Can you help me understand this... Thatcher related.(31 Posts)
Sorry cant help you work it out because its utter bullshit...
Sorry alt I thought the whole thing you had posted was his comments.
It doesn't make that much more send tbh - but there are some people who love a conspiracy theory.
In previous miners' strikes maintenance operators were allowed through the picket line so that after the strike was over the mines could re-open.
The main maintenance was pumping water out. This didn't happen in 1983-1984 meaning many coal seams were no longer viable.
I have no idea who made the decision, it could have been Thatcher, it could have been the NUM, I don't know. I do know it did a lot of damage.
She did call miners 'the enemy within'.
The 'battle of Orgreave' was not a battle. Men and women were hearded into a field. They were charged by horses from one end, and police with truncheons at the other. 95 were then put on trial for rioting, which could be a life sentence, the trial showed that it was the police who charged first and all were acquitted.
I don't know who gave the order for this, I do know it was/is widely believed to be Thatcher. I also know the police were forced to pay compensation.
There was a really interesting documentary on tv a few years ago about what life was like in the 70s and it appears that the country was going to hell in a hand basket. Margaret Thatcher was elected basically to break the power of the Unions. Across the country there was actually very little public support for the miners because people were getting fed up of the strikes. There was something on this evening where Neil Kinnock said he didn't blame Thatcher for taking advantage of the situation as it was, but that Arthur Scargill contributed more to the demise of the British mining industry than Thatcher ever did. To me, that speaks volumes.
I think, given thus all happened years ago, people tend to have become more entrenched in their views of the period - she was either a hero or single-handedly responsible for every single bad thing that has happened since.
And re: the Iraq war, I don't know. But it makes sense to wait for UN backing.
The UN never backed the Iraq war. Hence it being illegal.
* he is lovely, and knowledgable, but I'm struggling to understand my opinions against his.*
I think you are making the mistake of thinking that someone who does not make enough sense for you to be able to form an argument against is more knowledgable than you tbh.
sashh and trazzle do make sense though.
I dont think anyone with a reasonable understanding of economy would argue with the positive impact of Thatcher on British economy through modernization difficult decisions needed to be made and she certainly did that, it was a case of sacrificing the minority for the good of the majority.
It was her uncompromising style that was contentious, as was that of Arthur Scargills. It was a case of the hard-right vs the hard-left, in actual fact Scargill was criticised from within (NUM & labour) for his handling of the strikes on following issues;
1)Keeping TUC at arms length which marginalized support for the miners in other trade unions.
2)His leadership of the strikes within the NUM (flying pickets, avoiding a national ballot, etc)
3)Doing too little to turn public support in favour of the striking minors.
Therefore it could be argued that Arthur Scargill (alongside Thatcher) played a key role in the demise of the trade unions by sacrificing unity for militancy. Who and why the mines were flooded is pretty much insignificant to the big picture.
On the other hand Thatcher and her government came to the battle better prepared by building up of coal reserves with contingency plans in place for alternative transport (road vs rail) and petroleum based power supplies. It came down to a game of chess and Thatcher won - thats politics.
As for Blair and Bush did you not see the Yo Blair - how are you doing conversation between the two in July 2006 when the microphone was supposed to be off? How could that man have any influence on Bush?
For the record my political bearing is tilted towards LibDem but have never voted and am not a supporter of any political party.
There was plenty of coal in the mines but Thatcher wanted to take on the unions (hence upping police wages) & to make a political point. Took European money for the areas affected to recover & they still lag behind economically.
At the time we were importing coal from Australia because it was cheaper to ship it by sea than pay our own miners to dig it out.
The unions were out of control in the 70's
The big question is, putting all the rhetoric to one side, why did Labour reverse none of the previous governments policies? The answer to that has to be: because they were the right policies for the time.
I did pick up somewhere yesterday (did far too much reading) that the reason the government and unions are so cordial today is because of Thatchers policies.
What about the social impact of the destruction of the mining industry? The human cost of high unemployment and social deprivation? Don't make me laugh about economic success. The early 80s were a nightmare in the north and mine was one of the families affected by unemployment. Then there was the bubble which eventually burst on Black Wednesday. Oh, and West Germany subsidised its coal industry by four times as much, France three times as much. Heavily subsidised coal industries were commonplace in Europe. I can't find that £1bn figure anywhere. Care to give a link?
I wonder how many of you live outside of the South East. My DH is from an area in the Noth East where there still communities which 30 years on haven't recovered from the closure of the mines. It's heart-breaking.
And what about her legacy? She oversaw the privatisation of the utilities. That's going well isn't it, what with competition keeping prices low. Oh, hang on a minute... And the privatisation process has rumbled on ever since. Overcrowded, overpriced railways and now we're fighting to keep our NHS out of the hands of profiteers and the prospect of profit-making schools looms.
I'm not actually celebrating her death even though I despised her. She's very much alive and well in terms of legacy. Her death makes no difference. Though I would like to see the. £8m of taxpayers money being squandered on her funeral being given instead to families in poverty. It's obscene.
Holly berry - too late, the mines had been closed. The privatised industries - money from them gone & you would have to compensate new owners if you took them back. Doesn't make the decisions right.
Scargill chose the wrong "battle"
He began the strike, after most of a decade when 3 or so unions were dominating and overtly influencing government, with a (now known) intention of bringing down That Bloody Woman (nice, sexist epithet - but might have done same to any new Tory in expectation of them folding like Heath) - and began it without a ballot.
Can you imagine that today? A strike without balloting members about whether they wanted to strike? He lost a huge amount of public support at that point, especially as there was a break away union which did not support the strike.
I really do blame Scargill for destroying the mines then - his refusal to ballot made his position unsupportable and eventually unwinnable. He put politicking ahead of the industry.
And, the bit that anti-T commentators always seem to omit: mining in Britain continued The further pit closures by 'nice' Mr Blair did not attract the same mass opprobrium, despite protests.
I don't understand the comment 'sold mines to the Russians' - Scargill was discredited for having links with the old USSR, Libya and the IRA. Put that all back into the context of the time.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now »
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.