Why Did The British Celebrate Thatcher's Death?

More than three decades after her election, the country remains divided when it comes to Thatcher's achievements in office. Half of the country believe that she was the best thing since sliced bread, whilst the remainder of the country, to put it mildly, believe that this is codswallop. 

Many commentators argue that one's view of the late Mrs.Thatcher will be determined by your social class, and whilst it is reasonable to assume that your position in society will invariably influence your view of it, it is not entirely reasonable to suggest that the class to which you belong is responsible for the strong feelings of anger and resentment, aimed at one individual who is ideologically the opposite of yourself. After all, would the death of Micheal Heseltine, John Major or Ken Clarke evoke such a powerful reaction from the masses?

Perhaps then, we need to explore Thatcher's policies and how they affected particular sections of society, in order to determine why the country remains so divided when it comes to the question of Thatcher's leadership.

There are many communities within England, Wales and Scotland which would never, ever, elect a Conservative MP. Is this because of a deeply entrenched ideology? Well, possibly, but more likely due to a collective memory of the Thatcher years and what it means to be working class; as an immigrant, single mother, trade unionist, unemployed individual or gay man and woman, under a Conservative government.

Thankfully [some] in the Conservative Party have drastically altered their stance when it comes gay marriage and equality, but sadly not all. 

If we are to examine the effects of Thatcher's policies on communities, we cannot move forward without mentioning the Miners' strike. The author has previously written about the topic in Class Conflict; Ideology or Social Experiment, so will only briefly touch on the issue here. 

During the strike, the miners and their families suffered immeasurably; they had to rely on soup kitchens and the goodwill of others in order to feed their families. Many of their civil rights were withdrawn and a simple Google search will reveal a wealth of evidence supporting the claims that they were brutalized by the police and the state. 

Unfortunately,  when strike action ended the suffering did not. Almost three decades later many of those communities are reminded daily of Thatcher and her policies. They have yet to recover:

"According to the DETR, three-quarters of the former coalfield communities were among the 20% of the most deprived regions in England, and the data collected from South Wales was similarly shocking. High unemployment, long term illness, poor educational attainments and the inevitable levels of crime, substance misuse and alcoholism which follow." ( HollieT. Class Conflict; Ideology or Social Experiment?) 

Make of that statement what you will,  but bear in mind that Thatcher held similar views when it came to the plight of refugees. Whilst Thatcher was willing to accept white Rhodesians, Poles and Hungarians who had fled their native land during periods of social unrest and political change, claiming that " they could be more easily assimilated into British Society", she adopted a completely different position when it came to the Vietnamese. 

The desperation of hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese boat people, who were fleeing persecution from the communist regime, had prompted Lord Carrington to suggest that Britain take 10,000 refugees. The prime minister, on the other hand, had declared that there were enough people coming to Britain and discussed the matter within the context of immigration.

Mrs Thatcher was reminded by Lord Carrington that the plight of refugees was quite different to that of the economic migrant, and that amongst the population there was general support for taking more Vietnamese refugees;  he had received letters from the public requesting that he do so. To which Mrs Thatcher replied "“ All those who wrote letters in this sense should be invited to accept one into their homes."

Within two years of Thatcher coming to power, there were no fewer than four riots;  in all four cases, the catalyst for the riots was linked to racial tension and urban deprivation.

In 1987 Thatcher famously made her society speech:

"There is no such thing as society; there are individual men and women, and there are families."  

Mrs. Thatcher was quite vocal when it came to the relationship between the individual and society, and was heavily influenced by American right leaning thinkers who advocated that the welfare state gave birth to, and nurtured, an underclass of individuals who were, frankly, irresponsible. 

The prime minister voiced her opinions about single parenthood and claimed, on more than one occasion, that many single women with children had become so in order to claim benefits and a council flat. 

In fact, Thatcher considered single parents to be a social and economic burden. Her values regarding the family were Victorian, some would say draconian, and she believed that only the conventional family should be recognized; not unmarried couples, however stable, and certainly not same sex couples. 

During a speech in Kentucky in 1998, long after her resignation as PM, Thatcher claimed that: 

"It is far better to put these children [of single parents] in the hands of a very good religious organisation, and the mother as well, so that they will be brought up with family values."  Thatcher also maintained that welfare provision to single mothers had exacerbated the problem, which indeed was the view she held whilst in office.

According to Jonathan Shaw, Senior Research Economist at the IFS, the number of children living in poverty rose from 1.8 million when Thatcher was elected, to 3.6 million by the time of her resignation.

Mrs. T vehemently opposed any policy or practice that she perceived to be remotely socialistic. In 1976, during a television interview for Thames TV, Mrs Thatcher declared that "...and socialist governments do traditionally make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite characteristic of them."

Thatcher was committed to the free market, deregulation (particularly where the financial sector was concerned) and the privatization of state-owned businesses. Naturally, such moves would result in conflict between the trade unions and her government. In attempts to counter opposition from the unions, Thatcher needed to diminish their power and membership. She succeeded. 

The prime minister's reforms during the early 1980's ensured that the unions' power to negotiate wages and working conditions were greatly reduced. Consequently, the balance of power shifted to employers and other reforms; including the length of time an individual had to work for an employer before taking them to an industrial tribunal for unfair practice, was extended. 

Union membership fell by more than 3.5 million during her time in office.

Thatcher has been accused by left-wing commentators of crushing the unions by politicizing the police and using the state and judiciary for ideological ends. 

Interestingly, the term nasty party was not coined by the left. It was Teresa May, a Conservative politician,  who in 2002 declared that  "There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us -- the Nasty Party."

It is widely believed that May was referring to the Conservative anti-stance;  anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-poor but pro-business. 

On reflection it could be argued that Thatcher's government were only about opposition; opposition to any group in society who were not a mirror image of themselves; white, mostly male, middle class and Christian. 

Perhaps that's why it is so difficult for individuals who do not belong to a minority group or particular class, to understand the vitriol which is directed towards Thatcher. To live in a society where the ruling elite are anti-you, can be very frightening indeed. But fear aside, to exist in a society where you are blamed for being you; financially punished and socially frowned upon, can have a very damaging and lasting effect.

Not surprisingly, the various groups in society who were directly and adversely affected by Thatcher's policies will often talk of how she hated the working classes, gays, immigrants; them. To those people her governance and her death are personal. Which perhaps goes some way to explain, but not justify, the hatred that they feel for her. Perhaps this is another of her legacies, she raised an anti-generation.

Social cohesion, the glue which binds us together, comes with the understanding of, and tolerance for, people who are different from ourselves. Understanding nurtures unity, anti rhetoric does not.