. Let's not also forget that honest Gordon has sold nearly every school and hospital off to big business and then used tax payers money to rent it back for ever and ever. I'm sure everyone will live near a school that has been sold, a new one built on half the original land and a great big new housing estate on the other half. Renton, you need to drag yourself away from your hand wringing yuppie dinner parties and see a bit of the real world outside your bubble. Well I've no axe to grind now as I don't live in the UK anymore. I don't think people believe that their vote matters anymore. I have no time for Labour - especially since the Iraq 'conflict' - but I'd never vote for the Tories either, not after their last period in office. So I considered myself disenfranchised anyway . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 29491 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I blame her for the way parents don't bring up their kids Eh? She was very much pro-family iirc. Her views on her own family may have been admirable. But I don't doubt for a second her "I'm all right Jack" attitude fucked communities and, in turn, families. Well she was a working mother and her family turned out just fine (ignoring the racist and the international criminal ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 20421 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 What a surprise that Christmas tree is a Thatcher apologist. Obvious from his personal philosophy really. didn't take long for mother teresa to arrive! Does it ever cross your mind that She was democratically elected again and again and again? Or is democracy only important when it suits YOUR agenda. She was universally (well, almost apparently) reviled in the North East though, and was effectively voted in with a block vote from the South East and Midlands who happened to benefit from her 'I'm alright Jack' philosophy. She caused untold misery in the North which we haven't, and probably never will, recover from, and she really couldn't give a shit who she hurt. Her vision of society (or rather, there is no society) was callous in the extreme. I take it you did OK alright under her though. So just for the record if the Tories had not been in power for 18 years, are you saying we would still have thriving coal mines. Steel works, and superb nationalised compaies? We might still have some industry rather than third generation charvers living in heroine addled estates (like Heaton ). Seriously, think people like Kitman have already answered this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now