As we await Margaret Thatcher ‘ceremonial’ funeral and continue to witness the ludicrous level of debate around the playing or not of a certain song on Radio 1, it’s a salutory lesson to rethink one’s own opinions of the Thatcher legacy and, importantly, her approach to political delivery. Sadly for me, the character traits I reluctantly admired in Thatcher appear, on reflection, to be shrouded in ambiguity……
Conviction, strength of purpose, lack of compromise and focus on delivery all seem like positive characteristics to admire. A provocative argument for benevolent despotism? Nothing more disdainful than woolly compromise and an unwillingness to get things done. And I still argue that, certainly throughout my working life, I witnessed far too much prevarication and refusal to change than was good for me. The problem of course is that, even while admiring the single mindedness that she applied to the role, without the checks and balances of effective opposition the policies for which she was responsible destroyed much of our industrial heritage, devastated whole communities and blighted lives for generations to come. Benevolent despotism is of course only remotely appealing if the despot happens to be on the side of the angels.
A younger me would and did condemn everything she did. The older me sees politics as much more nuanced than the black and white divisions of my youth. The industrial base of Britain probably did need shaking up, it clearly wasn’t competitive anyway; other countries weren’t buying British, trade was poor. But was the development of state industries into private monopolies with poor, ineffectual regulation the required response? And the qualities that provided the drive, purpose and commitment weren’t seemingly complemented by any other human virtues that would have mitigated some of effects that the changes in the manufacturing, shipbuilding and mining industries brought about. Neglect of the regions ruined by deindustrialisation is surely the greatest condemnation of Thatcher’s prime ministership. Whether through pure dogma or callous indifference, communities were left forgotten leading generations to live off benefits in a manner that surely helped to build the dependency culture that afflicts so many today. Ghost towns still exist if you venture away from the cosy confines of the metropolis. And for that, whole communities, especially in the North, have every reason not to mourn her passing.
I have no more time for the callous dancing on grave antics exhibited by some than I have for the sainthood that appears to have been handed out by the Telegraph, Mail et al. But surely we can allow a family to grieve for its loss and still be critical of a record of office? And as for “conviction, no compromise politicians”, I shall be careful what I wish for. As Churchill said “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”. However, I still can’t abide the current crop of ‘dithering, mustn’t offend, let’s see which way the wind blows, what would the press say, run it past the focus groups to check what I currently believe’ individuals that currently pass for our political leadership. It ruins debate and it kills interest, which can only be harmful.
As for the very silly headline hitting debate around the “Witch Is Dead”? The BBC should have grown a couple and played it. Oh, and isn’t the fact that the funeral of the champion of privatisation is being paid for by the State the greatest irony of all.