NationStates Jolt Archive

30 years ago (as of tomorrow, according to Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_4)), Margaret Thatcher became the first female PM of the United Kingdom. So, what say you? Is Lady Thatcher's legacy good, bad, or in between?

Discuss.

I'd hit that.

Only surpassed by Churchhill.

Pretty good as PM, but far from perfect.

I'd hit that.

Wait... WHAT?

No idea, the only thing Thatcher is known for with me is the Falklands War...

Which I used to disprove the theory that if Women ruled the world, there would be no war, lol...

Wait... WHAT?

Someone has a geriatric fetish.

It's funny, most UK citizens I've met regard her as either evil incarnate or the best thing since sliced bread. I have yet to meet one that views her as somewhere between those two extremes. She's like Chavez in that regard; 99% of her fellow countrymen (and -women) either absolutely love her or absolutely hate her.

Wait... WHAT?

Ah, but he never said what he'd hit her with. ;)

Wait... WHAT?
I feel violated and unclean just from reading TSI's post. urgh.

No idea, the only thing Thatcher is known for with me is the Falklands War...

Which I used to disprove the theory that if Women ruled the world, there would be no war, lol...
That's unfair. I don't think it can be used as an example to prove women wouldn't go to war. Just that women can be as obsessed about remaining in power as any man, and are willing to go to any length - including committing their armed forces to a pointless, avoidable war - in order to do so.

That's unfair. I don't think it can be used as an example to prove women wouldn't go to war. Just that women can be as obsessed about remaining in power as any man, and are willing to go to any length - including committing their armed forces to a pointless, avoidable war - in order to do so.

I think its an example of Women being as willing to go to war as Men...

Im just saying that the Ability to wage war is inherent in Both Genders...

really just the UK's Reagan(yes i know she came to power first)

really just the UK's Reagan(yes i know she came to power first)

Pretty much...

That's unfair. I don't think it can be used as an example to prove women wouldn't go to war. Just that women can be as obsessed about remaining in power as any man, and are willing to go to any length - including committing their armed forces to a pointless, avoidable war - in order to do so.

Pointless my ass. The Argentines launched a direct attack the British millitary. Its like saying the US involvement in the Pacific was pointless after Pearl Harbor.

really just the UK's Reagan(yes i know she came to power first)

Which makes her great.

Which makes her great.

I find the easy analogy, regardless of your opinion of either.

I'd hit that.

There's hummus-vomit on my monitor, you toad.

I think its an example of Women being as willing to go to war as Men...

Im just saying that the Ability to wage war is inherent in Both Genders...
I think it's more an example of women being as willing as men to do anything possible, including going to war, if it means holding onto power.

There's hummus-vomit on my monitor, you toad.

Oh dear.

She fixed a lot of things, she broke some others. She was a good Prime Minister, but far from flawless.

Poll tax?

Pointless my ass. The Argentines launched a direct attack the British millitary. Its like saying the US involvement in the Pacific was pointless after Pearl Harbor.

wow. you really have no grasp about History do you? There's no way, whatsoever, that anyone could possibly contrive to equate Pearl Harbour to the Falklands invasion. It's not even comparing apples to oranges, it's like comparing an apple to freaking sun.

wow. you really have no grasp about History do you? There's no way, whatsoever, that anyone could possibly contrive to equate Pearl Harbour to the Falklands invasion. It's not even comparing apples to oranges, it's like comparing an apple to freaking sun.

The Argentines gave several hints of an attack, just like the Japanese did, the difference was that the Japanese did not consider Hawaii its territory, and that they did not invade. The British responded in force to an attack on its millitary.

Too young to know, and plus I was in the United States.

Wait... WHAT?

So no one here finds power sexy?

My 3 favorite British PM's are Churchill, Thatcher and Disraeli.

http://www.solarnavigator.net/history/explorers_history/Winston_Churchill_British_bulldog_portrait.jpg
http://www.getset.com.tw/uk_information/history/images/ukhistory_margaretthatcher.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Benjamin_Disraeli%2C_1st_Earl_of_Beaconsfield_-_Project_Gutenberg_eText_13619.jpg

I wonder if we can get Thatcher and Nancy Reagan to mud wrestle.

So no one here finds power sexy?

Supposedly the Ultimate Aphrodisiac.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Benjamin_Disraeli%2C_1st_Earl_of_Beaconsfield_-_Project_Gutenberg_eText_13619.jpg

You don't even know who I am. (heh all the fmaily guy quotes can come out on this thread)

Actually I wouldn't have always picked it for you but I will give it to you a good pick I say.

My 3 favorite British PM's are Churchill, Thatcher and Disraeli.

Agree with the first, disagree with the second, don't know the third.
I wonder if we can get Thatcher and Nancy Reagan to mud wrestle.
Comrade, come with me. You have a meeting with our mutual friend Comrade Stalin.

Total. Slut.

*nod*

Only surpassed by Churchhill.
What, in terms of cretinous behavior outside of wars? Aye.

Not a great fan.

Viva Maggie Thatcher the Iron Lady of Britain. Viva USA President Ronald Reagan.

Viva Maggie Thatcher the Iron Lady of Britain. Viva USA President Ronald Reagan.

Isn't he dead?

How can we cry out for hime to live long?

Viva Maggie Thatcher the Iron Lady of Britain. Viva USA President Ronald Reagan.
Just give me a second while I get the bile out of my mouth... *cough*

No.

Just give me a second while I get the bile out of my mouth... *cough*

No.

lol.

Agree with the first, disagree with the second, don't know the third.
Big time British Imperialist.

Benjamin Disraeli, 1st Earl of Beaconsfield, KG, PC, FRS, born Benjamin D'Israeli, (21 December 1804 – 19 April 1881), was a British Conservative statesman and literary figure. He served in government for three decades, twice as Prime Minister. A teenage convert to Anglicanism, he was nonetheless the country's first and thus far only Prime Minister of Jewish heritage.[1][2][3][4] He played an instrumental role in the creation of the modern Conservative Party after the Corn Laws schism of 1846.

From 1852 onwards, Disraeli's career would also be marked by his often intense rivalry with William Gladstone, who eventually rose to become leader of the Liberal Party. In this feud, Disraeli was aided by his warm friendship with Queen Victoria, who came to detest Gladstone during the latter's first premiership in the 1870s. In 1876 Disraeli was raised to the peerage as the Earl of Beaconsfield, capping nearly four decades in the House of Commons.

Before and during his political career, Disraeli was well-known as a literary and social figure, although his novels are not generally regarded as a part of the Victorian literary canon. He mainly wrote romances, of which Sybil and Vivian Grey are perhaps the best-known today. He is unusual among British Prime Ministers for having gained equal social and political renown. He was twice successful as the Glasgow University Conservative Association's candidate for Rector of the University, holding the post for two full terms between 1871 and 1877.

Big time British Imperialist.

I hope he died a very nasty death.

I hope he died a very nasty death.
*shrugs*

He died at 77 after falling ill?

I hope he died a very nasty death.
The British Empire was awesome. You might just not understand that.

The British Empire was awesome. You might just not understand that.

It was awesome to some and not so much to others...

Its certainly been good to us colonials over the years, despite that whole revolution bit, :p

*shrugs*

He died at 77 after falling ill?

Not good enough.

Imperialism is evil no matter who does it. Whether it's the annexation of Czechoslovakia by the Third Reich, the U.S. colonization of the Philippines, the Bolshevist invasion of Georgia, or the British Raj, subjugating other people and denying them the right of self-determination is evil.

With Churchill as your competition, no one can be the best.

The British Empire was awesome. You might just not understand that.
This.

My 3 favorite empires, in order of awesomess:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/RomanEmpire_117.svg/800px-RomanEmpire_117.svg.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/The_British_Empire.png/800px-The_British_Empire.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/German_Empire%2C_Wilhelminian_third_version.svg/800px-German_Empire%2C_Wilhelminian_third_version.svg.png

Not good enough.

Imperialism is evil no matter who does it. Whether it's the annexation of Czechoslovakia by the Third Reich, the U.S. colonization of the Philippines, the Bolshevist invasion of Georgia, or the British Raj, subjugating other people and denying them the right of self-determination is evil.
Oh aye. The British in India, just like the Third Reich. Uhu... but not.

The British Empire was awesome. You might just not understand that.

Yes, repressing other people is so awesome. :rolleyes:

Only slightly less evil then Reagan.

With Churchill as your competition, no one can be the best.
Churchill was an arsehole ;)

Oh aye. The British in India, just like the Third Reich. Uhu... but not.

If the British Empire was so wonderful, Indians would have never wanted independence.

Yes, repressing other people is so awesome. :rolleyes:
Aye well as someone who hates freedom, but loves long-term progress and peace, that's my opinion.

Yes, repressing other people is so awesome. :rolleyes:

It can inspire some awe, thats for sure, ;)

Not good enough.

Imperialism is evil no matter who does it. Whether it's the annexation of Czechoslovakia by the Third Reich, the U.S. colonization of the Philippines, the Bolshevist invasion of Georgia, or the British Raj, subjugating other people and denying them the right of self-determination is evil.
Meh. It's bad for some and good for others, like anything.

India is better off because of the British. America, Canada, Australia and NZ exist because of the British. South Africa became the first industrialized country in Africa originally because of the Empire, etc etc etc

If the British Empire was so wonderful, Indians would have never wanted independence.
If the British Empire was so much like the Third Reich, we wouldn't have given it to them as best we could ;)

Aye well as someone who hates freedom

That explains everything.

That explains everything.
I only hate it a bit -_-

I hope he died a very nasty death.

He is also the PM who brought about a lot of workers rights to ensure that they were treated with a bit more respect such as decriminalising trade unions, allowed picket lines, limited the hours that people could be forced to work especially children and allowed workers to sue their employers if they breached their contract. Amongst many other changes he made and made conditions better that nowadays we would find horrendous


He also brought in more regulation over the sale of food, seeked to improve the health and well being of his people, and established better education for all children this was also included in his workplace reforms where he made it illegal for children under the age of 9 to work in factories and instead must go to school.

Meh. It's bad for some and good for others, like anything.

India is better off because of the British. America, Canada, Australia and NZ exist because of the British. South Africa became the first industrialized country in Africa originally because of the Empire, etc etc etc

Imperialism is never good for the people being colonized. It's only good for the colonialists.

This.

My 3 favorite empires, in order of awesomess:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/RomanEmpire_117.svg/800px-RomanEmpire_117.svg.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/The_British_Empire.png/800px-The_British_Empire.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/German_Empire%2C_Wilhelminian_third_version.svg/800px-German_Empire%2C_Wilhelminian_third_version.svg.png

All I have to say to that is...:

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/3375/800pxthebritishempire.png

I only hate it a bit -_-

Fair enough. You're entitled to your opinion.

I think it's more an example of women being as willing as men to do anything possible, including going to war, if it means holding onto power.
Aren't you two arguing the same thing (ie women go to war)? Not that Thatcher needed to prove that. Catherine the Great, anyone?
Oh aye. The British in India, just like the Third Reich. Uhu... but not.
When you're a nation of violent, imperialist, racist assholes, you're a nation of violent, imperialist, racist assholes. There are no degrees, there is just essence.

All I have to say to that is...:

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/3375/800pxthebritishempire.png
It's ours. *shrug*

It even has a flag, as of 1963, and its own money, as of 2008.

All I have to say to that is...:

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/3375/800pxthebritishempire.png

British Empire: We do it, because we can! :p

As far as Thatcher? "Margaret Thatcher, Milk Snatcher," is fun to say. So I guess I support her existence as something to be opposed with rhyming slogans that may or may not actually mean anything.

All I have to say to that is...:

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/3375/800pxthebritishempire.png

What's your point?

Imperialism is never good for the people being colonized. It's only good for the colonialists.
Well, the colonialists are people too.

But in India, I'm serious that the British Empire had a positive effect and India was better off for it.

All I have to say to that is...:



Claim flows through the falklands or someshit. Still, a lot of countries don't recognize that that bit of Antarctica is rightfully British.

Imperialism is never good for the people being colonized. It's only good for the colonialists.

As much as I like TAI as a person, remember he is "Captian Only the Economy Matters", meaning if you rape, torture, exile, and slaughter 100 million of an ethnic minority, but your a capitalist, he's going to defend you.

Well, the colonialists are people too.

But in India, I'm serious that the British Empire had a positive effect and India was better off for it.

Quick question TAI is the only reason why you piked Disraeli as your 3rd choice because he was an Imperialist?

Still, she could have integrated British Honduras into metropolitan Britain instead of independence. It would have been totally ace.

Quick question TAI is the only reason why you piked Disraeli as your 3rd choice because he was an Imperialist?

Maybe it was because he was a Jew?

Maybe it was because he was a Jew?

True if you mean Jews to be a race rather than simply a religion. He did after all convert to Anglicanism while a teenager.

Imperialism is never good for the people being colonized. It's only good for the colonialists.
Can't say I agree, but then I guess I wouldn't. We messed up in parts of Africa, and the whole India But Also Pakistan(s) thing was a bit of a mistake, although an understandable one given the circumstances.

The British Empire had its good times and its bad times.

The early days were pretty terrible. Can't argue with that. What happened with the slave trade and so on was dreadful, and I'm proud to have Britain as the first European state to ban slavery.

The 1800s-very early 1990s were where we learnt some tact and compassion as regards the colonised. This was a Good Thing.

I'm pretty proud of the 20th century decolonisation process, where we wanted nothing to do with the racist regimes in Rhodesia and South Africa, and actively aided people like the new Malaysian state in the 1940s-50s.

The economic might of the states in the Indian Subcontinent and Singapore/Malaysia has at least something to do with British nation-building there before the handover. You can't deny that.
When you're a nation of violent, imperialist, racist assholes, you're a nation of violent, imperialist, racist assholes. There are no degrees, there is just essence.
... well that's just ridiculous. There absolutely are degrees. Providing infrastructure and security to people, at the expense of tribal self-determination is simply not the same as rounding up large portions of the populations and actively engaging in genocide.

Quick question TAI is the only reason why you piked Disraeli as your 3rd choice because he was an Imperialist?

Nope, though I won't lie it's a main one. I also like what he did for Britain's Conservative party (although his Afghanistan campaign sort of hurt it in the end of his days), for his close working relationship with the Queen and for how he humanized industrial-capitalism. Industrialization is a good thing, but no doubt it was ugly in Britain in its youth. Disraeli helped to give Industrial-capitalism a make-over and a new coat of paint. This, naturally, was good for the British who were working with horrible conditions.

I also think it's fascinating that he was a PM as a British-Jew, and this was in the 1800's.

Well, the colonialists are people too.

Of course.

But in India, I'm serious that the British Empire had a positive effect and India was better off for it.

No chapter of history is steeped further in blood than the history of colonialism. Blood was shed uselessly and senselessly. Flourishing lands were laid waste; whole peoples destroyed and exterminated. All this can in no way be extenuated or justified.

The marvelous achievements of the British administration in India were overshadowed by the vain arrogance and stupid race pride of the white man.

Nope, though I won't lie it's a main one. I also like what he did for Britain's Conservative party (although his Afghanistan campaign sort of hurt it in the end of his days), for his close working relationship with the Queen and for how he humanized industrial-capitalism. Industrialization is a good thing, but no doubt it was ugly in Britain in its youth. Disraeli helped to give Industrial-capitalism a make-over and a new coat of paint. This, naturally, was good for the British who were working with horrible conditions.

I also think it's fascinating that he was a PM as a British-Jew, and this was in the 1800's.

True he did help the Conservative party (and something I forgot to mention in my other post) he also reformed the electoral process and gave people better representation such as giving larger cities like Manchester and Liverpool more members in the House of Commons and getting rid of the dirty boroughs.

True if you mean Jews to be a race rather than simply a religion. He did after all convert to Anglicanism while a teenager.
On the Jewish Question™, lulz, I wouldn't call Disraeli Jewish were he to convert to Anglicanism and if he didn't recognize himself as a Jew. . . but I do because he considered himself Jewish even while converting.

Although born of Jewish parents, Disraeli was baptised in the Christian faith at the age of thirteen, and remained an observant Anglican for the rest of his life.[51] At the same time, he was culturally Jewish and believed the two positions to be compatible. A famous quote of his response to an anti-semitic snide remark by a British politician runs as follows: "Yes, I am a Jew, and when the ancestors of the right honourable gentleman were brutal savages in an unknown island, mine were priests in the temple of Solomon", to which it is said was replied; "This 'Island' was never not known to us. Exactly where is it that you are coming from?"[1] Adam Kirsch, in his biography of Disraeli, states that his Jewishness was "both the greatest obstacle to his ambition and its greatest engine."[52]

Ludwig von Mises
Well I'm glad we've got an Austrian Libertarian's opinion on the British Empire. Ho yes.

Of course.

Look, I'm also a fan of von Mises, though not to the extent you are, but this quote is simply too much of a generalization and just false:

The marvelous achievements of the British administration in India were overshadowed by the vain arrogance and stupid race pride of the white man.
Racial pride does not overshadow marvelous achievements, especially during a time when it was accepted, normal and common to have racial pride.

On the Jewish Question™, lulz, I wouldn't call Disraeli Jewish since he converted to Anglicanism and didn't recognize himself as a Jew. . . but I do because he considered himself Jewish anyway.

Fair enough.

... well that's just ridiculous. There absolutely are degrees. Providing infrastructure and security to people, at the expense of tribal self-determination is simply not the same as rounding up large portions of the populations and actively engaging in genocide.
Yep, that's all that British Empire was. The loss of "tribal self-determination." War? Violent occupation? Religious oppression? Economic exploitation? Famine? Disease? The Jaillianwala Bagh Massacre? What are you talking about, you filthy colonials!
At least the Germans have the courtesy to feel bad about Nazism.

It's ours. *shrug*

It even has a flag, as of 1963, and its own money, as of 2008.

What? I thought the British flag was made in 1606?

And, what?....

Racial pride does not overshadow marvelous achievements, especially during a time when it was accepted, normal and common to have racial pride.
Can't say I really agree with you there. Racial hubris is a problem unto itself, which is why I'm particularly proud that we tried to form 'native' civil services in the run-up to their independence.

Fair enough.
I had a big typo in there that threw off the meaning of my point. I went back to edit. Hope you understood.

Yep, that's all that British Empire was. The loss of "tribal self-determination." War? Violent occupation? Religious oppression? Economic exploitation? Famine? Disease? The Jaillianwala Bagh Massacre? What are you talking about, you filthy colonials!
At least the Germans have the courtesy to feel bad about Nazism.

I'm pretty sure most of the British do not support the many horrible actions of the British Empire, although some do. Just like there is still a substantial neo-Nazi presence in Germany.

Can't say I really agree with you there. Racial hubris is a problem unto itself, which is why I'm particularly proud that we tried to form 'native' civil services in the run-up to their independence.
When you monocle wearers started to do that, it was generally already after WWII, when racial pride and British supremacy were falling out of fashion due to the racism associated with the Nazis and the holocaust, etc.

Aren't you two arguing the same thing (ie women go to war)?
when has agreement ever got in the way of an argument?

(anyway, maybe I was reading too much into his comment - I took him to mean that Thatcher proves that women are as warfaring as men but I view her decision to invade the Falklands was solely a political decision, in an [successful as it turned out] attempt to win re-election. War can be fought for many other reasons afterall; re-election being just one of them)

I had a big typo in there that threw off the meaning of my point. I went back to edit. Hope you understood.

Yeah though did you miss the word "he"?

I actually understood your meaning from the quote you posted.

I think.

I had a big typo in there that threw off the meaning of my point. I went back to edit. Hope you understood.

Now it makes even less sense.

Look, I'm also a fan of von Mises, though not to the extent you are, but this quote is simply too much of a generalization and just false:

No, it isn't. Look at Leopold II's Congo "Free" State, German South West Africa (where 75% of the Herero were exterminated), the Second Boer War (where Afrikaner women and children perished in concentration camps), the U.S. occupation of the Philippines (where our "counterinsurgency" operations resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths), the French rule in Haiti, etc.

Yeah though did you miss the word "he"?

I actually understood your meaning from the quote you posted.

I think.

Indeed. Re-stated my point.

No, it isn't. Look at Leopold II's Congo "Free" State, German South West Africa (where 75% of the Herero were exterminated), the Second Boer War (where Afrikaner women and children perished in concentration camps), the U.S. occupation of the Philippines (where our "counterinsurgency" operations resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths), the French rule in Haiti, etc.

None of which have anything to do with his quote about the British and India? ? ?

Indeed. Re-stated my point.

Indeed and I do understand.

Yep, that's all that British Empire was.
You have to be fucking kidding me. What about the economic development, and the opening of insular pseudo-states to the rest of the world, to the progress that humanity has made?
The loss of "tribal self-determination." War? Violent occupation? Religious oppression? Economic exploitation? Famine? Disease?
All of which were only invented by the British? Because before we turned up, the natives just kicked about writing poetry about the wonderfulness of their lives, and making pals with each other?

Of course. Because economic exploitation, war and famine are European inventions. Aye, that'd be the one.
The Jaillianwala Bagh Massacre?
Which lost the man in charge his job, and had very wide criticism? I don't think you'll find many people defending his barbarism. I'm certainly not one of them. That was a particularly dark time for the British in India.
At least the Germans have the courtesy to feel bad about Nazism.
What, and all of the British are unrepentant about the empire? I think you'll find that's not the case at all.
What? I thought the British flag was made in 1606?
It has its own seperate flag, same as most of our colonies or ex-colonies.
And, what?....
Aye, coined its own tender starting in 2008.

None of which have anything to do with his quote about the British and India? ? ?

If I recall, the British killed plenty of Indians, and life for the Indians wasn't exactly rainbows and sunshine.

No, it isn't. Look at Leopold II's Congo "Free" State, German South West Africa (where 75% of the Herero were exterminated), the U.S. occupation of the Philippines (where our "counterinsurgency" operations resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths), the French rule in Haiti, etc
Not British. Have no love for the above empires, esp. the Belgian one.
the Second Boer War (where Afrikaner women and children perished in concentration camps).
Was a dreadful mess.

Of course. Because economic exploitation, war and famine are European inventions. Aye, that'd be the one.

They're a human invention.

If I recall, the British killed plenty of Indians, and life for the Indians wasn't exactly rainbows and sunshine.

No, it was not. And the British ruined a number of archeological treasures by dismantling them and selling the pieces, or just demolishing them altogether: The Taj Mahal came this close to being destroyed.

Not British.

I'm aware.

Was a dreadful mess.

No argument there.

They're a human invention.
Damn right. And were the people in the countries we took over not human?

It has its own seperate flag, same as most of our colonies or ex-colonies.

Aye, coined its own tender starting in 2008.

Ah, I see what you mean, you mean specifically the British Antarctic Territory...

I was under the Impression that you mean the Empire as a whole, and Im like: :confused:

lol

Damn right. And were the people in the countries we took over not human?

Of course. My point was that no group invented those things (mass murder, exploitation, etc.). They're what make us human.

Of course. My point was that no group invented those things (mass murder, exploitation, etc.). They're what make us human.
Mass murder and exploitation make us human?

Mass murder and exploitation make us human?

Well, they're some of our more prominent traits. :(

Mass murder and exploitation make us human?
They're a part of us. Not the whole of us.

Still waiting on any reason to hate or love Margaret Thatcher beyond the Falklands...

Still waiting on any reason to hate or love Margaret Thatcher beyond the Falklands...
Destruction of the railway system, losing the industrial parts of the UK to save London and support for arsehole dictators, esp. the South Africans, to start with.

Still waiting on any reason to hate or love Margaret Thatcher beyond the Falklands...

I dont even hate her for the Falklands, the Falkland Islanders were British Citizens, if Im not mistaken, and actively wanted to remain under British Jurisdiction....

Allowing Argentina to just run ramshod over them, would be denying their right to self determination...

Well she did lose Hong Kong.

Well she did lose Hong Kong.
That was very careless of her. One would think with a piece of land that size, HK would have been rather difficult to lose.


tbh, how she handled HK is probably one of the, if not the only, best things she did.

Probably the greatest.

We need someone like her now.

tbh, how she handled HK is probably one of the, if not the only, best things she did.

Didn't look so stellar in 1989.

All this talk of favourite PMs and no Clement Attlee? For shame.

Still waiting on any reason to hate or love Margaret Thatcher beyond the Falklands...
She enjoys snatching milk. From whom? I don't know. Why? I don't know that, either. What does she do with the milk after it has been snatched? I can't say.
But milk is definitely being snatched. Oh yes.

Pointless my ass. The Argentines launched a direct attack the British millitary. Its like saying the US involvement in the Pacific was pointless after Pearl Harbor.

Yet she did nothing when the US invaded Grenada.

UK industry needed restructuring but she did it in a blockheaded ideological fashion, so she did as much economic damage as she did good. The only good thing she did was take us more into Europe.

30 years ago (as of tomorrow, according to Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_4)), Margaret Thatcher became the first female PM of the United Kingdom. So, what say you? Is Lady Thatcher's legacy good, bad, or in between?

Discuss.

I don't think "destructively evil fuck" is in between good and bad......

30 years ago (as of tomorrow, according to Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_4)), Margaret Thatcher became the first female PM of the United Kingdom. So, what say you? Is Lady Thatcher's legacy good, bad, or in between?

Discuss.

evil. in some ways a necessary evil, but mostly just evil.

Still waiting on any reason to hate or love Margaret Thatcher beyond the Falklands...

Her public interactions re: Northern Ireland didn't exactly help the situation imo.

A totally average PM in policy who cleverly managed to manipulate the media into presenting her as a great leader.

In her first term her strict monetarist policies were directly responsible for exacerbating poor economic performance. She only stayed in due to the Falklands war. She then dismantled the psuedo-social democratic state, disengaging the state from the economy in a way that offered some short term improved prospects for growth but simulateneously reduced the capacity of the state to regulate the economy; I need not go into the consequences of this.

What limited economic success there was during her reign was primarily due to the benefits of North Sea oil. In the late 1980s her government pursued an unwise inflationary policy in order to win another election (the Lawson boom) which created inflationary pressures that ultimately necessitated a "stop" policy to replace the "go" and joining the ERM in order to remove the inflationary tendencies in the economy.

Her abrasive style and ideology also led to an unneccessarily intense conflict with the unions and the rapid decline of the mining industry, since many customers took the opportunity of low supply to convert to oil and gas. A more constructive policy could have made possible a more gradual transition away from coal and the development of a well-thought out regional policy to address the problems of mass regional unemployment problems caused by the decline in the industry.

On the good side: she won a war (one that was just, since it was an attack on a community who self-identified as British).

She enjoys snatching milk. From whom? I don't know. Why? I don't know that, either. What does she do with the milk after it has been snatched? I can't say.
But milk is definitely being snatched. Oh yes.

She put an end to free milk for school kids. I often wonder whether I would have grown up big and strong with a penis that women wouldn't laugh at if I were given free milk at school..

I hate her..

That was very careless of her. One would think with a piece of land that size, HK would have been rather difficult to lose.


tbh, how she handled HK is probably one of the, if not the only, best things she did.

Are you kidding? she walked into the meeting with Deng Xiaoping demanding China cede the 99 year lease territory in perpetuity. If she had don't like the Portuguese the Chinese would have said we are not ready to adsorb the territory yet. Just call it a Chinese territory under British administration.

She put an end to free milk for school kids. I often wonder whether I would have grown up big and strong with a penis that women wouldn't laugh at if I were given free milk at school..

I hate her..

It was ended here too, speaking to people who had to go to school through it they would have been much happier if they didn't have to.

It was ended here too, speaking to people who had to go to school through it they would have been much happier if they didn't have to.

Yeah, yeah.. The point is Margerat Thatcher is to blame for all of my inadaquacies!

Probably the greatest.

We need someone like her now.

Communist for Margaret Thatcher, eh?

Communist for Margaret Thatcher, eh?

Indeed.

She put an end to free milk for school kids. I often wonder whether I would have grown up big and strong with a penis that women wouldn't laugh at if I were given free milk at school.
I remember free milk in primary school. We used to get a whole bottle of the stuff, and only one of those tiny, ineffectual straws you occasionally get in bars to drink the whole bastard with. I also remember singing songs about Maggie Thatcher, and knowing from a very young age that she was a horrible woman.

Then John Major was boring.

Then Tony Blair promised things could only get better.

Then they didn't.

Rather than a phased closure of mines, she pressed ahead and just shut them, turning parts of wales into unemployment blackspots which still remain.....Her policies of less regulation were a contributory factor to the current economic mess....

Rather than a phased closure of mines, she pressed ahead and just shut them, turning parts of wales into unemployment blackspots which still remain.....Her policies of less regulation were a contributory factor to the current economic mess....

How did I know you'd say something like that.

How did I know you'd say something like that.
Any kind of refutal? No?

.Her policies of less regulation were a contributory factor to the current economic mess....

So your saying this was all caused by the British Banks?
great we can blame the British now.

So your saying this was all caused by the British Banks?
great we can blame the British now.
Fuckin A. On the other hand, in 2011 when things are Back To Normal, this is our fault too :D

Fuckin A. On the other hand, in 2011 when things are Back To Normal, this is our fault too :D

You mean like the 1970's ?
18% inflation and negative GDP growth rates. Oh the UK of Pre Thatcher how we long for it.

Funny thing was, Thatcher didn't have much a choice in implementation of many of her reforms. The IMF loan pretty much forced many of these things as terms.

You mean like the 1970's ?
18% inflation and negative GDP growth rates. Oh the UK of Pre Thatcher how we long for it.

Funny thing was, Thatcher didn't have much a choice in implementation of many of her reforms. The IMF loan pretty much forced many of these things as terms.
Yeah Labour in the 1970s did very little good, either. Still, we persevere etc.

Yeah Labour in the 1970s did very little good, either. Still, we persevere etc.

By little good you meaning running your economy like a precursor to Zimbabwe ?

So your saying this was all caused by the British Banks?


They indulged in a lot of the same practices, bought a lot of those derivatives...

Of course 'New Labour' did fuck all to keep it in check either and are thus equally culpable.

Funny thing was, Thatcher didn't have much a choice in implementation of many of her reforms.

The French had the same problem with the mines. They did a phased closure over twenty years, while avoiding most of the negative social factors caused by thatcher just dropping the shutters.

They indulged in a lot of the same practices, bought a lot of those derivatives...

Of course 'New Labour' did fuck all to keep it in check either and are thus equally culpable.

The whole mess is more tied to a currency bubble.


The French had the same problem with the mines. They did a phased closure over twenty years, while avoiding most of the negative social factors caused by thatcher just dropping the shutters.

The French didn't have an IMF loan and the associated restrictions on over printing currency. Thatcher did so she couldn't print money to buy time to phase out the mines.

Thatcher did so she couldn't print money to buy time to phase out the mines.
No matter which way you put it, or whatever her reasons, the closures were handled in a terrible way; consolidating economic prosperity in the south-east of England and gutting working communities of at times their main employer.

All of which kick-started or exacerbated social problems that we are still dealing with in the UK today. It's taken thirty years for some parts of the country - the north of England, southern Scotland and much of Wales in particular - to recover from her policies.

:tongue: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WCfAd3S1hc)<---clicky-linky-thingie
Need we say more?

She put an end to free milk for school kids. I often wonder whether I would have grown up big and strong with a penis that women wouldn't laugh at if I were given free milk at school..

I hate her..
Milk causes men to grow up well endowed? I guess that makes sense: I've never seen a bull with a penis he couldn't be well and truly proud of.

Are you kidding? she walked into the meeting with Deng Xiaoping demanding China cede the 99 year lease territory in perpetuity. If she had don't like the Portuguese the Chinese would have said we are not ready to adsorb the territory yet. Just call it a Chinese territory under British administration.
The 99yr lease was for the area known as the New Territories (NT), which surround Kowloon up to the border with China. HK island and Kowloon themselves were signed in perpetuity. China had no legal right to take those back.
However, all the water and most of the power comes from the NT, and there's no border between the NT and Kowloon, other than a natural hill range. Considering what China was like in the 1970s when the UK started to wake up to the idea that the NT 99yr lease was expiring soon, the idea that China would just open the borders and delibrately flood the NT with millions of peasants to overrun Kowloon, and then HK island, was a very real fear. China did hold all the cards here. I've no doubt that this fear played some part in China's decision to create Shenzhen.
The agreement they reached, of HK region becoming a SAR til 2047 is probably the best deal the UK could get.

The 99yr lease was for the area known as the New Territories (NT), which surround Kowloon up to the border with China. HK island and Kowloon themselves were signed in perpetuity. China had no legal right to take those back.
However, all the water and most of the power comes from the NT, and there's no border between the NT and Kowloon, other than a natural hill range. Considering what China was like in the 1970s when the UK started to wake up to the idea that the NT 99yr lease was expiring soon, the idea that China would just open the borders and delibrately flood the NT with millions of peasants to overrun Kowloon, and then HK island, was a very real fear. China did hold all the cards here. I've no doubt that this fear played some part in China's decision to create Shenzhen.
The agreement they reached, of HK region becoming a SAR til 2047 is probably the best deal the UK could get.


I am aware of the distinction. Though they would have legal right on the grounds that the island and peninsula were ceded in unequal treaties.


But moving beyond that.

All she had to do was do with Portugal did. Portugal tried to return Macau and the Chinese said no keep it. You know why ? Because, Hong Kong and Macau were where the Communist party leaders laundered their money. They needed a place outside of their jurisdiction so no one in country could find it.
Now they hide their money in Switzerland.
When she showed up thinking she could take on China like she had Argentina it became a loss of Face issue for the leaders of China. So course they were going to insist for the entire territory to be returned.

"The Young Ones" didnt like her so neither do I.

I am aware of the distinction. Though they would have legal right on the grounds that the island and peninsula were ceded in unequal treaties.


But moving beyond that.

All she had to do was do with Portugal did. Portugal tried to return Macau and the Chinese said no keep it. You know why ? Because, Hong Kong and Macau were where the Communist party leaders laundered their money. They needed a place outside of their jurisdiction so no one in country could find it.
Now they hide their money in Switzerland.
When she showed up thinking she could take on China like she had Argentina it became a loss of Face issue for the leaders of China. So course they were going to insist for the entire territory to be returned.

Then why is Macau also a SAR? Portugal handed it back to China in 1999 with pretty much identical terms as that of UK's handing back of HK in 1997.

Pssssshh pssshhh evil, evil woman.

By little good you meaning running your economy like a precursor to Zimbabwe ?
Yeah but actually quite differently, for starters we didn't get involved in any ridiculous wars under Labour at that time (thank fuck we stayed out of Vietnam tbqh).

Maggie "Attila" Thatcher has ruined the british society so much, that even the tories now have switched to a somewhat centrist stance about economics and welfare.

Maggie "Attila" Thatcher has ruined the british society so much, that even the tories now have switched to a somewhat centrist stance about economics and welfare.

You mean similar to the stance they had after WW2?

best option in 1979 broke the power of the milliant unions which more an less in sway in the 70's, turned the country around, then she went a little crazy and ruined what she had accomplished.

Then why is Macau also a SAR? Portugal handed it back to China in 1999 with pretty much identical terms as that of UK's handing back of HK in 1997.

Because after they agreed to take Hong Kong it would look bad if they continued to turn down Portugal offer of Macau.
It would be like putting a big sign saying this is where the dear leader and his cronies hid their laundered money.

Maggie "Attila" Thatcher has ruined the british society so much, that even the tories now have switched to a somewhat centrist stance about economics and welfare.

Bullshit. The Tories are still right wing.

Also, she was fairly good. A bit over the top with somethings, but she was decent. Certainly better than the 3 we've had since.

Also, she was fairly good. A bit over the top with somethings, but she was decent. Certainly better than the 3 we've had since.

At last. You and I agree.

At last. You and I agree.

You're the first leftist I've met who actually likes Thatcher. May I ask why, and which of her policies you agree with?

You're the first leftist I've met who actually likes Thatcher. May I ask why, and which of her policies you agree with?

It's not so much her policies, it's her herself.

The Falklands, helped slow down our world stage decline. I love her.

One piece of legislation, from near the end of her tenure, makes me physically scream.

And no, I'm not talking about the Poll Tax. I'm talking about the Broadcasting Act 1990.

Dammit, Maggie! You killed ITV!!!

It's not so much her policies, it's her herself.

The Falklands, helped slow down our world stage decline. I love her.

Gah! Imperialist!

Gah! Imperialist!

We can dream:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/The_British_Empire.png/250px-The_British_Empire.png

*looks wistfully away* :p