Thatcher

[SiF]

Coming from a poor working class background I was taught to stand on my own 2 feet, work hard and not to expect help from anyone else

Now Thatcher would approve of that, she loved the poor working class.

She was too honest to say "We are all in it together" though as the quote above was more suited to her idea of how a dog-eat-dog lower class should be kept productive.

If you end up topdog it seems OK. If you are just part of the pack fighting over the scraps you may be tempted to look across the channel, to Europe, and think there is a better way.

What's Thatcher got to do with it? It's a general comment on aspiration, wanting to do better for yourself and the notion that hard work pays? It happens all the time, regardless of who is in power. My sister went through the same process under Blair. And better way? Spain, Greece, Portugal, Italy ... you are joking.

I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my XOOM 2 using hovercraft full of eels. 2

[Raph]

Whoops - apology for huge answer, I got carried away! It's a huge topic though.

"Succeeded"... in what? Presenting a seminar on typical tory selective naïveté? As I slightly suspected we do agree on a lot of basics - but toryism in the 80s was very different to what it is now, and tory basics have changed, for the better I'm glad to say, which is partly why I'm no longer as opposed as I was.

I agree that the ability of the richest to avoid paying their share is totally immoral.

That already is a pointer as to how different you are from anything Thatcher stood for. Equality was not at all desirable then, inequality was openly the aim, blaming those that didn't make it above poverty for being lazy, even those working 60-hour weeks for peanuts. I knew lots of people in that situation, I did stints of it myself.

You like to focus on positives, that's great. Thatcher however made a point of tapping into negatives - hatred towards elements of our own society, anger at each other - she might as well have said "where there is harmony let us bring discord" though to be fair there wasn't any harmony to start with, e.g. the miners! Anyone who looked like they might not like the tories was in line for a kicking. I very nearly got a bad pasting a couple of times riding home at night - not by muggers or psychos, but by cops. Well, effectively psychos in uniform, cos the drive to increase police numbers was so desperate that where I lived they simply put a cop's uniform on anything with a tattoo and a scowl. Both times the opening valediction was a stream of four-letter expletives and violent threats - amazing what they taught them at the Hendon training college! Riding a bicycle I might have been a lefty about to storm the houses of parliament you see - it all makes sense. The first of these impromptu meetings was about a week after Thatcher used the term "enemy within", making the expression "Thatcher's boot-boys" quite poignant. An anecdote doesn't make a trend, but "Starsky'n'Hutch" antics against citizens were pretty much the norm then. I think she learned that from her mate Pinochet.

You must show me a "moaning lefty" some time - I've never seen or heard one, they usually shout platitudes self-righteously and share the tory trait of using self-serving circular logic and selective gullibility. I have on the other hand heard lots of moaning tory bores who resent every insignificant minor nuisance in life, e.g. other people being gay or putting music on in their own gardens (remember the 80s tory law against that?) - the mere existence of cyclists usually comes very close to the top of the list of unbearable scourges. Dole scroungers feature way behind. But somehow not a word against the scary banks, who get bailed out once your life savings are safely invested in their yachts in the Bahamas, and you only get that back when they've made a lot of money again. Pragmatism obviously failed there - a bit of ideology might not have gone amiss. This isn't envy by the way, I don't want a yacht in the Bahamas, and I don't care about someone else's life savings - though I do wonder why most of the population is paying more tax and getting less services to save their life savings once their bank has p1ssed them up the wall. If it were a choice between the two I'd bring back the dole scroungers!

When Labour wound up Railtrack, or whatever it was called at the time, what did the tory opposition freak out about? A useless company that couldn't do its job? No. The poor passengers trying to get to work? No. The poor shareholders. The people who had invested in something that didn't work, who should then lose that money cos they'd invested it badly - were regarded as the poor victims. The fact that not many trains had run reliably over the last ten years was, to a tory, an irrelevant detail. To take your point about ideology vs. pragmatism, I now know that a labour govt couldn't run a Thomas the Tank train reliably on a three-foot section of wooden kiddie train track - so pragmatically, there's nothing to favour a labour government there. It is nevertheless amusing to hear the squealing indignation of a thousand moaning tories.

Every third sentence from a tory bore involves the quote "there aught to be a law against it", and eventually when we're not allowed to breathe lest it should inconvenience or offend someone who would then sue us in the spirit of entrepreneurial initiative... suddenly they make out it's the lefty nanny state at fault. I'm not moaning, just pointing out that much tory moaning is misplaced - short term knee-jerk remedies lead to unintended consequences that you can then blame on labour, while moaning copiously. The obsession with suing people really took off in the late 80s, now we're bogged down with H&S. In every case where I have to PAT test gear and provide public liability insurance and do a load of paperwork the reason is clearly to avoid litigation from chancers (as well as to insure genuinely against mishaps!) - nothing to do with lefty human rights. Doesn't stop Jeremy Clarkson blaming Trotsky personally.

Coming from a poor working class background I was taught to stand on my own 2 feet, work hard and not to expect help from anyone else

Then you're perfect tory fodder! Elsewhere you say all your working-class mates vote tory - perfect - the tory strategy of decimating education is working.

Tories will invariably cite the few examples of people who have dragged themselves out of poverty and become millionaires - now there's a 0.000001% sample if ever there was one! Dangling those unrepresentative few in front of the rest keeps us all beavering away desperately, whereas wouldn't a better outcome be if the norm was that work was rewarded, the exception was people working lifetimes for very little. It's game of musical chairs where there are actually ten chairs and ten people, but one guy takes all the chairs and holds the rest to ransom - that's the tory hero.

Problem is, we don't have a welfare state that helps the needy, but a dependency state that supports the useless.

True, but you're exaggerating massively - there's widespread abuse of the system, and as indy points out, the rules aren't well thought out e.g. excessive housing benefit doesn't really benefit the housed, it benefits landlords. But largely people who can't manage for whatever reason (because the minimum wage is [droppings]?), get help.

The tories have changed a lot since the 80s though - Thatcher was an extreme we put up with because, as someone mentioned above, when we were strangled by unions, it appeared preferable to be strangled by tories.

Leftyism has changed a lot as well - Billy Bragg used to represent an attitude that I absolutely hate, sort of "reduce everybody until everybody is the same", whereas my view of equality is to increase everybody. A practical example - I got into a lot of fights at primary school cos I played the piano. I was rubbish at everything else so I'm not blowing any trumpets here (sic!) but the fact that I did something that "toffs" do meant getting into scraps a lot. Later on lefty mates used to take the mick if not actually disapprove that I played classical music - toff's music. Basically I can't stand that attitude - but in the last 30 years, actually thanks to Thatcher to some extent, the class system has sort of turned over on its side. By dangling the 0.000001% rags-to-riches millionaire in front of the oiks of the country she inadvertently put the idea in their heads that maybe the good life wasn't something to sneer at.

Even Billy Bragg, on telly the other day, admitted (or maybe only implied...) that sharing what's good from the previously top layer of society (can't remember his exact examples but stuff like classical music, wine etc) is more valuable than keeping a working class identity by proscribing it. At the French revolution they got the harpsichords and viols from the top floor of the Bastille and threw them out of the window and burned them along with all the written music - they could have shared them out and enriched everyone, but no, (19)80s working class identity was to keep shovelling [droppings] and keep voting tory - nice food & wine and classical music were for poofs. Thatcher talked of going back to "Victorian values" - regardless how she meant it, to my working class mates at the time it meant working men drank beer not wine, homos were to be executed, posh dads had a mistress, and as a concession to the 20th century, you took your musical tastes from Radio 1.

Ultimately, possibly agreeing with your point about "entertainment politics" - to me the relevant dividing line isn't between left and right politics, but to do with merit and co-operation, and both sides of the divide fail or succeed to widely varying degrees. That's why I sit on the fence - not cos I'm avoiding a scrap, but cos I reckon it's often the right place to be, and actually it gets me in twice as many scraps! I seriously alienated a lefty mate recently who gave me a load of classic lefty [male undercarriage plural], with the same disregard for whether someone is of use to society, but lots of Marxist theory - very democratic in theory, but totally irrelevant.

[meic]

What's Thatcher got to do with it?

Considering the title of the thread, this question seems senseless.

It's a general comment on aspiration

,
no, it was a comment on being a class traitor and climbing on the backs of others

you see when you add this bit

wanting to do better for yourself and the notion that hard work pays?

it makes it look like general aspiration

but then remove this bit

and not to expect help from anyone else

which shows it was more about looking after number 1.

It happens all the time, regardless of who is in power.

Yes but some leaders encourage it, in particular a certain Margaret Thatcher.

My sister went through the same process under Blair.

Not for nothing was he known as "Son of Thatcher"

And better way? Spain, Greece, Portugal, Italy ... you are joking.

Nope, definitely not joking. My view of Europe is from being there rather than reading the Sun.
To be fair, I would have agreed with you whilst I was still only informed by the newspapers but travel broadened my mind.

[Raph]

meic I'm not sure what you mean by "class traitor" - sounds a bit like the thing I mentioned in my last post about friends (that I left behind decades ago) deciding what sort of music I should or shouldn't listen to or play, or calling each other traitors cos they got into posh food or going to the theatre. Hopefully you mean something more meaningful such as someone buying up all the property on their street and then charging their neighbours massive rents? Yeah that might be a traitor of sorts but to me the class element of it is irrelevant.

[Raph]

Coming from a poor working class background I was taught to stand on my own 2 feet, work hard and not to expect help from anyone else

Now Thatcher would approve of that, she loved the poor working class.

No she didn't - she thought they were idiots.

They loved her.

[meic]

For the point about classical music and the like,
The two are related.

A class traitor is somebody who sells out their class by playing the managements game and helping to keep the rest down for a little extra.
One of the common traits of such people is that they take on the traits of the other class, clothes, accent, manners etc. So liking classical music is easily interpreted this way by many stalwarts.

Just as Tony Blair tried to pretend to take on working class traits to ingratiate himself with voters.
"A man of the people"

As for Thatcher liking the poor working class, I think she did as she did her best to ensure they remained a growing sector of society.

[JohnW]

................As for Thatcher liking the poor working class, I think she did as she did her best to ensure they remained a growing sector of society.

If Thacher had any liking at all for working class people, was it because they were the ones who read the Sun rag? - and who were gullible enough to do what Murdoch told them to do and vote for b****y Thatcher? - so that she could direct the nation's wealth back towards the rich - and the Americans. Or was it the kind of liking that the cat has for the mouse?

What really went on between Thatcher, Murdoch, Reagan et al? Are we ever likely to know? Was she, however, merely a puppet of the bastrous rich and greedy who really wield the power?

As for Thatcher "loving" the working class - well, analyse her actions - was she capable of that emotion?

[SiF]

What's Thatcher got to do with it?

Considering the title of the thread, this question seems senseless.

Well, the full thread starts with 'CTC' but I am not stupic enough to think that all comments, in all threads, are specifically related to cycle touring.

It's a general comment on aspiration

no, it was a comment on being a class traitor and climbing on the backs of others

Class traitor?? What planet are you on? So, you have never had the use of medical services, the legal profession, financial services, etc?? Or are you one of those vegetarians that eat bacon, ie, a hypocrite. (Oh look, you have used airlines, so yes, you are a hypocrite).

And climbing on the backs of others? My aspiration may be a vicar for all you know! You are just one of those people who think that success equates to privilege/greed/having a money tree in the garden. From here it sounds like you are a net taker from society, justified by a sense of injustice.

you see when you add this bit

wanting to do better for yourself and the notion that hard work pays?

it makes it look like general aspiration

but then remove this bit

and not to expect help from anyone else

which shows it was more about looking after number 1.

Err, and how do you reach this insightful conclusion? Aspiration isn't all about achieving financial goals you know. Screwing over others to achieve your aims may be part of your value set but I cannot associate with it.

It happens all the time, regardless of who is in power.

Yes but some leaders encourage it, in particular a certain Margaret Thatcher.

Better than the last lot who killed aspiration and promoted mediocrity.

My sister went through the same process under Blair.

Not for nothing was he known as "Son of Thatcher"

As the world drifts towards the centre ground you are left in a little island all of your own.

And better way? Spain, Greece, Portugal, Italy ... you are joking.

Nope, definitely not joking. My view of Europe is from being there rather than reading the Sun.
To be fair, I would have agreed with you whilst I was still only informed by the newspapers but travel broadened my mind.

Ahh. Standard 'doesn't agree with me so must have read it in the newspapers' response. How intelligent.

You on the other hand have 'travelled'. So, spending some time in various countries, meeting a restrictive set of similarly minded people, has provided great depth of insight into the culture and socio-economic conditions of that country. That just arrogant.

I have met many like you. Priviledged upbringing, public school, and never had a want. Telling the rest of us that we are engaged in some pseudo-intellectual class war and we have it all wrong, when we just want to get on.

Am I right?

[meic]

So, you have never had the use of medical services, the legal profession, financial services, etc?? Or are you one of those vegetarians that eat bacon, ie, a hypocrite. (Oh look, you have used airlines, so yes, you are a hypocrite).

You are just one of those people who think that success equates to privilege/greed/having a money tree in the garden.
From here it sounds like you are a net taker from society, justified by a sense of injustice.

Screwing over others to achieve your aims may be part of your value set but I cannot associate with it.
you are left in a little island all of your own.
How intelligent.

You on the other hand have 'travelled'. So, spending some time in various countries, meeting a restrictive set of similarly minded people, has provided great depth of insight into the culture and socio-economic conditions of that country.
That just arrogant.

I have met many like you. Priviledged upbringing, public school, and never had a want. Telling the rest of us that we are engaged in some pseudo-intellectual class war and we have it all wrong, when we just want to get on.

Am I right?

Well with all that to choose from you must have got at least one tiny bit right.

So why all the barrage of personal attacks?

Also assuming that I have been on an airline, how on earth does that make me a hypocrite?

To the best of my knowledge you cant actually be a vegetarian and eat bacon. So either I am a vegetarian or I eat bacon would appear to be a more sensible question. The answer by the way is neither.

[daveg]

By 'eck - not been on this thread for a while but there's been a lot happening.

I used to get all hot under the collar about those dear beloved politicians and the powerbrokers but happy to say I've managed to calm down a bit. Life's just a game of Monopoly. The majority struggle along to make ends meet whislt the rich get richer. That's capitalism. Nothing will change until capitalism is replaced. The big question really is what with? Communism doesn't work; the "third way" doesn't seem to exist. There's no effort being put into finding a way that we could all live together in a fairer society; just a lot of tinkering at the edges and schoolboy arguments about my way's better than yours.

That said, I couldn't abide Mrs T, but neither could I go with Mr B (although he started off with high hopes) and the current crop are neither use nor ornament.

As things are it looks gloomy to me as we are all going to argue until we disappear up our own backsides.

Good job I've got a bike and can go out and enjoy myself now and then!

[mrjemm]

What daveg says.

Tums up from me.

[kwackers]

The majority struggle along to make ends meet whislt the rich get richer. That's capitalism. Nothing will change until capitalism is replaced. The big question really is what with? Communism doesn't work; the "third way" doesn't seem to exist. There's no effort being put into finding a way that we could all live together in a fairer society; just a lot of tinkering at the edges and schoolboy arguments about my way's better than yours.

Nothing wrong with capitalism, what is wrong is believing that everything can be fixed if capitalist principles are used.
My gripe about politics in general is the way you have to belong to a particular group, capitalist, socialist, communist etc.
IMO all have merits and a decent society cherry picks the particular system for the job in hand. The perfect system isn't any of the above but a blend of whatever principle works and benefits society, and by 'benefit' I don't necessarily mean monetarily.

Of course the first job is to get people used to the idea that society comes first and individuals second...

[Raph]

SiF - have you finally found your moaning lefty? Your arguments at meic are the usual tory nonsense though. Going on holiday isn't a right-wing pursuit, a lefty that goes on holiday isn't a hypocrit, you have nothing there to support your sarcasms on. Do you think lefties should preserve their principles by laying down and starving lest they should buy something using filthy money? The fact that everything has been appropriated under monetary freedom by someone else doesn't make those commodities evil or unnecessary to a lefty, they've still gotta eat. A tory that buys stuff from a lefty country is just as much a hypocrit, or not.

But meic - all that class loyalty stuff... cor blimey guvnor do me a favour! Class used to determine wealth, it does so less and less, the next stage is to concentrate on removing barriers that prevent the bottom layer from bettering their lives, and a lot of that bottom layer is these days middle class. Free market economy is definitely not the way, but neither is a badly thought out welfare state.

Maybe it's time to stop throwing custard pies at each other (I'm guilty as charged yer honour) and work out how we're going to proceed. I don't hope that a thread on a forum is going to hatch the new mentality but the two-tier politics we have is destructive and it's good to chip away at it rather than keep poking each other in the eye.

Here's another question that neither political side asks - where is the wealth going? Business is simply good or bad apparently, according to political colour. Tories say globalisation is marvellous, it brings employment where there was none, turns barren wastelands into flourishing fertile blablas etc... Yes, it does in the short term. The moment it becomes unprofitable, the companies involved pack up and go, leaving a worse wasteland than before, often polluted - and the profits have gone elsewhere. And the profits always go the same way - to those who had the capital in the first place, and become ever more capable of forcing the next deal in their own favour.

There are lots of towns in the UK without a centre, without a "hub" - just a vague collection of characterless shopping malls that nobody could possibly feel any affection for. That's a free market in action. And we the consumers are the idiots that fuel it. I try to support the local shop, but eventually it closes because a nationwide chainstore has moved in on the outskirts of town and a million car-dependent couch potatoes go there instead. No local shop, no choice, no freedom.

But then state ownership is simply another form of globalisation, as the state is never going to ask the opinions of its citizens about anything. No choice no freedom there either, and it's even more sinister as for example USSR food shortages were an instrument of state control.

80s tories did support small business, that was good. However what actually happened was a gradual taking over by big business, often killing local traders, and becoming sweatshop employers - you can't expect a massive multinational company to care about the fodder that beavers away for them. Huge swathes of population become a commodity. The ideal of "doing business" is a distant memory as companies effectively own employees. The definition of slavery is work for no pay, but a slave gets clothed and housed - when people in employment earn only barely enough to be clothed and housed and the alternative is starvation, it's slavery in all but name. With that on offer globally, how do we in the UK compete unless we're prepared to accept conditions of slavery? We can't. We rave on about how marvellous it is that people in Thailand, China etc work for $1 a day, why don't we do that, we're such lazy feckers and refuse to work for 50p an hour let alone $1 a day, what a nation of benefit-dependent chavs!

Capitalism is merely a mechanism, it's just what people do, mutual back-scratching, it's totally natural to be swapping things, any two kids will naturally do business - I'll swap you three sherbet pips for a fruit salad chew. It's only harmful when it becomes an ideology over and above basic human fairness, which I admit is a minefield in itself.

[Mick F]

What daveg says.

Tums up from me.

Me too!

[meic]

Raph,

I am merely a rather disinterested observer, who has had a chance to look at things from many different angles. Also I am not sufficiently educated by TV and newspapers.

The class system is losing its hereditary basis and it is being placed by a meritocracy. Now merit is "awarded" in a way that has a very strong class bias but has enough permeability to give it a veneer of meritocracy.

The end result is the same, the meritorious get the nice well paid jobs and chastise their "lesser" mortals for being lazy scroungers and complaining about all the tax they pay from their hard earned money.
Nobody seems to interested in finding a fair and useful part for everyone to play, well not unless you cross the channel that is. On the contrary the unemployed are a useful stick to threaten the employed with.

Now I would be the last to deny myself the privilege of a bit of moaning yet it appears you dont even have to do any moaning to get the stereotype, or could you point out my moan in this thread?
It is automatic to describe anyone who points out inequality as a moaner or having a chip on their shoulder (wasnt that almost compulsory for black people in the 1970s who said anything?).