NationStates Jolt Archive

I went on a visit to the HP yesterday so I am enthused..

who do you think?

.Barney : And I say, England's greatest Prime Minister was Lord Palmerston!
Wade Boggs : Pitt the Elder!
Barney : Lord Palmerston!
Wade Boggs : Pitt the Elder!
Barney : Okay, you asked for it, Boggs! (punches Wade)
Moe : Yeah, that's showing him, Barney! Pitt the Elder...
Barney : Lord Palmerston! (punches Moe)

:D

i suppose Clement Attlee for establishing the NHS and furthering the welfare state.


been a bit shite since (especially thatcher *coughEVILwomancough)

edit: Blair gets some real brownie points with me due to his (albeit slow) turning around thatcherism. the economy has been strong and stable, and he's stopped the country from getting worse after the evil one was in charge...

i suppose Clement Attlee for establishing the NHS and furthering the welfare state.


been a bit shite since (especially thatcher *coughEVILwomancough*)
That's pretty much exactly what I was gonna say :P great minds and all *nods* :fluffle:

i suppose Clement Attlee for establishing the NHS and furthering the welfare state.


Well the welfare reforms were planned during the war and were in Churchill's 1945 manifesto and had cross party support. So I wouldn't give him too much credit they would have been implimented even if Atlee lost.

and does it not strike you that Blair's stable economy is the result of Thatcherite labour reforms and not becuase Blair has changed anything. After reforming the bank of England very little has been done to the economy.

Spencer Perceval.

I put Attlee - Churchill is just too clichéd these days.

no backers for Gladstone then?

edit: Blair gets some real brownie points with me due to his (albeit slow) turning around thatcherism. the economy has been strong and stable, and he's stopped the country from getting worse after the evil one was in charge...

Come on, New Labour has simply continued the Tory economic policies set up by Lamont.

Technically, Disraeli was not jewish.

It is a faith and a culture rather than an ethnicity, and he had neither jewish faith nor culture.

Although his family had jewish origins, he was brought up an Anglican, and used this fact to circumvent the prejudice that would have barred him from politics. This play of the system marks him out as more of a pragmatic secularist at heart, abiding by cultural and religious conventions out of expediency alone. It remains unclear whether he belonged to any religion in any meaningful way.

Disraeli

I loved his artwork on Disraeli gears

Well the welfare reforms were planned during the war and were in Churchill's 1945 manifesto and had cross party support. So I wouldn't give him too much credit they would have been implimented even if Atlee lost.
yes, it was some dude's report that recommended the introduction of the NHS. doesn't stop Atlee being the one in power when it happened... i'll rephrase to "Atlee's government" if that's any better.

and does it not strike you that Blair's stable economy is the result of Thatcherite labour reforms and not becuase Blair has changed anything. After reforming the bank of England very little has been done to the economy.
oh come on... the economy has been stable in a large part because interest rates since 1997 have no longer in the hands of vote-grabbing politicians who are willing to bend and send the economy into cycles of boom-and-bust just to stay in power.

granted the reforms haven't been as far-reaching as i'd have hoped and they have continued very much along monetarist, thatcherist lines, but its still better than actual thatcherism

Come on, New Labour has simply continued the Tory economic policies set up by Lamont.
on the surface, yes. underneath they've slowed and held steady the social decline of the country, especially in terms of social and economic mobility of classes (which historically has always been on the increase, the most so in the 1970s... but the trend was reversed to an amazing effect in the 1980s and 90's)

I put Attlee - Churchill is just too clichéd these days.

he fought the Afgans as a cavalry officer, fought during the Cuban war of independence (hence the cigars) escaped from a Boer POW camp, worked as war corrispondant both at Spion Kop and Omdurman was a naval minister during the first world war, was on both the liberal and the conservative front bench, lead the country though six long years and rationing and then after losing a land slide election fought his way years later to being relected and then died the year the miniskirt was invented, the man was a legend...

Also, the fundamentals for the growth of Empire were laid down well before the time of Disraeli. The Honourable East India Company had its origins in Anglo-Dutch join ventures in the late 18th century, and subsequently it was Peel who presided over the setting in place of the trade, commerce and banking mechanisms, and the rise of the industrial middle class, that gave the Empire a life of its own.

Gladstone and Disraeli merely continued the process, placing the Empire on a more official footing and placing the military on a more professional footing, bringing to an end an era in which the British Empire consisted of an outsourced foreign policy run by privately-owned companies, many with their own colonial militaries.

GO Winston Churchill and Maggie Thatcher (the Iron Lady)!

Anyone who voted Thatcher gets a visit from Mr Crowbar.

Anyone who voted Thatcher gets a visit from Mr Crowbar.
Considering the vote is public, I would advise against making threats of violence. As far as NationStates rules are concerned, such threats carry the same weight as specifically-directed ones.

Who has been the greatest Prime Minister of Great Britain

Greatest Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, shurely?

I will be. Give me ten years...

Churchill, Thatcher, Disraeli, and Peel.

Churchill. A greatly flawed man, but still the one man who managed to rally a government together and turn Britain against Hitler. He had more than a little help in that matter, but he was the energy and the key to such a turn-about.

Disraeli 1st- I like him for the empire building
Thatcher 2nd- She was like Englands Reagan, how could you not like her.
Churchill 3rd- Dont like the guy personally, but I admire him as a war time leader and he was crucial to brining an end to Nazi War Machine.

Disraeli 1st- I like him for the empire building
Thatcher 2nd- She was like Englands Reagan, how could you not like her.

Because she stole the kid's milk?

i suppose Clement Attlee for establishing the NHS and furthering the welfare state.

edit: Blair gets some real brownie points with me due to his (albeit slow) turning around thatcherism. the economy has been strong and stable, and he's stopped the country from getting worse after the evil one was in charge...

Agreed on Attlee. His govt made the biggest positive difference to the lives of people in this country. Of course it was historic opportunity that allowed it to happen at that point.

Regarding Bliar tho...

1) His policies to get into office were all nicked from the Conservatives who were trying to repair their abysmal reputation post-thatch and -major. However, turning his party into "New Tory" has had some benefits. So I have to agree with you up to a point there.
2) Handing over foreign policy to the USA lock stock and barrel is the biggest point in disqualifying him. The massive campaign of deception to attempt to justify doing so, like with all the other spin and propaganda also gives him negative points.
3) Some of his appointees have been less than inspired choices. I realise that this happens with every govt. but after mandy (fired twice incl corruption allegations), irvine, sainsbury, birt, prezza (the latest) and blunkett (fired twice) and of course the whole cash for peerages scandal, it has a tendency to make Archer look like a wise choice.

Disraeli 1st- I like him for the empire building
.

Yeah cos invading and nicking other peoples' countries is always a good idea.

Holiday in Kashmir, anyone?

3) Some of his appointees have been less than inspired choices. I realise that this happens with every govt. but after mandy (fired twice incl corruption allegations), irvine, sainsbury, birt, prezza (the latest) and blunkett (fired twice) and of course the whole cash for peerages scandal, it has a tendency to make Archer look like a wise choice.
If Blair thinks this is 'whiter than white', then I think he needs to start using a new detergent.

The Tories had extramarital affairs and a couple of people who lied in court about their personal lives and were said to be 'corrupt'. They were mere amateurs compared to New Labour.

Given the choice between a politician having an affair and one taking money for honours, or for passports, or twisting the system for his lover, or spending hundreds of thousands on wallpaper, or changing sporting laws for someone who's just given you a huge donation, or taking up company directorships straight after leaving office against the ministerial code, or not declaring relationships with people lobbying the Government, I think I know which type of 'corruption' I prefer.

1) His policies to get into office were all nicked from the Conservatives who were trying to repair their abysmal reputation post-thatch and -major. However, turning his party into "New Tory" has had some benefits. So I have to agree with you up to a point there.

Can't see any benefits here - high tax and shit services (with someone making a mint out of it). The wost of both worlds.

2) Handing over foreign policy to the USA lock stock and barrel is the biggest point in disqualifying him. The massive campaign of deception to attempt to justify doing so, like with all the other spin and propaganda also gives him negative points.

Zing!

3) Some of his appointees have been less than inspired choices. I realise that this happens with every govt. but after mandy (fired twice incl corruption allegations), irvine, sainsbury, birt, prezza (the latest) and blunkett (fired twice) and of course the whole cash for peerages scandal, it has a tendency to make Archer look like a wise choice.

I'd take all Blair's bad choices over Archer's literature *shudders*.

What???

No Pitt the Elder or Lord Palmerston.http://www.smilietown.de/smilies/finger/finger_040.gif

What???

No Pitt the Elder or Lord Palmerston.http://www.smilietown.de/smilies/finger/finger_040.gif
Lord Palmerston! *punches out Harles*

Lord Palmerston! *punches out Harles*
LOL
Pitt the Elder!

Can't see any benefits here - high tax and shit services (with someone making a mint out of it). The wost of both worlds.


Good point. I left that out.

The economy is reasonably stable, but as you say high tax and shit services.

Of course at the next election the two main players will be offering to drop direct taxes (income tax, NI) and then after they get in, whack it all on indirect taxes (Fuel, etc).

And the same people who are bitching at the NHS, etc being cack will still vote for a tax cut, despite the obvious economic reality that cutting taxes leaves less money for public services. So we will end up with more schemes like PFI which run down the public services and put the money into the pockets of private companies using the same personnel as before but at a higher cost and less efficiently.

Did someone say we get the government we deserve?

he fought the Afgans as a cavalry officer, fought during the Cuban war of independence (hence the cigars) escaped from a Boer POW camp, worked as war corrispondant both at Spion Kop and Omdurman was a naval minister during the first world war, was on both the liberal and the conservative front bench, lead the country though six long years and rationing and then after losing a land slide election fought his way years later to being relected and then died the year the miniskirt was invented, the man was a legend...

I appreciate what he did, and I recognise that he was great and all that, but wasnt he a complete bastard in private?

Robert Peel, because he may be related to John Peel, who has done many good sessions for the whole world!

Spencer Perceval.

Tee Hee. Beat me to it.

[QUOTE=Barcodius]Yeah cos invading and nicking other peoples' countries is always a good idea.
[QUOTE]


Do they have a flag? :p

[QUOTE=Barcodius]Yeah cos invading and nicking other peoples' countries is always a good idea.

Do they have a flag? :p

I'm sure we can add ours into the top left corner if they have ;)

It saddens and disturbs me that several people have voted for our current self-serving, totalitarian, duplicitous incumbent.

John Smith....
oops, no, sorry, he died before he could get elected and we got that pseudo-Thatcherite Blair instead

Atlee! Rise up from thy grave and nick those buggers who won't give more funding to the bloody NHS!

Atlee! Rise up from thy grave and nick those buggers who won't give more funding to the bloody NHS!

whats wrong with the NHS? this has been their best year ever..

whats wrong with the NHS? this has been their best year ever..

I've been spending too much time with the yanks.

I read that as serious at first.

I think I need a lie down and a dose of british satire

We're all behind you, Winnie!

I voted Gladstone.

Oh and for anyone who doubts the greatness of Thatcher, I advise you compare what the country was like before her to what the country was like after her. Labour (and their subservience to Union bosses) had brought the country to a standstill, with a three day week and one of the most backward economies in Europe. By the end of Major (and I should stress that it was Major and Lamont, not Blair and Brown, who were responsible for the prosperity of the last 10 years), the country was utterly transformed into one of the best economies in Europe.

What many fail to realise about Thatcher is that she created a revolution in British politics. And, just as Lenin said, you cannot make a revolution wearing white gloves. There were always going to be casualities, like the miners. But the changes she made were necessary for Britain. We could not have continued with the ruinous schemes that had decimated our nation in the 1960s and 1970s.

Atlee by far...

Why the hell are people voting for Churchill?

He was a racist alcoholic who showed no respect to anyone other than white, middle-class, male, educated Britons.

Eugh... what a piece of shit he was...



And Thatcher?

Oh deary me...

Churchill, Thatcher, Disraeli, and Peel.
Why? Why? Why? Why?

Why? Why? Why? Why?
He's American- he knows nowt what he says.

He's American- he knows nowt what he says.
Ah - good point. And a right-wing, militaristic American at that.

Never mind.

He clearly doesn't mind the ruining of the mining industry, the teacher's strikes that left my mum without any education at all for at least a day a week at secondary school, Poll Tax and the general off-pissing of the USSR when we'd just come out of a relatively happy time with them, because she didn't like 'commies' and also fought over some strategically placed sheep in the Falklands.

I understand.

He clearly doesn't mind the ruining of the mining industry, the teacher's strikes that left my mum without any education at all for at least a day a week at secondary school, Poll Tax and the general off-pissing of the USSR when we'd just come out of a relatively happy time with them, because she didn't like 'commies' and also fought over some strategically placed sheep in the Falklands.

I understand.
No, actually, you've just shown a completely lack of understanding about politics in the 1980s.

Churchill, Thatcher, Disraeli, and Peel.

Why? Why? Why? Why?

1. The reason people are voting Churchill is probably something to with that whole 'saving our country in World War Two' school of thought. Which, to be fair, is quite a valid point.

2. As already mentioned, Thatcher turned this country around from the sick man of Europe into one of its leaders. Admittedly, that policy caused a lot of suffering and strife but one cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs.

3. Remember the Second Reform Act of 1867? The one that gave large numbers of the working class the vote for the first time? That was Disraeli's work.

4. Peel is the father of the modern police force and he repealed the crippling protectionist measure known as the Corn Laws.

Anyone ever seen the mostly mediocre movie, "Love Actually?" Well, I vote for Hugh Grant for his portrayal of a Prime Minister in that movie. Why? He told the movie American President to shove a pineapple up his arse at a press conference. How I wish Tony would work up the courage to do that.

Anyone ever seen the mostly mediocre movie, "Love Actually?" Well, I vote for Hugh Grant for his portrayal of a Prime Minister in that movie. Why? He told the movie American President to shove a pineapple up his arse at a press conference. How I wish Tony would work up the courage to do that.

To get the pineapple up there, george would have to remove tony's head first.

1. The reason people are voting Churchill is probably something to with that whole 'saving our country in World War Two' school of thought. Which, to be fair, is quite a valid point.

2. As already mentioned, Thatcher turned this country around from the sick man of Europe into one of its leaders. Admittedly, that policy caused a lot of suffering and strife but one cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs.

3. Remember the Second Reform Act of 1867? The one that gave large numbers of the working class the vote for the first time? That was Disraeli's work.

4. Peel is the father of the modern police force and he repealed the crippling protectionist measure known as the Corn Laws.

1. If Britain had followed Churchill's idea of a Grand Alliance in the mid 1930s instead of Chamberlain's policy of Appeasement then Britain certainly would have fallen to Hitler and the Nazis. Also, people seem to forget Gallipoli.

2. Well I really have nothing against Thatcher.

3. Disraeli shouldn't be up there at all. I admit, passing the Second Reform Act in 1867 with a minority government can be seen as a success, but the Act was always gonna be passed, with all the Radicals and at least half the Liberals behind any bill giving the working class the vote.
Disraeli's second ministry was a success, but all the work is down to the Home Office Minister Richard Cross who proposed most of the legislation.
Disraeli then did not have a reply to Gladstone's Midlothian Campaign and lost the next general election.

4. I agree with Robert Peel being on the list. The repeal of the Corn Laws may have crippled the Conservative Party for 40 years, but was absolutely the correct step to take during the Irish Potato Famine and was a step in the right direction of a free market economy.

Thatcher, with Churchill in a close second.

And as for jug ears.......:upyours:

Ok for a start will people stop quoting Stalin, He is NOT a good example of how to rule a county, somewhat like Thatcher coughevilcough.

The fact is the economy did recover, but France and Germany were in the shit at the end of the 70's too (Global factors people, 1.globalisation 2.emergence of east asia taking all the manufacturing 3. Oil Crisis 4.Cold war) and by the 90's they seemed to be doing alright and today they still have their own national industries, in fact the reason Britain seemed to turn around in the 80's was the global economy recovered. Thatchers rule really had four effects, screwed the poor, screwed up public services, created an amazingly crap Bureaucracy , and sorry to be all cuddly here, destroyed the British Community.

Gladstone and Peel get my vote.

Ok for a start will people stop quoting Stalin, He is NOT a good example of how to rula a county, somewhat like Thatcher coughevilcough.

The fact is the economy did recover, but France and Germany were in the shit at the end of the 70's too (Global factors people, 1.globalisation 2.emergence of east asia taking all the manufacturing 3. Oil Crisis 4.Cold war) and by the 90's they seemed to be doing alright and today they still have their own national industries, in fact the reason Britain seemed to turn around in the 80's was the global economy recovered. Thatchers rule really had four effects, screwed the poor, screwed up public services, created an amazingly crap Beurocracy, and sorry to be all cuddly here, destroyed the British Community.

Gladstone and Peel get my vote.

Much as I dislike a socialist state, Stalin did transmogrify Russia from an anachronistic farce in 1929, to a super power in 1953. One cannot contend that Stalin was a poor leader; a reprehensible potentate, yes, an inept leader, no.

Much as I dislike a socialist state, Stalin did transmogrify Russia from an anachronistic farce in 1929, to a super power in 1953. One cannot contend that Stalin was a poor leader; a reprehensible potentate, yes, an inept leader, no.


Inept no, he was possibly the only way the world stopped Hitler. But to claim it is a sensible, balanced or sustainable way to rule is completely wrong.

If the eggs were the kulaks and the Omlette was stopping a global fascist state, its arguable his way was the only way forward. If the eggs are your public services, the poor, and the bonds of your society, and the Omlette is a short but intense economic recovery followed by a four year recession, I'd have to say I want my eggs back.

You've managed to get the Uk's worst Pm up there, and left out the best (Lloyd george)

You've managed to get the Uk's worst Pm up there, and left out the best (Lloyd george)

Moron.

"Taffy is a welshman, taffy is a thief". :)

Disraeli wasn't bad actually.

Inept no, he was possibly the only way the world stopped Hitler. But to claim it is a sensible, balanced or sustainable way to rule is completely wrong.

If the eggs were the kulaks and the Omlette was stopping a global fascist state, its arguable his way was the only way forward. If the eggs are your public services, the poor, and the bonds of your society, and the Omlette is a short but intense economic recovery followed by a four year recession, I'd have to say I want my eggs back.

Public services? Oh diddums, get a better job

The poor? Try raising the minimum wage and removing unemployment benefits.

Societies bonds? Society dos not exist. The concerns of the individual exist.

Public services? Oh diddums, get a better job

The poor? Try raising the minimum wage and removing unemployment benefits.

Societies bonds? Society dos not exist. The concerns of the individual exist.

Frankly what this means???

In fact under Thatcher the number of Administrative Civil Servants increased at the largest unpresidented rate until our current administration, she just got rid of the people that did the work!

Oh I'm glad you have solved the problem of the poor, I'll pass on your comments to Bob Geldof

Sorry I forgot Society doesn't exist, not in the UK anyway.

Public services? Oh diddums, get a better job

The poor? Try raising the minimum wage and removing unemployment benefits.

Societies bonds? Society dos not exist. The concerns of the individual exist.

You yanks just don't get the concept of "national insurance" do you.

You yanks just don't get the concept of "national insurance" do you.

I'm English. I simply object to any measure that reduces personal repsonsibility.

I'm English. I simply object to any measure that reduces personal repsonsibility.

In that case I apologise for calling you a yank ;)

Actually I do agree that there is a problem with personal responsibility. Trouble is that you are stuck between two evils and there has to be a sensible balance somewhere.

On the list, Attlee.
I do feel that Chamberlain has been unfairly left out. It was he who provided the time, and the money, to start the reconstruction of the British Armed Forces before the Second World War which led to our eventual survival and "Churchill's victory".

Moron.

"Taffy is a welshman, taffy is a thief". :)

Disraeli wasn't bad actually.
You forget his good work, the peoples Budget, Pensions, the Munisions Crisis, Versille. If you dont' recognise his achivments you don't understand British poltics at all. As for your commetns:

What happens if there isn't a better job available. what happens if your unemployed becuase your buisness fails and you've got 2 kids to support? We tried the system you suggest, and you know what...

it didn't work!

On the list, Attlee.
I do feel that Chamberlain has been unfairly left out. It was he who provided the time, and the money, to start the reconstruction of the British Armed Forces before the Second World War which led to our eventual survival and "Churchill's victory".

It is true, Appeasement was the saviour of Great Britain. Churchill's 'Grand Alliance' would undoubtedly have been an absolute failure and would have left Britain fighting a very powerful opponent without any air defenses.

Many people seem to miss this little chapter of history when judging Churchill, a bad-tempered, hot-headed old grump with a love for war.

You forget his good work, the peoples Budget, Pensions, the Munisions Crisis, Versille. If you dont' recognise his achivments you don't understand British poltics at all. As for your commetns:



I don't think that Versailles can come under the achievements column. It was merely a peace treaty that set the scene for another major conflict in Europe between France and Germany; but I suppose this was more of a blunder down to Clemenceau rather than Lloyd George.

I don't think that Versailles can come under the achievements column. It was merely a peace treaty that set the scene for another major conflict in Europe between France and Germany; but I suppose this was more of a blunder down to Clemenceau rather than Lloyd George.
It was onyl as sucessful as it was-it only worked becuase lloyd Geroge was there. it was not a perfect peace, but no peace would ahev come if he hadn't provided a middle ground between Clemancue and Wilson.