Wednesday, 16 July 2008

The "Queen" is dead

About a week ago I had a very vivid dream, in which a radio announcer proclaimed "Margaret Thatcher has died". It was so vivid it woke me up, and I switched on the radio, only to get someone talking about pigs on Farming Today. But here's something to ponder.... Should Margaret Thatcher have a state funeral? You have a day left to vote.

8 comments:

puppet freezone said...

God No!

Undoubtedly she will get one, but as far as I'm concerned, this country was a better place when it had a sense of people-power.

I think she is responsible for making people more selfish and more image conscious, and that this gave rise to the politicians we have today. All style, no substance, not listening to anyone, spending more time with eachother than with us 'plebs' they're supposed to actually work for. It's her fault I tell ya!

Bring back beards!

DaveA said...

In 2008 we have a Prime Minster who inherited his office, rising inflation, rising unemployment, public sector strikes (although I doubt you would notice) and a Labour Party at sixes and sevens.

Not much change from when Maggie came to power in 1979. Ted Heath was equallu useless and the Liberals were mired in homosexual scandals. The only discernable difference I can see is that she won the war she fought. We were the sick man of Europe and destined to become relatively a third world country. At least you could smoke in a pub then.

She transformed a decaying country into force to be reckoned with and made us the 4th largest economy in the world.


A state funeral is the least we can give her.

Dick Puddlecote said...

I hated Thatcher but my Dad loved her and still does. We used to have fantastic debates about her as Dad would always refer to the 'Winter of Discontent' and how bad a Labour Government can be. I always disagreed with him vehemently and was a member of the Labour party for 5 years.

I now know he was absolutely right. There is nothing worse than a Labour Government.

My problem with Thatcher was that she played God with working people and communities, most especially during the Miners' Strike. Now tell me what is the difference now?

This Government doesn't just focus on certain points, it wants to dictate every little aspect of our daily lives and if we don't conform, we are to be forced to do so.

Kerry, why are the entire population of this country being bombarded with adverts that say a pint of beer is always 3 units when the vast majority of the best-selling brands are 2 units or less? How long till rationing?

What right has Sir (haha) Liam Donaldson got to tell us all what we are supposed to eat? Isn't that up to the individual in a 'free' society?

And why is a public consultation on further anti-smoking measures being hidden away on a DoH web-site but promoted loudly on DoH satellite sites that only allow one answer? Is this Labour democracy?

Public Information films used to advise but allow choice to the individual, now we just get bullying and hectoring from Labour, all backed up by threats and intimidation.

Stop meddling in the lives of the people you are supposed to be representing. Life doesn't begin and end in Westminster.

Northern Lights said...

DaveA...I'm not sure the 3 million people who were out of work when she was in power would agree.

A few observations, but please do correct me if I'm wrong...

Gordon Brown 'inherited' his office, just like John Major did (and others before him) - this isn't unconstitutional.

Isn't inflation (according to CPI) at about 3.8% still quite low in historic terms? Even if we use RPI (4.6%) it's still a lot lower than under the last Government - RPI was 10% in 1990 and almost never lower than 5% between 1979 & 1992.

As I understand it, more people are in work now than before; even considering the slight rise in recent months. Compares quite well with over 3 million out of work in the mid 80s (and 1993) doesn't it?

Yes there are public sector strikes, but not quite at the same level as in 1984 eh?

On the whole, I think a lot of people would be quite uncomfortable with the idea of giving her a state funeral; she's just too divisive.

puppet freezone said...

Oh Godddd why oh why must politics revolve around numbers?

Life is about how you feel... about the spirit of the people.

Under Thatcher (who I despised) I was employed and well-paid, but I've never been an 'I'm all right Jack' kind of person. My spirit felt broken when I looked around at the devastation she created for people lower down the scale. I felt terrible guilt for having a decent wage while people were being crushed. Most of the people who were doing well seemed totally two-dimensional with meaningless lives. It was as though there was a lot of money in their pockets but they had no sense of value, of what really mattered. It was all about money for the sake of it. It was repulsive to me.

Under Labour (for whom I've previously always voted) I've learned that the 'Nanny State' really was on the cards all along, and wasn't (unfortunately) just the Tories trying to frighten us off. Under Labour I'm seeing people's sense of self totally crushed, under a constant barrage of 'shoulds' and 'must nots'. It feels more like being ruled by an extreme religion than being 'served' by a political party.

It'd take another 20 years of someone like Thatcher in power to get me to vote Labour again. Frankly, I feel we should have a new rule and not allow any party to stay in power for more than five years. As soon as they get too comfy in office, they all end up too detached from reality.

DaveA said...

NorthernLights: I do not disagree with what you said, infact inflation was up to 25%, mainly as oil went up to the equivalent of $100 a barrel. It is now $120 I believe which does not bode well. In the long term inflation leads to mass unemployment and I fear for the future. British industry was demoralised and in the face of the unions were unable to manage. We had an inefficient over manned, under invested manufacturing sector. In my opinion without the structural changes she made to the country's economy we would of gave long term unemployment of 5 millio. The only people who were divided by Thatcher were the ones who chose to be.

Kerry said...

"The only people who were divided by Thatcher were the ones who chose to be." What does that mean?

Jay said...

Am I right in thinking that the only politician who has had a State funeral was Churchill and that this was on the exceptional grounds of his leadership during the Second World War?

If so, then there is no tradition of State funerals for politicians and I don't see how a case an be made for Margaret Thatcher unless you want to make The Falkland War count. Tony Blair would then have to be given a State funeral for leading the UK into the Iraq War.
In fact, the entire Government ought to be given State funerals since every aspect of life in Britain today is informed by its continuing War on Terror. Indeed, since we poor subjects are increasingly required to sacrifice our liberties in order to play our part in The War That Can Never Be Won, we, too, deserve State funerals.