Why is her legacy so polarized?
Because although journalists hate her for not being left-wing they can't really deny that she made Britain great again.
What did she actually do? Just fire some miners and btfo the Argies?
>>1100105
because she was the worst prime minister of the 20th century.
>inb4 butthurt lefties
Don't you know before Thatcher Britain was joyful place where the workers sang happy songs on their way to the British Leyland plant. Beer was much cheaper and the summers were warmer. You could leave your front door unlocked and the police were genial fellows. Before Thatcher everyone shared and lived in peace and harmony.
Then Thatcher came along and personally invented greed, selfishness and cruelty. Everything bad in the world since 1979 is her fault.
>>1100105
Were you dissatisfied with your last Thatcher bait thread
>>1100105
I genuinely think that Thatcher's legacy was primarily positive, even though she alienated large parts of the population.
Before she came along, British locomotives were still manned as if they ran on steam power, because nobody had the balls to not employ a stoker on a diesel-electric train.
>>1100256
And those were the GOOD things she did.
It's her economic policies that destroyed Great Britain's economy in the 21st century. Who knew rampant privatization of almost everything would lead to disaster in the future?
She and Regean were great people. They let the wealth trickle down to the lowly workers.
>>1100396
>would lead to disaster in the future
The British economy seems to be doing better now than during the 1970s. Not even the labour governments that came after her wanted to undo her reforms.
>>1100256
>btfo the Argies
>Being so proud of such an insignificant victory
It is in one of her greatest achievement then that is a new low
>>1100407
The Argies BTFO'd themselves.
The Brits were only there to watch it. And they even announced their wartime plans ON INTERNATIONAL TEEVEE.
>economy on the brink of collapse
>Thatcher comes in and begins her reforms
>the economy is hugely dependent on government, so there is instability
>ten years later, the economy is in better shape than it's ever been
>people hate her for that
>>1100418
Then all the more it should not be something Thatcher should take credit for
>>1100422
Masive privatization, Tons of oligarchs, democracy turning into an oligarchy, muzzzie becomes mayor of London, Scotland almost leaves the union.
>>1100105
She kept the UK intact during a time when it was under attack from leftists, argentines and papists. These groups all resent her for it.
>>1100449
>tons of oligarchs
Welcome to human history retard.
>>1100448
The irony is, Thatcher was involved in the Falklands. She did set up a war cabinet to deal with that.
>>1100449
Something something deregulating the banks and the 2008 financial crisis.
Oh, wait. GDP growth matters above the well-being of the people. Because fuck the people.
>>1100470
The people were more fucked over by immigration than by privatization, and that was a Blair initiative not a Thatcher one.
>>1100462
>>1100449
>privatisation
>bad
Yeah, because all the state-owned companies were working so well in the 1970s.
>>1100506
Yeah, why not just give everything to private hands and let unelected people rule and do as they please?
Government is obviously ineffeicent but powerful private capital is never ineffecient and alwasy somehow works ofr the benfit of everyone instead of the person who is holding it and his whims.
Of course competition never creates ineffeciency when several companeis invest resoruces into developing almost identical products or skew and effect public policy.
>>1100528
And corporations never run smaller buisness out of buisness by lowering prices and then jack up prices and suck govrnemnt funds(using their finluence) to pay minimum wage to their workers.
>>1100528
The problem with people like you, just like Libertarians who do the exact same thing with government, is that you completely ignore all the good things that private companies (or the government) has done, completely focus on the negative and claim it's such a morally reprehensible thing that it must be highly regulated (or deregulated) and restricted (or unrestricted) have actually have a very shallow understanding on what either side actually offers.
>>1100528
>and let unelected people rule and do as they please?
Like the ConLibLab party?
>>1100541
>maximizing profit.
Yes, lets orient an entire society towards maximizing the profits of a few individuals so they can have private planes and own islands. We need more rolaxes and 6 star hotels to solve the world's problems.
There are other ways to encourage inginuity and inventivness.
The way its set up now we prefer quick descisions made by individuals that want to benefit themselves as oppose to democratic descision making that is slower but takes into account its place within the society it operates in to make sure it contributes to societal goals.
>>1100549
False dichotomy. It's actually possible that they're both utter shit.
I'm a left anarchist and I think both politicians and corporations only seek to better themselves.
>>1100558
>There are other ways to encourage inginuity and inventivness.
Go on, tell us what the are, O great speller, suckler of the teat of Russell Brand!
>>1100561
>left anarchist
So you're some kind of syndicalist?
![misty_tongue[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/NMNI2KE.jpg "misty_tongue[1].jpg")
>>1100561
>I'm a left anarchist
she destroyed northern communities and killed over 600 billion coal miners.
She was very very evil.
>>1100558
>There are other ways to encourage inginuity and inventivness
Such as?
This is the problem with leftists. All they do is complain about the current system without ever offering a viable alternative. Even Marx himself was like this.
>>1100562
ITs called an end to heirarchical systems alongside modern instant communications and virtual structures and descision making.
>>1100567
Tell me what your interpretation of syndicalism is and then I'll be able to answer your questions.
>>1100581
Move descision making into the virtual sphere and create virtual structures that allow descision making and argumentation that effects real life instead of only being a shallow sphere for interpersonal communications.
>>1100586
Yeah, ok. Tell me more about how there's no hierarchy in the structure of Google, Amazon or Microsoft.
>>1100591
Well you consider yourself a leftist, so you most likely want the workers to own the means of production, thereby creating a classless society. Since you also consider yourself an anarchist, you dislike the concept of the state itself, meaning that you would prefer some form of lower-level organisation.
Syndicalism fills both of these things pretty well. Workers own the means of production, but aren't organized on a nation-wide level. Instead it's the trade unions doing their thing.
>>1100595
>Move descision making into the virtual sphere and create virtual structures that allow descision making and argumentation that effects real life instead of only being a shallow sphere for interpersonal communications.
I work in marketing and this sounds a lot like something I'd pull out of my ass during a presentation I haven't actually prepared for tbqh.
>>1100591
Kill yourself retard
>>1100610
>most likely want the workers to own the means of production
I'm a leftist but I'm not a Marxist. Trade unions are spooks and I don't believe in them.
>>1100621
Ok, why don't you elaborate on your worldviews for a little bit?
>>1100595
>Move descision making into the virtual sphere and create virtual structures that allow descision making and argumentation that effects real life instead of only being a shallow sphere for interpersonal communications
kek
>>1100597
>>1100611
Take social communications websites like facebook reddit 4chan etc.. Add descision making structures that allow masses of people to come to conclusions. Allow the ability to both identify yourself and remain anonymous. Link descision making with actions in the real world. I.e. recgonize the virtual website/strucutre officially and create a real life supporting strucutre to carry out descisions in real life.
Obviously the details and issues would have to be solved through trial and error but the lack of such a system is what stopped say, the arab srping, from being able to descide on the proper changes the masses wanted.
Fund the website/infrustructure with a tax put on all people.
>>1100628
Well, I don't know about you, but I think the intention of politicians, corporations and trade unions want to use me for their own ends and I think that their interests do not coincide with mine. This is why I think you are wrong (if you are the same person I responded to earlier) to postulate a confrontation between government-hating libertarians on the one hand and corporation-haters on the other. In my view they are two sides of the same coin.
>>1100644
And what happens if they don't pay the tax? I'm assuming you have some sort of law enforcement mechanism.
Law enforcement without hierarchy hmmm.... yeah I don't think it's going to work mate.
>>1100644
Allow for both anonymous communications and interaction and allow people to identify themselves.
I didnt mean of course to use current existing websites. I only refferd to them to shwocase what can be done alrady and what functionality needs to be added.
>>1100659
>poses a problem
ok...It needs thought.
To solve problems you have to first take a suggestion seriously as oppose ot ruling it out because there are problematic aspects.
A virtual semi anonymous descision making structure has a lot of advatages.
It has potential to partially or fully deal with agency problems, it streamlines mass voting and descision making and allows the ability to express oppinions about official matters as they are being decided upon without personal risk.
>>1100680
I'm asking if you have any idea at all of how non-hierarchical law enforcement could possibly work.
>>1100105
Margaret Thatcher is sometimes labelled as a shill for the establishment but she actually disrupted the status quo a bit. She presented classical liberal ideals as a solution to the economic crisis of the 70s giving the conservative party a new lease of life and even managed to convince the aristocratic elite of the conservative party to make a space for her and other nouveau riche. She upset the liberals too, she not only crushed communism, she proved that individualism is the main drive for egalitarian ideals, not some collectivist vanguard party that dictates what is and isn't kosher in the world of feminism.
>>1100689
By streamlining communications between the police and other parts of society, allowing different segments of society to influence descision making directly. I am not saying there wont by any descision makers at all and of course you cant expect citizens to constantly invovle thmeselves in the descisoon making of everything throghout the country but such access needs to exist so that when and if a certain descision is important for people they can pitch in and state their oppinion instead of problems being channeld in an ineffecient way through agents who are worried about their own personal benefit and advancment.
In general a semi or fully anonymous feedback systme would allow criticism from all sides and virtual decsion making wold allow more transperancy.
i.e Any individual should be allowed to influence any descision if he or she so desire.
The point is that virtual systems can expand the boundaries of a directly democratic descion making.
I.e. I can immidately criticse my chief of police, i can state my oppinions not through representatives on issues i care about but directly effect policy.
A road is not being fixed in my neighberhood? Well, the cost of my reporting it and making sure it is fixed becomes much lower in temrs of time investment.
>>1100736
and of course virtual decsicion making structures can be modified with ease as oppose to regular non virtual strucutres which solidify and have agents that can, for personal, gain work to keep them stagnant.
Her solution to the Northern Ireland problem was to polarise all sides, discard any hope of a political solution and promote militarism all round
>>1100692
>individualism is the main drive of egalitarianism
??????
testt
>>1100760
Going back to the liberal thinkers of the Englightenment and the French Revolution, where the rights of the individual trumps the rights of the collective.
If im to be honest most brits nowadays dont give a shit about her either way
she was just someone who was PM almost 40 years ago now and honestly the recent obsession with her era is frustrating at best
