Article

2004-06-10 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike 2004-06-10 6:29:53 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Thatcher thought she was royalty anyway - led to her downfall. Surprised she's not trying to suck off the corpse. I doubt that she'll get that sort of send off herself. My reason for antagonism? Sometimes you have to live under a 'great' leader's regime to see through the BS. When I visited the States in the Eighties, everyone seemed to love Maggie whereas at home I remember the celebrations in the neighbourhood (mining town) when the iRA triesd to blow her up - the one time we celebrated an IRA bombing.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 6:44:16 AM|| 2004-06-10 6:44:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Last night before going to bed I was fortunate enough to catch some of the coverage on the hill. I kept flipping between C-SPAN and the other four networks. It took me a nanosecond to realize that on the four networks (I do not get Fox) they had people talking over what I was watching. Then I went back to C-SPAN where they allowed the images to speak for themselves.

Posted by Dragon Fly 2004-06-10 6:45:17 AM|| 2004-06-10 6:45:17 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Sorry to ruin the atmos. Reagan seemed like an awfully decent fella - can't say I lived under his govt. tho' - fire at will L & G...

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 6:47:02 AM|| 2004-06-10 6:47:02 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 I have to say, Howard, one of the bravest things Maggie did was stand up to the raging old dinosaur that was the British mining industry. She refused to continue subsidising a business that was woefully incapable of competing fairly in the global market, and which many hoped would be kept wheezingly alive at the British taxpayers' expense. Yes, it caused local pain, but the British mining industry was a failure not because of Maggie, but because of simple, brutal, economics. It was inefficient and wasteful for British energies to go pouring into something we couldn't hope to compete at - a reality Thatcher saw clearly, but which many others refused to.

Maggie faced down and defeated the self-interested miners' unions, and the UK as a whole ultimately benefitted.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-06-10 6:57:46 AM|| 2004-06-10 6:57:46 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Is Bulldog's assertion correct,Howard?And are there other reasons for your animosity?

Posted by Raptor 2004-06-10 7:15:55 AM|| 2004-06-10 7:15:55 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I think with hindsight you're right, we are a stronger country economically. However, the implementation of a police state went far beyond what was required. In a town with a third of the male population long-term unemployed to be told 'to get on their bikes and find work' was an insult that no-one living in that region in that era will ever forget. Also being told by Cockney-wanker Met officers that men weren't allowed to travel by car across the county border - half-a-mile from my then home reminds me of something from a totalitarian state. This is why I would never ever consider voting Tory.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 7:20:09 AM|| 2004-06-10 7:20:09 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Sorry Howard I side with Bulldog on this one. I only hope one day we end ALL welfare to our nations farmers and industries. Our farmers get HUGE patments for growing something nobody wants or growing nothing at all. And our steel industry is being propt up by STUPID tariffs to make their product compete on LOCAL markets. To me this is kind of like supporting the covered wagon industry after the automobile was put into mass production. Speaking of which, I wonder how much LESS a car would cost if they could buy cheaper steel from Japan and Korea?

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2004-06-10 7:20:33 AM|| 2004-06-10 7:20:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 I'm sure Americans would love being told they couldn't travel outside their county of domicile or to stop being lazy and go find work if the farming/steel industry was uncompetitive. Strikes me you'd have another McVeigh on your hands in no time.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 7:29:05 AM|| 2004-06-10 7:29:05 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Howard...if what you say is true, your're right, she handled that poorly. But sounds to me like she had the guts to stand up to mining industry just like she had the guts to stand up to the Soviet Union and the world is better for both.

You'll never get over the insult - don't expect you too, but you should step back a bit as you seem a bit too close to judge her fairly.

Posted by B 2004-06-10 7:43:22 AM|| 2004-06-10 7:43:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Howard: I posted this because I thought Maggie's gesture of respect was classy--and that's independent of whether you like her or not. Hope we can at least agree on that, and save the debate on Maggie's legacy for another day (preferably over some cold Newcastles).

Posted by Mike 2004-06-10 8:24:04 AM|| 2004-06-10 8:24:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Apology expressed in #3. I only have to hear Thatcher's name and I become apoplectic. I'll never forget the Commonwealth Conference where the heads of state had gathered for a photo. They awaited the arrival of the Queen and Thatcher. The front centre seat had fairly obviously been kept free for the Queen and Thatcher was expected to join the standing ranks. So what does Thatcher do? Goes and sits in the Queen's seat and looks terribly pissed off when asked to make way for the Queen. Funny she affords Reagan the respect she grudgingly if ever gave the monarch. The Queen had the last laugh in 91 as she got to present Thatcher with her 'cards.' Nice. Apologies once again Mike - us Brits are nothing if not well mannered ;)

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 8:44:59 AM|| 2004-06-10 8:44:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 us Brits are nothing if not well mannered

That you are, sir, that you are.

Posted by Mike 2004-06-10 8:51:44 AM|| 2004-06-10 8:51:44 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 In a town with a third of the male population long-term unemployed to be told 'to get on their bikes and find work' was an insult that no-one living in that region in that era will ever forget.

What? Are they Arabs? 'Cause it sure sounds like it. Are they still seething? Or did they get on their bikes and find work, like civilized men?

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-06-10 9:01:04 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2004-06-10 9:01:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 In a town with a third of the male population long-term unemployed to be told 'to get on their bikes and find work' was an insult that no-one living in that region in that era will ever forget

Just an observation, and one of the (I believe) key differences in culture between we Yanks and our cousins across the pond.

One of our great strengths is people's willingness to move around for jobs. In the 70's & 80's the steel industries in the midwest got punched out badly, and as a result many many people moved out West, or to the South to find different jobs. The notion of staying in an area that isn't economically viable doesn't make sense.

I myself have moved from Ohio, to California, and now Oregon in 20 year of working

Can anyone confirm that Americans are much more mobile, or that Europeans tend to stay in one area?

Just curious,
Francis

Posted by Francis 2004-06-10 9:09:29 AM|| 2004-06-10 9:09:29 AM|| Front Page Top

#15 Many were already on their bikes and trying to find work at the time! Some went to their graves without working again. Midlanders/Northerners are an industrious breed who know what an honest day's work is - unlike a lot of the limp cocks I meet when working in London.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 9:11:07 AM|| 2004-06-10 9:11:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#16 Francis - that seems a bit unfair since America is a much bigger country...It's far easier to move from Detroit to Houston than to move to another country.

Posted by B 2004-06-10 9:29:48 AM|| 2004-06-10 9:29:48 AM|| Front Page Top

#17 Also being told by Cockney-wanker Met officers that men weren't allowed to travel by car across the county border - half-a-mile from my then home reminds me of something from a totalitarian state.

Weren't allowed? Wow... whatever was the purpose of that dictate?

Posted by eLarson 2004-06-10 10:32:53 AM|| 2004-06-10 10:32:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#18 A problem with 'Flying Pickets.' Striking miners would travel to other pits in the coalfield to rally for the cause and picket miners who were still working - a small number. The coalfield in which I lived stretched across 3 counties - Derbys/Notts/S Yorks - any men of working age travelling together in a car were subject to police roadblocks and told to return home if they were suspected of being miners intending to picket other pits. These police were often brought in from other parts of the country to deal with the burgeoning civil disobedience. Northerners and southerners view each other with a little animosity at times and being told by southern police to go home when driving to a football match/ to visit relatives in another part of the country was a tad irritating to my male relatives. A sign of how quickly a democracy can become a police state.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 10:47:46 AM|| 2004-06-10 10:47:46 AM|| Front Page Top

#19 I assume that the travel restrictions were something that happened when the infamous miners' strikes were taking place, and were measures intended to curb the movements of 'flying pickets', who travelled from pit to pit with the intention of stopping work and confronting police and 'scabs'.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-06-10 10:50:40 AM|| 2004-06-10 10:50:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#20 You beat me to it, Howard.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-06-10 10:51:32 AM|| 2004-06-10 10:51:32 AM|| Front Page Top

#21 18-20: Thanks for that. I had never heard of that before. About what year are we talking? (I'm wondering, for instance, if that kind of policy influenced Roger Waters when he was writing The Wall.)

RR never had such a ban on travel for air traffic controllers. He just fired 'em all and replaced them.

Posted by eLarson 2004-06-10 10:54:20 AM|| 2004-06-10 10:54:20 AM|| Front Page Top

#22 1984-1985

http://www.strike84.co.uk/ - Check the gallery

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/12/newsid_2540000/2540175.stm

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 11:16:06 AM|| 2004-06-10 11:16:06 AM|| Front Page Top

#23 In a town with a third of the male population long-term unemployed to be told 'to get on their bikes and find work' was an insult that no-one living in that region in that era will ever forget.

Although I have learned quite a bit from your arguments Howard, I fail to see anything resembliing a solution to the problem at hand in your comments.

You seem to be endorsing the status quo, aka government subsidies aka Socialism aka Communism-in-training.

What solution, other than continuing to allow the workers to suckle the government teat, do you endorse for this particular problem? What is wrong with these people choosing a new career? I heard that the fledgeling com-pu-ter industry was growing a little bit during the 80s...

I have the same beefs with farming subsidies in the US, and have little sympathy for people who insist on their "right" to work in a dying industry. Maybe the rules are different in GB, but I doubt it is a crime to change careers there.

Posted by Chris W. 2004-06-10 11:27:21 AM|| 2004-06-10 11:27:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#24 I think most people realised it was coming and understood the economic raison d'etre - I do now at least! - There certainly wasn't and still isn't a scarcity of coal but miners had been lied to by successive governments about the status of coal reserves for twenty years. Thus it was a shock to be told that the entire industry would have to go. The problem lay in the way it was done. Essentially the Tory govt turned to 100,000 men and said 'on your bikes' - now that's great if there are other jobs to go to, but there simply weren't.. hence communities simply died. The best the Tories could do was say 'Yah Boo Sucks' I'm looking forward to Thatcher's funeral as I'm sure there'll be street parties back at home.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 11:37:07 AM|| 2004-06-10 11:37:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#25 All,

thanks for the info re: mobility. #16, I wasn't trying to be fair or unfair, I was simply wondering if American predisposition to following jobs around is different than that of the British.

The reason I ask is because my relatives in France (I'm almost ashamed to admit partial french heritage these days) tend to stay in the area they were born, and the whole idea of moving around to follow jobs or industries isn't as common as found in the states.

Regards,
Francis

Posted by Francis 2004-06-10 11:54:35 AM|| 2004-06-10 11:54:35 AM|| Front Page Top

#26 Howard, the indiustry wasn't exactly shut down overnight - the strikes were called after the National Coal Board delared its intention to shut 20 uneconomic pits, over one period, which would result in the losses of 20,000 jobs. The industry had already been in decline for some years, and would continue to decline for years to come. Arguably, the actions of Scargill and his NUM only hastened the destruction of the industry by, on the one hand aggressively trying to hold the country to ransom, and on the other, demonstrating that the UK could still function even with the majority of the miners refusing to work, for an entire year!

There's a good summary of the events here.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-06-10 12:06:34 PM|| 2004-06-10 12:06:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Howard #24

Yeesh, what a mess. Sounds like the gov built up the industry to a point where the market couldn't support it. That changes things a bit; the gov had their hands so entrenched into these peoples lives and livelihood that to make a change like Thatcher did was like pulling the rug out from under them. This might as well have been a government cottage industry: created by and controlled by them, and ultimately dismissed at the whim of a beaurucrat.

In the US, hundreds of thousands of jobs would be lost if they decided to shut down, say, licensing offices or something similar. Any time the gov invents an industry there's always the threat of it being shut down at a whim. One of the many dangers of gov interference in the free market / job market.

Posted by Chris W. 2004-06-10 12:10:54 PM|| 2004-06-10 12:10:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 Francis wrote:

Can anyone confirm that Americans are much more mobile, or that Europeans tend to stay in one area?

Sure, I'll sign up for that sweeping generalization. If you think of Britain as the center of Europe (and why not, most brits do), the further south and east you go, the more rooted people are. I'd be interested in True German Ally's take on this.

Posted by Classical_Liberal 2004-06-10 12:27:52 PM|| 2004-06-10 12:27:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 Howard - Seems like you had a bad experience - up close -

However, from an outsiders perspective, the Labour Party's fringe seems to be the sort who would stifle freedom in a much worse way. Some of them seem borderline Communist Totalitarians. Certainly Tony Blair, whatever his domestic policies, does have a rational world view, which is unusual for the left. Only Lieberman, of the Democrat candidates here, seemed to have that view. What would you do id the Labour extreme left got control of the party? Voting for the 3rd party Liberal-Democrats would be a protest for sure, but it seems that they have no chance to get any Prime Minister. Its Either Tory or Labour.

Posted by BigEd 2004-06-10 12:54:15 PM|| 2004-06-10 12:54:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 Francis - sorry. One of those questions where you meant one thing and I read another. Looks like someone else took a more enlightened stab at it.

Posted by B 2004-06-10 1:12:40 PM|| 2004-06-10 1:12:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 Howard & Bulldog--Thanks for the primer on recent British history and politics! Very interesting, and very new to me. Exchanges like this make appreciate the Rantburg community even more.

I'm with Cyber Sarge re: #7, getting rid of subsidies to farms and steel industries. I would love to get rid of Social Security as well--the biggest damn Ponzi scheme in the history of the world!

Posted by Dar 2004-06-10 1:24:25 PM|| 2004-06-10 1:24:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#32 Bulldog: Apologies , got the number wrong - laziness/hyperbole on my part!? Scargill's actions did ultimately hasten the industry's end - BUT people who saw their communities dying - and mine is just barely getting back on its feet - were determined to make a stand.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 1:45:28 PM|| 2004-06-10 1:45:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 It must have been very tough indeed - no denying it, but the way I see it, what was the natural death of an industry became transformed into a grisly political circus when socialist agitators got involved. Instead of acknowledging the fact that British mining simply wasn't competitive, individuals like Scargill tried to win popular support for lashing the moribund industry to the British economy, like a corpse to a chain gang. Miners, offered what looked like a way of saving their jobs, jumped on board. Instead, what happened? Miners went through hardships, without pay for a year, and still lost their jobs. Former mining communities were left with a deep bitterness and resentment, convinced that their mining livelihoods were lost not because they were economically uncompetitive, but because of politics. Politics in a way did fail the former miners, but it was that of Scargill, his phoney economics, and his false promises...

Posted by Bulldog 2004-06-10 2:20:39 PM|| 2004-06-10 2:20:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#34 A time that taught me to be compassionate and understanding to my fellow man and also how utterly ruthless politicians can be in surpressing a community by implementing a police state to get their way.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 2:35:53 PM|| 2004-06-10 2:35:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#35 Considering my readings of Twain/Faulkner/Steinbeck times weren't so bad I suppose.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-10 2:43:22 PM|| 2004-06-10 2:43:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#36 Since I work in the afternoon (right now in fact) I wasn't able to watch any of the procession or the ceremony in the Rotunda except on a c-span rebroadcast. I sat there from 11pm to 2am, unable to tear myself away. It really was a dignified event. I got a lump in my throat when Bill Frist escorted Thatcher to the casket. And a tear in my eye when she curtsied. Way back when we called her Maggie or The Iron Lady because of the way she stood along side Reagan against the Soviets. Sometimes I think I see the same type of relationship between GWB and Blair. It seems that staring down tyrants brings out the best in our two nations.

Posted by Scott 2004-06-10 4:05:03 PM|| [totalvocabularyfailure.com] 2004-06-10 4:05:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#37

(Drudge)

There seems to be a bond between the two families on a personal level as well. . ..

Posted by Inquiring Mind 2004-06-10 5:40:13 PM|| 2004-06-10 5:40:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#38 Everytime I get inflated about my cussin skillz I get to hear a native speaker. :)

Posted by Shipman 2004-06-10 6:09:44 PM|| 2004-06-10 6:09:44 PM|| Front Page Top

01:57 Mark Espinola
01:22 Silentbrick
01:19 Mark Espinola
08:19 Howard UK
07:57 Mitch H.
04:18 Howard UK
00:39 Super Hose
00:24 Super Hose
23:56 painterdave
23:47 Rafael
23:35 OldSpook
23:32 Alaska Paul
23:32 Infidel Bob
23:26 Alaska Paul
23:18 RWV
23:09 RWV
23:05 Zenster
23:00 RWV
22:55 Mike Sylwester
22:52 Mike Sylwester
22:51 RWV
22:49 Bomb-a-rama
22:46 Alaska Paul
22:41 tu3031