In Defence of Margaret Thatcher

This post has been inspired by an attack on Lady Thatcher and her legacy over at Futile Democracy.
Now, first off I wouldn’t call myself a Thatcherite exactly. I disagree with her social policies (“there’s no such thing as society”) but her economics were pretty sound. That’s more or less the opinion of David Cameron too, who wants to build upon her legacy by adding a more human side to Thatcherism. But I recognise that what she did was, on the whole, for the greater good for the country.
I know Thatcher bashing is fashionable, even after all these years. But the greatest PM since Churchill did what needed to be done. Yes, some of her policies were brutal – but necessary. I agree the blow could have been softened; help and support should have been there. It’s shameful that it wasn’t. That’s my only criticism of her time in office (apart from the poll tax that is).
Your story was terrible and no one should have to go through that but the country was on its knees under the old regime. We were a laughing stock, the sick man of Europe. Ever heard of the 3-day week or the winter of discontent? The trade unions held this country to ransom, subverting the will of democratically elected governments. I dread to think where we’d be now if it wasn’t for her.
Of course no one wants job losses and the collapse of an industry is regrettable but that’s the nature of the free market. The state was propping up manufacturing to keep the trade unions at bay. It only died because we’d lost all sense of competition, of competitiveness as a country. What we were making could be done better, and cheaper, elsewhere.
Lady T saw that we can do better and be better when everyone else had accepted our terminal decline. She refused to believe that Britain’s best days lay behind her. Thatcher saw the state the country was in and wanted to fix it. And, for the most part, she did. She wasn’t evil, she wasn’t a murderer, she didn’t eat babies and she wasn’t out to make peoples lives a misery. Lets not forget as prime minister she was elected 3 times by the people of this country so she must have done something right.
The idea that we can blame the current recession on Lady T is ludicrous. She’s been out of office for 19 years. I fail to understand the need to blame all the ills of the world on her. We didn’t blame her for the problems in the 90s. She may have de-regulated the City but blaming her for the situation we’re in now is like blaming the designers and makers of cars for traffic accidents.
If you are looking to blame someone I suggest you look no further than our current Prime Minister, and former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown. He had a decade to ensure that the City wasn’t getting out of control. Indeed it was during his tenure that the City reached some of its worst excesses. But during the good times he became complacent, spending like there was no tomorrow, failing to put money away for a rainy day.
Margaret Thatcher, like all great prime ministers, divides people. She made the weather. History will, of course, make the final judgement but I think we can at least agree that she is a remarkable woman who during her 11 years in office changed this country forever.
What a fantastic post.
Her economics were clearly not right. It failed. Twenty five years of having free market deregulation rammed down our throats has lead to the mess we’re in now. Bother Thatcher and Reagan are to blame for that.
The Country was a mess in the 1970s. She came in to try and fix it. She did it ruthlessly, and when 3,000,000 end up unemployed, our manufacturing is just destroyed, millions lose their homes, huge homeless numbers and 60% of Liverpool’s workforce were out of work, you can say she did well because she defeated socialism, but measuring the success of a nation without taking into account the lives destroyed in the process, is wrong.
Well I suppose we’ll have agree to disagree then.
“I disagree with her social policies (“there’s no such thing as society”)…”
That is a stark misquote of her speech and not consistent with her ’social policy’. She was talking about how people, if able, should be looking after themselves and their interests, and not be reliant on others, i.e. the government, if it can be helped.
Fits snugly with her “pretty sound economic policies”.