Why do people hate Margaret Thatcher?

[Hide the Pain Sagman]

Margaret Thatcher puppet gave me endless nightmares.
But on a side note, wasn't her cabinet also problematic? As well as been taken photos with Jimmy Savile who's like an alleged pedo?

 

[Barry Scott]

As most of this thread concerns her handling of the north of Great Britain, driving it into a massive recession, I thought I'd chime in with something different, her handling of the ongoing Troubles in Northern Ireland which was was nothing short of disastrous.

Loyalist paramilitaries were receiving funding from her government in secret. The British Army sent bunch of barely trained young soldiers to try keep the peace, which ended with support for the IRA growing amongst Catholic Nationalist communities due to the constant oppression committed by the Army. Also y'know, the war crimes committed primarily by the actually highly trained and ruthless Parachute Regiment both before and during her tenure.

Hunger Strikes taken by IRA prisoners led by Bobby Sands, who wanted to be recognised as PoW, were ignored by her, resulting in ten men dying, divisions worsening and the British embassy in Dublin being burned out on the night of Bobby Sands death.

 

[Slap47]

Ver archivo adjunto 1315086
Margaret Thatcher puppet gave me endless nightmares.
But on a side note, wasn't her cabinet also problematic? As well as been taken photos with Jimmy Savile who's like an alleged pedo?

She was extremely corrupt and willing to work outside the system.

What I find more weird is how Reagan is beloved despite shit like Iran/Contra, offshoring and funding the Taliban.

 

[Shroom King]

Didn't Thatcher roll back the decriminalization of cannabis that happened during the 1970's, causing drug related crime to spike?

 

[Seed Pod Tits]

Destroyed the North, esp industry, just look what she did to Wales engaged a policy of "managed decline" for major cities, shacked up with Murdoch. I could do a text wall but instead I'll just finish with "cunt".
And she was a shopkeeper's daughter so also class traitor.

Fin.

I'd love to do one more on what she ordered on the Falkland's but no......

Also ginger

 

[Kornheiser]

I can answer the last question. Modernizing an industry necessities adding new blood, new blood that will be far more important than anyone before (and likely justifies firing large chunks of the old blood). This will severely weaken the Union members who'd rather have the whole company go down than let go an iota of power.

I never understood why so many people in Britain after the war did not want to come to terms on improving the country. I get the upper classes not being willing but why were the working classes so deadset against improving their own positions that didn’t involve getting back at the upper class. Was wanting to have your kids do better than you working in a factory or mine frowned upon by the working class and if so why?

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

I never understood why so many people in Britain after the war did not want to come to terms on improving the country. I get the upper classes not being willing but why were the working classes so deadset against improving their own positions that didn’t involve getting back at the upper class. Was wanting to have your kids do better than you working in a factory or mine frowned upon by the working class and if so why?

I think the Brits have some derangement where they pick shitty leaders and follow them all the way to the grave despite every warning sign. So all the lower class workers blindly followed the union leaders who rejected technological advancement because they were afraid of losing their position and bargaining power. The end result was inefficent bodies who could never compete against countries that did advance, so were doomed to extinction.

There is an episode of James May's Cars of the People that talks about it: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3oe1yo (I wish it could embed).
I recommend the series in general.

 

[Scarlett Johansson]

I'm going to say something controversial. I think as a woman in power she definitely made history. But she was a horrid asshole. She apparently cut milk from school lunches. She also covered up the pedophilia at the BBC. So yes, she's currently rotting in damnation, but you can see she was a part of history despite being a bitch.

 

[LazarusOwenhart]

De-industrialization is a exceptional policy. Sure she stood up to Argentina but she kowtowed to China.

She kowtowed to China because British trade unions were so unrealistically inflexible that negotiating any kind of change with them was more or less impossible. They were unable to grasp that modernizing industries usually results in job losses so they refused to allow it to happen. British industry therefore fell behind and became noncompetitive. The same has happened with our railways, the London Docks (where unloading a ship took up to 3 weeks because of union negotiations) and British Telecom.

 

[ICametoLurk]

The attitude of punk rock was a lot easier to churn up and sustain under Thatcher and Reagan. Keeping things shitty, or making them worse is necessary to the brand.

 

[Bass]

So here is a question for you guys, how do you think a Labour government would have delt with things in the 80's?

I ask because everything I see says she was some kind of a monster, yet she didn't lose an elextion during her tenure. If she was so terrible, why is that?

 

[ICametoLurk]

So here is a question for you guys, how do you think a Labour government would have delt with things in the 80's?

Falklands War would be viewed as good since it led to a government that killed anyone left of Pinochet resigning instead of viewed as bad solely cause Maggie did it that led to a government that killed anyone left of Pinochet resigning.

Kinda like Iraq War is viewed as bad cause Bush when Al Gore wanted to

 

[Buster O'Keefe]

She apparently cut milk from school lunches

Best thing she ever did. I can remember that disgusting warm milk and the mess kids made drinking it. Christ, I can still remember the smell of it.

 

[Emperor Julian]

I never understood why so many people in Britain after the war did not want to come to terms on improving the country.

Mostly because it's debtable if she actually improved the country, most of the people who don't like her don't actually believe she made things better and may have proactively made thinks worse. The fact the countries slowly sliding into oblivion gives this idea clout.

 

[Sweetpeaa]

I think you'll find it's in the manner of which she forced the country to open itself up.

Britain when she took over had had some disastrous economic policies from both Labour and the Conservative parties, particularly with regards to Labour Unions. Unions had been empowered by successive governments either supporting them and enshrining their power or being in direct conflict with the unions. This sort of came to a head during the winter of discontent and this was when Thatcher started to form her stance against labour unions. Her lasting legacy was forcing the UK into the modern era and global market, but as a result she had to disenfranchise the Labour Unions and destroy their power over different industries. (Effectively ending almost all British coal production, off loading nationalized industries.)

The North has never particularly forgiven her, because of the coal and the later loss of manufacturing industries.

All those changes didn't result in much. I looked up UK salaries and literally gasped. There cost of housing and rent is literally enormous with the poorest wages. UK was poor in the 70's, it was poor during Thatcher's reign and it's poor now. It just looks wealthy on paper. Look at this as an example



For someone with a PHD to earn so little in the UK is a disgrace. It's actually sickening.

Thatcherism was basically a scam. She opened the doors to the third world immigrants because she knew they would be tolerant to the shit standard of living and low wages. Basically only a small number of people benefited from her policies like the finance and business sector but those people never became rich. It wasn't like the ''Wallstreet boom''.

 

[No. 7 cat]

All those changes didn't result in much. I looked up UK salaries and literally gasped. There cost of housing and rent is literally enormous with the poorest wages. UK was poor in the 70's, it was poor during Thatcher's reign and it's poor now. It just looks wealthy on paper. Look at this as an example

Ver archivo adjunto 2147495

For someone with a PHD to earn so like in the UK is a disgrace. It's actually sickening.

Thatcherism was basically a scam. She opened the doors to the third world immigrants because she knew they would be tolerant to the shit standard of living and low wages. Basically only a small number of people benefited from her policies like the finance and business sector but those people never became rich. It wasn't like the ''Wallstreet boom''.

A future of selling houses to each other rather than building ships and other useful things.

 

[Muh Vagina]

From what I can tell, Margaret Thatcher was basically the British equivalent to Reagan

You just answered your own question.

 

[Billy Beer]

She fucked over the North and coal mining, pushing millions in to desperate poverty who were living a decent life before hand.

She shipped all of the coal mining to the chinks, making us dependant on foreign sources of fuel to power our coal fired power plants that were a stones throw away from most mining pits.

Plus she allowed social housing (Council housing) to be sold to mainly private investors from the South. They bought the houses from under people, the prices shot up and now we're struggling to build enough houses because most are owned by private landlords

She made the North/South divide the worst it has ever been and ripped the money from the North to send to the South. (For the Yanks, our North and South are opposite to what yours are; working class up North, uppity fart sniffing self-superior champagne socialist down south)

It says a shit load about how poorly Labour are doing politically in the North. A few years back people were burning effigies of Thatcher and celebrating when she died. Now those same communities have voted Tory, while holding their nose in disgust at doing so, just because Labour are now fart sniffing champagne socialists who don't give a fuck about the common working man, but love the pakis, immigrants and upper class socialists.

 

[emuemuemu]

So here is a question for you guys, how do you think a Labour government would have delt with things in the 80's?

I ask because everything I see says she was some kind of a monster, yet she didn't lose an elextion during her tenure. If she was so terrible, why is that?

Labour at the time was Corbyn, Livingston and Michael Foot. All straight up Marxists. They were the ones agitating the trade unions and facilitating the coal miner strikes in the hopes of collapsing the UK economy and sparking the mythical proletarian revolution.

So yes, Thatcher destroyed northen industries but it's an absolute fallacy to think that they would have been somehow better off under literal Marxists or could just carry on being propped up by tax payers. All she did was amputate the cancerous limb quickly instead of letting it kill the whole country slowly.

There's a book on Corbyn called Dangerous Hero if you're interested in finding out more about Labour from that period.

Plus she allowed social housing (Council housing) to be sold to mainly private investors from the South. They bought the houses from under people, the prices shot up and now we're struggling to build enough houses because most are owned by private landlords

The whole point of Right to Buy is that people can buy their own council house. The only way the houses could end up in the hands of "private investors" is if the original buyers then sell them on at a massive profit. In which case they've now moved up the social ladder permanently. And that's a bad thing why? The problem with political parties that specifically target the poor is that they need to keep you poor so you keep voting for them.

And how does more expensive houses make it harder to build new ones? If it's more profitable then more people will do it. The reason there's a housing shortage is because there's a land shortage. And the reason there's a land shortage is because for decades Labour has been obsessed with overtaxing land sales in order to stick it to the bourgeoisie. If there's negligible, or even negative, profit to be made from selling land you've inherited to housing developers then obviously people are just going to end up sitting on it for generations.

 

[Billy Beer]

The whole point of Right to Buy is that people can buy their own council house. The only way the houses could end up in the hands of "private investors" is if the original buyers then sell them on at a massive profit. In which case they've now moved up the social ladder permanently. And that's a bad thing why? The problem with political parties that specifically target the poor is that they need to keep you poor so you keep voting for them.

I disagree with this. People in council houses don't just find enough money down the back of the sofa to be able to cough up enough money to get a mortgage.

And how does more expensive houses make it harder to build new ones? If it's more profitable then more people will do it. The reason there's a housing shortage is because there's a land shortage. And the reason there's a land shortage is because for decades Labour has been obsessed with overtaxing land sales in order to stick it to the bourgeoisie. If there's negligible, or even negative, profit to be made from selling land you've inherited to housing developers then obviously people are just going to end up sitting on it for generations.

There isn't a land shortage. There's a shit load of land we could build on. Hell, anything North of Harrogate is desolate ghost towns. But , if we want 80% of new infrastructure spending to be inside the M25 then yeah, there's no land.