AIBU?
To think that gang psychoplogy is behind people who like Thatcher
YohedYoshoulderYonisandYotoes · 16/04/2013 18:21
I have noticed that many people who 'like' Thatcher are really only people who are either a) trying to align themselves with the Tories with the mistaken and deluded belief that it will sorta make them richer and more socially accepted by the richer folk (the 'Rachel Haircut' idea), or b) people who like the idea of being in the gang that bullies the poor (in this I put people who instead of blaming employers for exploiting their staff so much that their staff would rather choose not to work, blame unions for making them have to walk a bit one day a year or some other small-minded petty inconvenience).
I can accept maybe a third circle that is overlapped by those two above of people who think that because she is middle class and was trying to sound like nasty poor-hating members of the middle and upper class, she is similar to them and so supporting Thatcher is a little like saying 'I'm alright' (and conversely feel that hating Thatcher is a little like hating the embarrassing bit about themselves), but I still think this is 'gang' type behaviour.
Its ironic for a leader who went on about the individual so much that she attacks pack rats.
Is that unreasonable?
HoneyDragon · 16/04/2013 18:39
This reply has been deleted
Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.
YohedYoshoulderYonisandYotoes · 16/04/2013 18:52
Anyway, no I am making a serious point about people thinking that if you align your thinking with/agree with exploitation by the wealthy, you think you are being self-interested, because you think that one day you will be rich and be able to take advantage of all the money being shoveled upwards, but in fact you are in one of the groups that will always be shafted - its a bit like liking the Hell's Angels because one day you hope that if you are in trouble you are going to be saved by a criminal gang.
LunaticFringe · 16/04/2013 18:57
This reply has been deleted
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Startail · 16/04/2013 18:57
This reply has been deleted
Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.
YohedYoshoulderYonisandYotoes · 16/04/2013 19:03
Huh? That isn't addressing the point that's talking about something else!! I don't think scargill is on one end of an ethical see-saw and Thatcher on another! If he was I am sure he would get off quickly when she is up in the air to try to give her a compressed spine. Not sure where that gets us but its a long way from pondering Thatcher's gangster credentials.
Why are people being cross with me?
MissyMooandherBeaverofSteel · 16/04/2013 19:07
This reply has been deleted
Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.
Rosesforrosie · 16/04/2013 19:07
Because you have started a goading, and repetitive thread which puts the democratic majority (for three successive elections) into a box marked 'cunts, money grabbing, class jumping cunts'.
And you are refusing to see that that is ignorant, small minded, and quite offensive.
Oh and you are doing it on the eve of a dead woman's funeral. naice.
YohedYoshoulderYonisandYotoes · 16/04/2013 19:08
Oh yes, though I am sure that a lot of people voted in 1979 because they thought they would become richer - though in fact we can never get away from the fact that parties don't really get voted in because they are popular, they are most often voted in when everyone is sick of the old one because it needs people to either vote angrily for the other, or to stop voting for the encumbent.
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.