I might be considered too young to have an opinion on this, and to top that I'm also foreign but what Thatcher did in England definitely have an influence on the countrys position today. Neo-liberalism is a dehumanizing concept that may improve the economy in a short-term perspective but with huge consequences for many people and communities. I would celebrate if someone who had done that to the country where I grew up died.
The category of the prosumer commodity does not signify a democratization of the media towards participatory systems, but the total commodification of human creativity
[quote="get the beer in"]Say what you like about her, but she had something Blair and Brown didn't have................a pair of bollocks. Frightened of no man or country, made you proud to be British. [/quote]
Totally agree with you mate. When she was in power - it was the last time Britain was respected all over the world. Could do with her again sort out the Bloody mess we are in now after 13 years of Blair and Brown fucking it all up. Britain has became a laughing stock - TOO SCARED TOO STAND UP FOR ITSELF.
Well, I tell them there's no problem Only solutions
It's all very well having the world respecting your stature due to a tough figurehead, but it soon becomes clear to all that a nation can't be run on the benefits of a single city.
Blair and Brown were economic sons of Thatcher. They continued her work in the marketisation of this nation. The change to Clause 4 proved it. People moan about no jobs, immigrants flooding in to undercut workers, factories moving to foreign lands, yet these all all symptoms of a free market; when the worker is nothing more than a commodity.
Industry means much more than an economy, it's about time we begun to remember that.
[quote="kuriousoranj"]It's all very well having the world respecting your stature due to a tough figurehead, but it soon becomes clear to all that a nation can't be run on the benefits of a single city.
Blair and Brown were economic sons of Thatcher. They continued her work in the marketisation of this nation. The change to Clause 4 proved it. People moan about no jobs, immigrants flooding in to undercut workers, factories moving to foreign lands, yet these all all symptoms of a free market; when the worker is nothing more than a commodity.
Industry means much more than an economy, it's about time we begun to remember that.[/quote]
That last sentence is quite interesting but I don't really know where you stand on this.
An industry fair enough is the people, companies etc involved in making goods and services to sell. However, surely if it is more cost effective to do so abroad, benefiting our nation in the long run, maybe we have to look into the bigger picture of our nation and not the minority affected by it? Maybe I am just a money grabbing bastard that should care more.
I think a lot of people have a warped view of Thatcher and how she 'dealt' with Argentina. Basically, we got lucky, very lucky.
First off, the Thatcher government could have averted a war against Argentina and in the process saved hundreds of British lives but instead she let the situation develop and used the war as a vehicle to get herself re-elected by the naive British population. That is how big her balls were - she sacrificed all those British lads in order to get another 5 years as PM - some woman eh?
As to the war itself. We had to beg the Americans to let us have some of their untested in battle 'sidewinder' missiles, without which the air war in the South Atlantic would have been a very different animal. We also then had to beg the French not to sell the Argies anymore of their deadly Exocet missiles because we had no defence against them and it was said that if we had lost anymore ships then we would have been in trouble. If one of the carriers had been hit with an exocet then it doesn't bear thinking about. Many military historians have said that Britain basically lucked-out in the Falklands war. Thank God for the yanks and the frogs!
[quote="jack5"][quote="kuriousoranj"]It's all very well having the world respecting your stature due to a tough figurehead, but it soon becomes clear to all that a nation can't be run on the benefits of a single city.
Blair and Brown were economic sons of Thatcher. They continued her work in the marketisation of this nation. The change to Clause 4 proved it. People moan about no jobs, immigrants flooding in to undercut workers, factories moving to foreign lands, yet these all all symptoms of a free market; when the worker is nothing more than a commodity.
Industry means much more than an economy, it's about time we begun to remember that.[/quote]
That last sentence is quite interesting but I don't really know where you stand on this.
An industry fair enough is the people, companies etc involved in making goods and services to sell. However, surely if it is more cost effective to do so abroad, benefiting our nation in the long run, maybe we have to look into the bigger picture of our nation and not the minority affected by it? Maybe I am just a money grabbing bastard that should care more.[/quote]
Haha, well it all depends on how you look at it. I've been raised in a country with 40% taxes and where some people wouldn't mind paying more, including me.
I think it's very dangerous to look at society/the market/human beings purely with an economics cost-effective view on it. Even Adam Smith was well aware of this fact and acknowledged the danger. Going abroad might save pennies but in the long run its not worth it. For me social democracy has so far proven to be the best way to run a country. It's about the welfare of the people and not the companies.
The category of the prosumer commodity does not signify a democratization of the media towards participatory systems, but the total commodification of human creativity
[quote="Vasque"]I think a lot of people have a warped view of Thatcher and how she 'dealt' with Argentina. Basically, we got lucky, very lucky.
First off, the Thatcher government could have averted a war against Argentina and in the process saved hundreds of British lives but instead she let the situation develop and used the war as a vehicle to get herself re-elected by the naive British population. That is how big her balls were - she sacrificed all those British lads in order to get another 5 years as PM - some woman eh?
As to the war itself. We had to beg the Americans to let us have some of their untested in battle 'sidewinder' missiles, without which the air war in the South Atlantic would have been a very different animal. We also then had to beg the French not to sell the Argies anymore of their deadly Exocet missiles because we had no defence against them and it was said that if we had lost anymore ships then we would have been in trouble. If one of the carriers had been hit with an exocet then it doesn't bear thinking about. Many military historians have said that Britain basically lucked-out in the Falklands war. Thank God for the yanks and the frogs![/quote]
You're not wrong there mate, add in the wealth of information the Yanks gave to us (despite the concerns of their own military) and the image of Britain putting the Argies in their place becomes very different.
Don't buy the idea that Britain has fallen from grace. We're an Island of 60 odd million and yet we command a seat on every top table in the world. Go to the USA and speak to people and you get a very different image of how the world sees us. Papers like the Mail and British people's little englander mentality has created this sense that the country used to have streets paved with gold when in real terms we're better now than at any point in human history. The main problem as I can see it is the isolation of individuals and the atomisation of society - no community spirit, people working all the hours god sends.....all of which can be traced back to the neo-liberal policies thatcher pursued. I won't celebrate her passing but I can understand those who will, her blinkered cold hearted policies tore the heart out of Britain for economic opportunism.
[quote="Vasque"]I think a lot of people have a warped view of Thatcher and how she 'dealt' with Argentina. Basically, we got lucky, very lucky.
First off, the Thatcher government could have averted a war against Argentina and in the process saved hundreds of British lives but instead she let the situation develop and used the war as a vehicle to get herself re-elected by the naive British population. That is how big her balls were - she sacrificed all those British lads in order to get another 5 years as PM - some woman eh?
As to the war itself. We had to beg the Americans to let us have some of their untested in battle 'sidewinder' missiles, without which the air war in the South Atlantic would have been a very different animal. We also then had to beg the French not to sell the Argies anymore of their deadly Exocet missiles because we had no defence against them and it was said that if we had lost anymore ships then we would have been in trouble. If one of the carriers had been hit with an exocet then it doesn't bear thinking about. Many military historians have said that Britain basically lucked-out in the Falklands war. Thank God for the yanks and the frogs![/quote]
You've made some good points there mate. Loss of British soldiers in battle is never a good thing but what was her option but to go to war.
In Thatchers position would you have just given in to The Argies and handed over The Falklands to them.
Thatcher stood up to them and gained alot of respect and showed she was a leader with balls.
Whatever your political views she will be seen as one of the Greatest Leaders in modern times.
Well, I tell them there's no problem Only solutions
[quote="RVP's Left Foot"][quote="Vasque"]I think a lot of people have a warped view of Thatcher and how she 'dealt' with Argentina. Basically, we got lucky, very lucky.
First off, the Thatcher government could have averted a war against Argentina and in the process saved hundreds of British lives but instead she let the situation develop and used the war as a vehicle to get herself re-elected by the naive British population. That is how big her balls were - she sacrificed all those British lads in order to get another 5 years as PM - some woman eh?
As to the war itself. We had to beg the Americans to let us have some of their untested in battle 'sidewinder' missiles, without which the air war in the South Atlantic would have been a very different animal. We also then had to beg the French not to sell the Argies anymore of their deadly Exocet missiles because we had no defence against them and it was said that if we had lost anymore ships then we would have been in trouble. If one of the carriers had been hit with an exocet then it doesn't bear thinking about. Many military historians have said that Britain basically lucked-out in the Falklands war. Thank God for the yanks and the frogs![/quote]
You've made some good points there mate. Loss of British soldiers in battle is never a good thing but what was her option but to go to war.
In Thatchers position would you have just given in to The Argies and handed over The Falklands to them.
Thatcher stood up to them and gained alot of respect and showed she was a leader with balls.
Whatever your political views she will be seen as one of the Greatest Leaders in modern times. [/quote]
It has been proved that Britain had the intelligence that said the Argies were preparing for an assault on the Falklands and did nothing to try and stop it. Telling the Argies that a nuclear sub was sniifing around the South Atlantic and that any Argentinian vessel that approached the Islands would get sunk would have stopped them in their tracks. This has been proved by documents from the time. Thatcher was in trouble with the public and needed something to boost her ratings and the Falkland war was perfect for her.
[quote="Jackbosco"]Too young to have an opinion but if she was what made england what it is today then her death should be celebrated...[/quote]
She didn't. But It was on Labour's watch were kid's left school not knowing that the country they live in is spelt with a capital 'E'. Which it seems is what England has become after 13 yrs of a Labour government!!!!!!!!!!!!
OFF HAND
Print view
Mon May 02, 2011 3:10 pm
reply
[/quote]
