My dad was an ambassador under several PM's, both left and right wings.........he said Maggie could be very difficult to deal with on a professional front but actually good company outside office hours.
He did feel that towards the end of her reign as PM she began to lose the plot; with retrospect I wonder if she was already showing signs of dementia.
The last dealings he had with her were explosive as she began to refuse to listen to her embassies (the experts in the field) and by that time both Geoffrey Howe and the FO in general were apparently feeling very uneasy with some her reasoning. On at least one occasion Dad refused to follow her orders as he knew the outcome would have been catastrophic
:-)
No I don't believe she can be compared to a family member but what started my musings was how it reminded me of my client's funeral and how no one took offence and the negative things that were said about him in front a packed congregation. His family loved him, yet felt no anger nor a need to jump to his defense.
I left feeling a bit confused but at the same time found this refreshing.
Why should we be obliged, with regards to someone who has done us wrong, to 'respect the dead' when they never showed us respect when they were alive?
Wow - that funeral is just like a school parent evening ! Except they really don't dwell on the good at all - in fact they don't even mention it - even though it is there!
Another snippet peek into the French psychie.
It is naturally very emotive and I think some expressions both ways are showing here in no uncertain terms. Not long after she has left office I attended a reception at 10 Downing Street. I was there are a member of the committee of a charity working with and for children. I was there with our chair the late Joan Lestor MP, another strong parliamentary woman. We were in the company of John Smith and his wife Elizabeth, plus Glenys Kinnock. None of us would have gone had T been hosting the event. John Smith, who died just a few months on, offered me the chance to stand for Labour, which I graciously turned down, never having wanted to be a parliamentarian under any circumstances. I have never gained anything, never tried nor wished to, from politics and yet have seen people enrich themselves grossly. That I have no respect for. I must say that under T and again under Blair I saw people use advantage unfairly. Since that was happening under the regime of certain people I have no memories which make me wish to speak out for them. They are best consigned to history and the memory of the select few who feel they must for whatever reason. Politics is a game of sides and what is perhaps right is that views are respected whatever they are and all the critical views of one or the other be put aside rather than picked apart.
That other nice Labour PM, Mr Wilson, closed more pits than Mrs T did. The Unions, particularly Mr Scargill did for the miners, Red Robbo for British Leyland and don't get me going on the print unions. However, yours is an honest, fair and adult response unlike Mr Gay's. I feel the same way about that nice Mr Blair and his lying toerags in his governments. A lot of people voted them both in 3 times to form governments so obviously someone liked them!
To be fair, Doreen, many of us bought our houses "for a song" & later sold for a mint. All property was increasing in value hugely until fairly recently.
Thank you, Mark for finally expressing the voice of reason! After all this time non one really cares if you were pro or against Thatcher and it no longer matters. Surely in 23 years we should have been able to move on; in all that time the various leaders elected by our democratic society have had more than enough chance to change things. How can any rationally-minded person lay so much blame, hate and responsibility at the foot of one politician? Makes no sense but I hope that Maggie is getting a post humous "buzz" from all the power and influence that is being attributed to her!
As for funeral costs, whatever your colours, surely anyone who has dedicated a large part of their life to their country deserves a decent send-off, if that's what the surviving family and friends want. Also, it's not for us to dictate who can and can't attend a funeral based on the cost to the economy! Last time I looked, GB wasn't a communist state.
Yes, perhaps all this gives grist to to the yobbo-tendencies of that section of society which seems to take pleasure in destruction and mayhem, but from what I see, the Jeremy Kyle faction of society seems to need little incentive to resort to their baser instincts. Perhaps it will also encourage many of our Scottish friends to vote for independence - so be it. I think its only fair that the rest of the not-so-united Kingdm also get chance to vote on whether we actually want Scotland in anymore or not - it should work both ways if democracy is to be truly executed ;-)
"she was honest according to her lights and I'll take that any day as an alternative to what we have today in politics."
Yes it is refreshing to see a politician stand for principle and I agree this is lacking in todays politician or at least the principle gets squeezed.
My view on this is stark - the electorate gets what the electorate deserves - read tabloids you get tabloid politicians - use decent informative sources of information and act on that knowledge and you get the same from the politician. We create the framework that they have to swing through and we create it by our choices of information and the level of debate that we as the public then take part in.
The public have got it all wrong blaming the politician - stop buying the Sun, the Mirror and so on and aim for a broadsheet that at least has a stab at intelligent analysis -form opinions around facts rather than the opposite.
Its a democracy - the blame or credit rests squarely on our own shoulders but of course blame always gravitates to the apex of the pyramid rather than the block stones that support it at the base.
I will state I didnt like her. In fact I got thrown out of a pub the night she got into power....it was in expensive Gerards Cross where my husband was working at the time and was a very Tory area.....and I was generally having a go about what a monster she was. I never liked her, always found her crushingly patronising and that voice drove me nuts. But, that was long ago....I know what she did to the mines...but truth is working as a minor is a horrible job and it kills people...if not through mine collapses then lung disease. The mines were not making money and anyone with a brain would close a business if it was losing money. It was hard for the mining communities at the time, as any loss of large employers in an area will have a big impact, but in the long term would I think it better to still have the mines? no actually, I dont. She taught greed, she introduced selling off of council houses and brought in the hated poll tax...but would the UK have had the very good years it did without her? Im not convinced.
As to your particular question.....if she had done the things Sadam did or Mugabe....then I wouldnt find the comments so tasteless...but despite being divisive, she did good as well as bad...so I find the comments offensive, and think it says more about the people making them than Thatcher.
My feeling is that the "celebrations" should have taken place in 1990 when her time in power expired - she has done nothing much since. I could understand this kind of furore if a we had lived under a dictator who had at last died - one only has to look at the celebrations in Iraq after the death of Saddam - but for the past 23 years the UK has had different (& democratically elected) leaders who have put their stamp on society.
Anyone would think that she was universally disliked, but she was voted in 3 times in a row, which puts the dissenters in the minority.
Mind you, I kind of wonder about these so called celebrations, some are just a plain excuse to cause civil unrest & riot, more mess for the tax payer to clear up - just like the Thatcher years again! There are lots of things I disagree with, but burning someone's car won't change much.
Sarah asks "how are we expected to behave?" Responsibly!
I agree with the fact that an expensive funeral is both pointless and inane. But thejn again I think ALL funerals fall into that category anyway. Nothing to do with the person who has died, just for those who are still around. Totally pointless.
Sorry Brian but my experience of Thatcher was a turning point in my life and far from being shattered, it was the shackles on a lower-working class yob that got shattered in my case. Bought my Council house, got a pride in ownership, felt I was 'a person' and opened up my mind to opportunities. Suddenly I was no longer factory-fodder (having doen my stints at that + a three-shift postman etc.,)
Made me realise I had some value at last. Mind you I had to leave the UK to make it work, but even that was a good thing.
Yes she stayed around too long, yes she started believing in her own infallibility, yes to a lot of négatives, but I've said it before and I'll say it again she was honest according to her lights and I'll take that any day as an alternative to what we have today in politics.
I find it incredibly arrogant of people to assume the 'right' to criticise others they have never known, or walked a mile in their shoes as the saying goes. Of course we all do it, but it is still an arrogance.
Yes MT was a divisive figure and she needed to be otherwise nothing would have changed. But Miners now, then, and their second and third generation offspring seem to think they have the only right to be considered poor, - utter crap!
There were more people than the miners who struggled and battled, and didn't need or respond to the lowlifes like Scargill, who were feathering their own nests at the expense of their 'members' who were too thick to realise it.
I get tired an revolted by these retarded 'hoons' who get their rocks off abusing those they have never even known, because 'grandad told me so'. Pathetic.
The good side of it is the reminder of why I got out and stayed out of Britain all those years ago (1969 to be precise).
I saw misery made into a way of life under Thatcher. Whilst unions were being given an extreme harsh hand for the position they were squeezing industry into, the coal industry especially, little attention was ever given to the families of people who lost livelihood, secure homes and even self respect. For some of us the suffering thrust on children was unforgivable. They grew up without certain futures, shattered communities and on that latter point it was she who said there is 'no such thing as community'. To one who studies community those words are an anathema, to one who believes in the interdependence of people they lack humanity.
To pay for a state funeral for somebody who divided society so crassly when it would have been easier and better to do it discretely and without vast expense does not portray this present government in a good light. They are making that common and simple miscalculation - never make a plan without taking your enemies into account. For my part, I suppose I should thank them for the extra votes for an independent Scotland this will reap, a place where no fond memories of her time in office linger.
I had three mothers, my natural mother who gave me away, and then tried to take me to the High Court when I wanted to try and find my father. My adoptive mother who had a natural daughter, a first child born at 40 and with learning difficulties. This mother went on to exclude both me and my father and everything in our house revolved around my sister and the aforementioned mother in law.
More than enough for anyoneI feel!
It has taken me a long time to get all this out of my system, it is not forgotten and neither should it be, but it does take its natural place in the scheme of things.
Both my adoptive mother and mother in law lived into their nineties, bit it was a relief when they both died. My siuster died four months later of a brain tumour and I was left out of her will, so I was denied what had been left tomy mother by our father, who would have been horrified. He died when I was thirteen and showed me unconditional love.
Being honest about people who have been horrible during their lifetime does is when you speak to other people, you find you are not alone and that is a great relief. People who find it abhorrent that you speak the truth about a person perhaps have never had to undergo the traumas these people cause.
Hi
Some of the people we call evil are not trying to be evil, they are simply acting according to a conscience that is radically different to ours.
For my own opinion, I have found it very interesting to see myself going through middle age and also the experience of leaving regular employment and becoming self employed then living in France first and Denmark later and seeing my position shift from what I would call an emotional socialist to what I now call a practical capitalist.
Owning your own business and employing people brings about a fresh perspective - its very easy to be a socialist with other people's money, I found it much easier to glibbly say this money should go to those people or that money should go to those people when I worked for a global corporation - my perspective on my former self was that I was somewhat like I child - as long as I delivered in my chosen field of specialisation I was largely shielded from all the details you have to worry about when you run your own business.
My main criticism of French government would be to sign cheques they cannot back - you cannot be an effective socialist in the global economy without asking where the money is going to come from for the benefits - spending money you have not got is not socialism - its penalising tomorrows generation in favour of todays generation and cheap political gain - China or another Brick country will probably not share your concern for your own underprividged - they've got their own - until things sort themselves out the only way to ensure the health or your own is to be competitive.
White - European socialism was rather blinkered, whilst we bemoaned the wealth differential in our own countries the whole thing was partially funded by exploitation of poor countries and former colonies.
Finally living in Denmark has taught me a thing or to about "fair society" and not all of it I anticipated or approve of - its one thing to have equal opportunity but its also interesting that fair societies seem to need to form themselves around a central ideology and there are always people who are otherwise unremarkable who will drape themselves in the flag and use this as a source of power in society. You can also find a phenomena whereby rather than the middle class anticipation that equality will lift people to an ideal central ground what you can find is an undercurrent that pulls people down to a mediocrity because no-one is allowed to put their head above the parapit.
Its taken me a number of years to figure this all out and I must say as a typical former middle class well education middlish socialist I now would always ask what do you mean by a fair society? Does this mean just equality of opportunity, equality of wealth, do you still support people of exceptional talent or is your doctrine a kind of mediocre blend that can lead some in society to act as bullies and pull back those of potential with the view that "we are all just equal so stop thinking you are someone special".
The one thing I have learnt is that I treasure people of talent, scientists, artists, poets - every direction and I might rather live in an unfair society that encouraged people of talent and potential than live in a society that supported all but bullied anyone who somehow attracted disproportionate interest and self worth - its very hard to express - you need to come and live in Denmark for four years like I have to "get it" but I would simply say that I did not anticipate everything that "fairness" might entail.
To get back on track - sorry but for me despite hating what Thatcher did at the time, in retrospect I think she was the broom that was needed to prepare the British economy for the sophisticated global market we have now. The activity of trade unions at the time seemed reasonable to me but that was in a former age before global markets, competition and sophistication - I feel that if the trade union mentality had been allowed to persist Britain would have sunk down an economic black hole - not all medicine tastes nice but sometimes you need it anyway.
It has taken a lot of courage for me to finally throw off the shackles of habitual partisan thinking within myself and finally come to the conclusion that as someone who voted labour throughout all those years in retrospect perhaps I actually owe my former object of dislike a posthumous vote - we wouldnt have made it economically without her. The current issue with banks and so on is a facet of global capitalism and you cannot deal with it as an isolated enclave - the word moves with or without an individual countries permission. The issue is not whether capitalism is good or works - the issue is what are you going to do instead?
Personally I take the view that in the coming decades with hungry countries becoming economic powerhouses all socialist intiatives will actually be funded by capitalist activity - until we see some kind of re-normalisation of global wealth isolated pockets of pure socialist principles will be decidely vulnerable.
Jon
PS: I am not rich, my strongest political viewpoint is ecological, I dont necessarily like capitalism but its all that seems to work and I think capitalism is a threat to the environmental future of the planet - I no longer feel I have the luxury of black and white bi-partisan political thinking.
In the recent movie about her, played by Myrelle Streep [spelling] i found myself symphasizing, and even liking her,boy such a good actrice that Mirelle, and thats Hollywood!! Cheers
She was, in my opinion, an excellent PM up to and including the Falklands. Unfortunately, due in part to her very strong personality, she was then surrounded by yes men consistently praising her. this went to her head. Power corrupts etc
In the future, like Nixon, history will praise her
I wouldn’t literally dance on her grave but my husband and I despised her. She was first and foremost a ruthless politician. She put herself “out there” and in my opinion is fair game for any and all comments and demonstrations short of those that do physical harm or disrupt the funeral itself. She ruined countless lives while living in luxury until she took her last breath.
Sarah I have a similar mother in law who has done & said some horrible things to me in particular and at times all members of the family - and she has few friends. There have been so many times when I have had to bite my tongue as saying what I felt would upset my wife - who I`m glad to say has none of her mother`s dysfunctional attributes!
It has taken a long time but I have eventually decided that we both see life from opposite points of view and at her age she will never change so there is no point in me stressing about it - I used to do but realised it was such a waste of nervous energy.