Thatcher, or should I say Sir Keith Joseph orchestrated, planned and handled the miners' strike superbly. They wated to smash the NUM. The NUM or any other unioin didn't bring down any government. The government(s) brought themselves down by tyhir inmadequacy in dealing with te NUM. The NUM, when Heath was in power acted legally(their constitution, decision making processes. democracy and so on were an are more stringent than what the Tories brought into force under Thatcher). Scargill as a combative, one dimensional leader who was outflanked from the outset by the government, but the conduct ofthe government and their vassals during the strike was unforgivable.I haven't if you read my posts on these two threads jumped on any bandwagon. I loathed what the Thatcher government did not just in terms of the miners' strike: and yes I felt it necessary that the countries obsolete industries needed replacing, but the way the government vindictively wen about its work leaves me bitter to thbis day.
I don't know whether replying to your post will cross into the content of the politics thread but I'll respond anyway.
Given the choice, I am sure Thatcher would have preferred a negotiated way forward. However, she came to power at a time when the unions were strong enough to depose a government (as they effectively did with Ted Heath's government). No unelected body should have that degree of power in a democracy and she understood that quite clearly. The minute she took on the might of the unions they fought back. Most of the leaders, particularly the idiot in charge of the miners, were as absorbed in their own ideology as Thatcher was in hers and therefore it was a case of six of one, half a dozen of the other. But it was important that democracy won, and it did. While those who like to jump on the hate bandwagon persist in pointing out the destruction of communities (and St Helens was a strong mining and glassmaking community but is now former in both pretty much), what they don't like to consider is that during the present economic crisis, people have stayed in jobs because unions have negotiated with management and management have retained workers for when things get better: a situation that would never have happened in the 1970s. There would have been all out war on the streets since 2008 had Thatcher not quashed the unions. That is one of the very positive aspects of her legacy.
As for the financial industry being deregulated, you need to look to Gordon Brown for that one, which may upset you. He was the one who deregulated the financial services industry.
So far as public transport is concerned, I understand why Thatcher considered privatisation. Nationalised services and industries are invariably loss making and certainly in this country they were extremely inefficient and very costly to the tax payer. However, both were controversial policies at the time. Mind you, when I travel to London or the Lake District on Virgin Trains I wonder at the quality of service, food, the discount prices (if I time my booking right), time keeping, cleanliness and comfort of the whole experience. It is so, so far ahead of anything I experienced when British Rail was in operation that all my initial doubts about privatising the rail network have long since vanished! You really had to be there to know just how bloody awful British Rail was! The buses are slightly different as their privatisation had a direct impact on outlying communities and elderly people who relied heavily upon them. There was also a sharp spike in prices. Personally, I haven't seen any particular improvement in the bus services since privatisation. I may even think they have worsened.
Section 28 was created as a direct result of predominant public feeling at the time, just as its repeal came as a result of predominant public feeling at the time.
The Falkland Islanders identified as British. They still do. I would hope the British government would rescue/protect me from an invader because I also identify as British (well, English these days). Why should we not rescue the British Falkland Islanders just because they are thousands of miles away? Thatcher did the right thing where the Falkland Islands are concerned.
British rail was an appalling oprganisation, to what extent do you think lack of investment was responsible for that? I suggest you look at other nationalised rail systems for examples of how they can succeed.
so the predominat feeling in the country was homophobia at the time was it? O, there was a lot of racism going around at the time: how com they didn't bring any race laws in? The Thatcher governmnt was supposed to be a government of conviction.
You missed my point about the Falklands tragedy.
The islands had to be retaken, but it was due to the incompetence of the government that the conflict happenedin the first place and was such a close run affair. The government as on the brink of selling the invincibleto Australia andf drastically cutting the navy's frigate strength, and of coure it was proposed to remove the islands' only constant naval presence.
Why would Gordon Brown's handling of the economy upset me? Do you suppose I'm a labour supporter? far from it.
Then of course there was the Poll Tax
Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 08 April 2013 - 10:28 PM.