The Falklands
- Started
- Last post
- 66 Responses
- Dancer0
I do believe that eevn Thatcher went to war for political gains. It was the Argentines/Glaterai (sp?) who did that...
- Bluejam0
this thread needs more 1982 moments
- trevedda0
Thatcher was evil - I'm older enough to have had a life of misery under her government. the Falklands was used politically to galvanise us against a common enemy when in fact the enemy was so much closer to home. I remember the Brixton riots, the poll tax, destruction of the industrial landscape, the miners' disputes.
Life under Thatcher was shit - even the music was crap (apart from a few bands).
Mind you - don't me started on Blair . . .
- kelpie0
yay.
- Dancer0
I meant to add a not in my last post – sounds all wrong now.
Whilst I am not supporting Thatcher and other things that went on in her 10yr reign. I am saying see had to defend her people from Invasion
- Nairn0
Why would I hate on Maggie?
I wonder where Britain might be now, if ol' Iron Maggie hadn't so 'ruthlessly' instituted reform to move us beyond our archaic reliance on the old world manufacturing industries.
Britain is currently the 4th most vigorous economy in the world, its financial centre seriously rivalling that of Wall street which has been at the forefront for nearly a hundred years. We have the lowest effective unemployment rates in Europe (even if you take away Blair's number crunching and back to work schemes etc), highest rates of home ownership and most fluid financial and business system going (as anyone who's started their own business should be able to tell you).
Why is it that we have such high immigration - and I don't just mean asylum-seekers - I mean from comparable European countries, if the changes instituted over the past 20 years were so bad?
A thing that annoys me is that the Labour administration of the past 10 years has largely ridden the benefits of change instituted by the previous Tory governments - I'm sure that had they been in power then, Scargill would've been swiftly out the door and a Brown-a-like put in his place, effectively making a new labour/old conservative structure anyway.
What would you have rathered - placation of the 'working classes' in the late 70s and 80s and an underperforming relic of a country - or a small island, punching above its weight and still (ironically) somewhat respected by first-world nations, populated by largely content middle-class consumers?
Besides - political parties be damned - I think the whole 4 year cycle of childish name-calling and back-biting is wasteful and retarded - we should've cybernetically enhanced Maggie and had her as a benign totalitarian dictator for the next 100 years, then we could get back our colonies (I mean you, America) and give those Germans the kicking they've deserved for so long.
I've no idea whether I'm kidding or not.
- kelpie0
What would you have rathered - placation of the 'working classes' in the late 70s and 80s and an underperforming relic of a country - or a small island, punching above its weight and still (ironically) somewhat respected by first-world nations, populated by largely content middle-class consumers?
-----------what about a country which "outdated" modes of society were changed over time, with enough investment and, frankly, care to not leave large tracts of anywhere north of london devastated and still in recovery today?
Thatcher ultimately provoked change which was necessary, doing so in such a way as to leave 90% of teh country far behind the tory strongholds and fucked fucked fucked for years.
then she decided to start experimenting with new tax models in "the provinces", nice - cheers for ripping up our social fabric, not giving a fucking monkeys and then sticking us with your evil tax try outs.
she's a fucking evil old hag, responsible for as much suffering in this country as the wonderful merits of being a rich middle class tory voter that you have noted above.
- TedUmptious0
Maggie Tatcher was a bi*ch overall. She cripled the North of England and the North of Ireland. What ever side you are on, she forced hundred's of thousands of her own people to suffer. Did nothing to foster peace. You shouldn't celebrate a leader on one moment, she should be judged overall, otherwise we could be praising Hitler for the AutoBahn.
- jevad0
and you are not even british..
Meeklo
(Apr 2 07, 19:53)I'm not? Somebody better tell my passport!
- kelpie0
she should be judged overall, otherwise we could be praising Hitler for the AutoBahn.
TedUmptious
(Apr 3 07, 07:48)heeheeheeheehee, love it :D
- kelpie0
she's a fucking evil old hag, responsible for as much suffering in this country as the wonderful merits of being a rich middle class tory voter that you have noted above.
kelpie
(Apr 3 07, 07:46)on reflection, that sounds like a personal attack nairn, sorry
- Nairn0
Crippled the North and Northern Ireland? How so? Seems to me the 'troubles' did most of the crippling in Northern Ireland, and the 'North' was too heavily reliant on increasingly-subsidised industries which would've very swiftly fallen away to foreign development and imports anyway - deferring, at best, this 'suffering' you speak of for a decade or so.
Unless, of course, you'd deny other nations' right to development and export, the overall ambition of worldwide development.
Perhaps you've forgotten the stranglehold the unions had in the 70s? Perhaps you've neglected the decades of trouble in Northern Ireland (and the Anglo-Irish agreement which was drawn up under Maggie's tenure?)
The reality is, we live in a hard capitalist world, and she was the best representation we could have hoped for at that time.
- TedUmptious0
You also live in a democracy where your leaders are supposed to represent the majority of the peoples. Not just look after their mates.
Hey yeah I know why she'd be pissed about the North since the IRA did try blow her up! Not happy times, but you'd really have to live there to fully undersatnd the situation. It's is great to see Gerry and Ian sitting down. Good times ahead hopefully.
I'm not an economist by anymeans it just seems if maggie had her way people from economicaly disadvantaged area would never get a chance. Capitalism is a great thing to a certain extent since it pushes the market forward, but there comes a point where you hace to ask "at what cost?".
- Nairn0
No worries, Kelpie - I appreciate what you meant.
I'm just fed up with some of my armchair-socialist friends who've spent the entiriety of their lives moaning aimlessly about ideals and un-realities which have never and could ever exist.
Personally, I'm a liberal-voting armchair-fascist - I'm just keenly aware of the realities of the life - bluntly - there are too many fucking people on this planet, so I'm loathe to accept moaning about jobs-for-life and inefficiencies being the driving force for our future development.
I know this is very absolutist, and I don't wholly believe it - but in the face of dilute sentimentality for days that never were, I feel I have to voice up.
- kelpie0
nairn have you ever lived anywhere like that though? most of teh people I have ever heard say things like the 'hard capitalist world' line have never had any experience of the shit side of that.
Her government did jack shit to help fill the gaps left in huge communities (entire areas of the country actually) once they 'modernised' our country, why? because they didn't care. that is a fact, it suited them to break these places and their people rather than to help them, it kept costs lower and kept their voting demographics happy while everyone else was running around trying to find work and watching places that were poorish but ok turn into really bad areas.
where I'm from its only just started to pick up properly and that due to a service industry and technologies sector which does little to serve vast swathes of the population.
They left us at a standing start. It was unnecessary and wrong.
that's why I will always hate that woman and the fawning toads who gathered around her.
peace my friend x
- kelpie0
meh, wish I'd read your last one before posting that.
quite wound up today, venting on NT.
soz again
rantrantrantrantrantrantrantrant...
- kelpie0
"Personally, I'm a liberal-voting armchair-fascist"
that's nice, btw, lol :P
- Nairn0
I even wear a purple armband emblazoned with an austere-looking geometric form.. :)
And no need to apologise, fella - beyond the pub, NT's the ideal forum for aimless argumentation - half the time I don't even believe what I write, I just get irked by other people not agreeing with my opinion.
Actually, I just get irked by other people.
God, I hate people.
:)
x
- JerseyRaindog0
God, I hate people.
:)
x
Nairn
(Apr 3 07, 08:35)+1
- rafalski0
Capitalism is a great thing to a certain extent since it pushes the market forward, but there comes a point where you hace to ask "at what cost?".
TedUmptious
(Apr 3 07, 08:09)Capitalism for me is freedom and wealth at the cost of everyone being responsible for themselves.
Socialism then is nanny state robbing everyone in order to produce generations of lazy ppl on welfare.
That's only my opinion, but just to put my money where my mouth is, I'll add I have moved from a poor post commie dreaming of German-French style socialism country to yours, the main reason being Ireland is one of the most capitalist states in Europe - thus amazingly prosperous.
I do like it here, don't get me wrong, but if I was offered 3/4 of the money I make here in sunny Barcelona, I would be boarding the plane in a second.
But somehow wages suck in leftist Spain. Damn, 2/3 would do, even if the rent is almost as ridiculously high as here! :)The rule most people don't understand is protectionism hurts the protected, that's why stripping trade unions off their power produced such growth.
Just some 2 months ago prof Milton Friedman died. If you search his name on youtube/google.vids, there are some excellent interviews with him on the topic, I highly recommend that.