Hitler –
For better or worse, he shaped our lives.
That's a
quote from the comedian StuWho in reference to some of the comments
being made in the aftermath of the news that Margaret Thatcher has
now managed to wriggle free from her mortal coil.
It's very
apt in my opinion.
There
seems to be a battle going on in the media, and across the social
networking territories, with many scrambling to write her footnote in
the history books.
His
reaction to this has been to highlight how flimsy the support for her
is in some quarters.
Instead
of being able to shed some light on the positive influences she
exerted over the UK, the best that some can come up with is that 'no
matter what you say you can't deny she changed our lives', and of
course they are correct in saying that.
Unfortunately
they are missing out 'for the worse' though.
Context
is everything.
Look
about today and on the one side we have those who would wish to
maintain a factual record of Thatchers time as the premier of this
land (largely negative), and on the other there are revisionists who
are trying to paint a rosy image of her (Canute style).
It is
really a fight between fact and fiction, and to be frank none of us
will be able to say who will reach the finish line first.
It will
be future generations opinions - shaped from the history books - that
will hand the winners rosette over.
So what
will they say?
Well if
much of the media have their reporting on the news carried on into
the future, then most will look back on her as the first female prime
minister, and possibly consider her an extension of the suffragette
movement, an example of gender equality having its day.
Maybe
they will see her as a warrior, a modern day Boudica, who took on
the might of Argentina and sent them home with their tails between
their legs.
Then
there will be the soundbites that could be misconstrued.
'This
lady is not for turning' sounds firmly positive and evokes an
attitude of maintaining a correct stance in the face of those who
would wish to steer the ship towards the rocks doesn't it?
However
when you take it in the context of the speech, she was actually
referring to refusing to accept liberalisation of the economy, even
though her policies had led to unemployment rising to 2 million.
Will it
be promoted by history as such though?
We have
to be careful and ensure that it does.
To tell
the truth is not to attack an individual.
The truth
is this.
She took
over when unemployment was at a record low and kick started a
recession that ended in 1982 with unemployment exceeding 3 million.
Between
1979 and 1982 over 2 million manufacturing jobs were lost in the UK.
Manufacturing
dropped by a dizzying 30% from the figure it was at just prior to her
reign as premier.
She
supported apartheid and stated that Mandela was a terrorist while
offering the hand of friendship to Pinochet.
She
despised our European brethren and made her feelings about the
mainland very clear as she exerted her disdain for Mitterrand and
Kohl publicly and privately ensuring that every introduction of
policy was fraught with issues regardless of their worth.
She
overseen national industries sold over to the private sector.
Ushered
in the sale of social housing stock.
Introduced
cheap labour to employers through employment schemes.
Manipulated
the unions into a fight and in winning it took away hard won workers
rights.
Used the
police as a cosh on the citizens of this country.
Created
social disharmony and division among the populace.
And in
some peoples opinions allowed the Falklands argument to escalate to
allow her to then become a war time leader.
Regardless
of the opinions she did issue the order to sink the Belgrano while it
was outside the maritime exclusion zone and while the government were
in receipt of a peace plan that conveniently hadn't been read until
after the attack on the ship had taken place.
She
introduced the regressive poll tax.
Presided
over riots in our cities.
She
demonized teachers and social workers alike.
Then
there is the miners.
The
treatment of those who worked in one sector of this countries
industry was akin to the tactics used to ethnically cleanse areas
sans the actual murdering of them.
Do I
really need to go on?
All of
this in the face of 'no matter what you say you can't deny she
changed our lives'.
There is
quite literally dancing going on in the streets and parties being
held.
This is
the reaction from people that is normally held when word of a loathed
dictator has died reaches them.
Instead
of calling it disrespectful the reasons behind the action should be
considered.
What did
Thatcher give this country, and what did she take away?
We are
still reaping the seeds that she had sown, just lift your heads and
look around.
This is
Thatchers legacy to us all.
