<p>Congrats, AA. Way to fight ad hominems with ad hominems.</p>
<p>May we all be remembered for the best things we did and said.
I wouldn’t feel good about celebrating a death. (Did you pop a cork for Hugo Chavez? Got a bottle ready for Castro?) At this point she was a demented old lady, a mother, etc. Did you all know her personally? Despicable, mean, vindictive,selfish, deluded, narcissistic??? Really? I hope someone will have kind words for us when we’ve passed on.</p>
<p>I was in London during the strikes as Murdoch shifted production from Fleet Street to Wapping and then when the Yorkshire coal pits were shut. In other words, the destruction of what had become a dead hand form of trade unionism. The newspaper unions insisted on inefficiency that made the papers unprofitable. The coal miners insisted pits that were bluntly non-economic be kept open. She didn’t have much of a hand in the former. So there was a shift due.</p>
<p>I think the nature of ideology is it responds in opposition: here is what we see as wrong and here is why and this is why we believe this. There was good and bad in the ideology. There was good and bad in what she did. I think much criticism of her is thinly veiled gender bias; she spoke with a bluntness people characterized as mean partly because they saw her as a witch more than as a strong person who happened to be female. </p>
<p>I’m not sure Thatcherism stood for much over time. She raised taxes but relaxed regulation. They offset increased taxes with monetary policy to expand the monetary base so she wasn’t at all like America’s GOP except to the extent they want to remember her as making cuts.</p>
<p>It’s probably too much to read in what happened after. So for example, I remember the London “Big Bang” when they deregulated the markets - and income soared for those in the financial industry. London needed to do this because they were being cut out by other locations but I can’t say she would have stood aside as the regulation became increasingly “light touch” to the point where London became the main center for hiding capital flows. I can’t put on her head the vast income inequality that developed because the financial industry ran amok. </p>
<p>(As a note, it was the regulatory inability to even see where capital was flowing which caused the actual freezing of the credit markets when Lehman was allowed to fail. The US Treasury was taken by surprise when it turned out that Eurozone banks flowed money through London into US money markets for short-term funding and that Lehman was their main funding source. The absence of regulation in London meant literally dollars suddenly became unavailable - in banks, meaning “electronic dollars” not actual greenbacks. The Fed had to make an $800B+ emergency loan to the ECB overnight because the system shut down from lack of dollars. BTW, my source for this is the BIS, the bank for international settlements. They were only able to figure how this happened from settlement information that took months to unravel. )</p>
<p>So one can fault Thatcher for what became of the ideology but I’m not sure that’s fair. Another example is the way Hayek is quote about a ‘road to serfdom’ without the context of when he wrote, which was during WWII. It’s as stupid to believe 70 years of experience doesn’t matter as to think Hayek would write exactly the same thing after those 70 years. That other people took Thatcher’s ideas and used them doesn’t make them actually Thatcher’s.</p>
<p>I know as well that she was anti-gay and held a number of positions I can’t stand but the evolution of gay awareness went on while she was in dementia. I can’t say she wouldn’t feel differently, just as politicians in the US are now shifting views after voting for DOMA.</p>
<p>I agree with Atomom. Shame on people to rejoice in a death. She was not Papa Doc or Pol Pot for goodness sake. In her day Margaret Thatcher did a lot of good for the British people. (I am British). I remember when we had 3 day working weeks, strikes whether it was the dustbinmen (garbage collectors) which had our streets full of rotting garbage, miners, railway, london transport or in fact any branch of industry with a union on a regular basis. She may have lost her way towards the end but in her first two elections she pulled Britain out of the dark ages to make it a better place to live. She did not win 3 general elections by force.</p>
<p>some people just don’t understand having to make the tough decisions to better an economy. Thatcher did a lot of good but the liberals will only see the negative…typical.</p>
<p>I was shocked that my conservative Irish friends are also rejoicing (maybe too strong a word) in her death.</p>
<p>H and I are what is termed " Thatcher children". grew up in the 70s/ 80s. We both went to University free of charge and had " grants" for living expenses. Graduated debt free- what a gift to working class kids. My parents forget that it was Thatchers policies that allowed them to buy their " council house" and led them to a path of home ownership. Both my siblings also went to uni. </p>
<p>I remember the miners strikes and the rolling power cuts. I was young at the time.</p>
<p>I am astounded by the hateful posts on facebook by friends in the UK. looking back as an adult I don’t agree with all her decisions, but as someone pointed out the British people elected her 3 times.</p>
<p>Shame on people who are making hateful remarks upon this woman’s death. Such a shame.</p>
<p>Truthfully I’m surprised at the hateful remarks. On one hand, I had no idea people felt such hate. On the other hand, really? An elderly woman, once a thrice elected politician died. Don’t agree with the politics … fine. Rejoice in her death? Again, really?</p>
<p>Careful not to break those wagging fingers. Does the shaming go for things said at the death of all people or are there some deemed so evil that it is okay? Who gets to decide?</p>
<p>I think the pain of her rule is still affecting people, so it makes sense that many feel this way. I understand that she was powerful, and I disagreed with her greatly on many issues, especially in regard to the Irish, miners, apartheid etc. Her passing did not end the negative affects of her administration. But to be fair, I will offer some nice things that I can say about her. </p>
<p>1) She believed that National Health Services was a jewel of Britain and didn’t see the need to privatize and bring in insurance companies to get rich without the benefit.
2) She acknowledged climate change early and didn’t try to hide human involvement in the change.
3) She believed in gun control and many restrictions became law under her watch.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I do think there are some deemed so evil that it is okay. But I think the key words are “so evil” … Does Thatcher fall under that heading? That’s honestly a serious question, not a snide remark. There’s “I really dislike that woman and her policies” and a whole other level of bad.</p>
<p>I didn’t celebrate her death. I don’t think the Thatcher was that worst person in the world by any stretch, and there are clearly people who did more harm, although I believe the world would have been a better place without her. I just wondered who gets to decide when it’s acceptable to criticize someone after death and when it’s not. I don’t think anyone on CC has been anointed to do so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If no one has the right to criticize the dead…especially powerful public figures who had much impact on national and international geopolitics, then you’re effectively impairing the ability for any journalist, historian, social scientist, or even a conscientious citizen from being able to do their jobs. </p>
<p>Anyone…especially the public figure concerned having issues with this…this song’s for you:</p>
<p><a href=“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUTGr5t3MoY[/url]”>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUTGr5t3MoY</a></p>
<p>IMHO, anyone who pursues a career where being a public figure is part and parcel of the job has no right to expect exemption from having their legacy analyzed and criticized…even in harsh and sometimes unjudicious terms. </p>
<p>They are all necessary for any attempts to honestly assess and appraise such public figures…especially political leaders.</p>
<p>England was an unmitigated disaster when she became Prime Minister, on a nonstop downward spiral. Continual strikes, trash in the streets, a lower and lower standard of living. What a tremendous change she was able to accomplish.</p>
<p>Shows you what one courageous leader can do. Not to even mention her pivotal role in the defeat of communism.</p>
<p>A truly remarkable person. One of the true leaders of the 20th century.</p>
<p>lots of hate just because of political disagreements it seems…</p>
<p>of course, you are free to hate as much as you want. She certainly had a bigger (and better) impact on the world than any of us will.</p>
<p>[Twitter</a> hashstag #nowthatcherisdead confuses Cher fans - CBS News](<a href=“http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57578479/twitter-hashstag-nowthatcherisdead-confuses-cher-fans/]Twitter”>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57578479/twitter-hashstag-nowthatcherisdead-confuses-cher-fans/)</p>
<p>A little humor to lighten up this thread…</p>
<p>That’s actually pretty funny – that there were really people who thought “now thatcher is dead” was actually “now that cher is dead.”</p>