Thatcher: Dead

Quite.

im 24 so didnt feel the effects of her personally. but im from Liverpool and my family and their friends did. she left our great city to rot, she branded us thugs and helped the police cover up Hillsborough. Im a big Everton fan but i knew people who were there and thankfully survived with broken legs. I have grown up to dispise her, to despise the Tory legacy and dear god i hope they dont run this country for much longer, but im afraid they will.

i know, i watched this morning yesterday and today and was pretty dissapointed that in their news sections, they had posh toffs doing the chats, saying how good she was but giving the people up north a quiet mention. made me blood boil. and you must hate how people are saying everyone from the south love her!!! thats plain to see its untrue with the street parties. i hate her and ill have a little chuckle on sunday if Ding Dong the Witch is Dead reaches number one. (its 4th in the charts at the moment!)

I consider myself apolitical, and was brought up by Liberals, but I couldn't bear to read anything about Thatcher or even watch the news the last couple of days. I do remember that when the Poll Tax was introduced I chose to live abroad for a couple of years, partly because I was so disgusted by it. I remember my Dad colluding by not putting me on the Electoral Roll so I could avoid paying anything (at least I think that is what he did when I was an adult living briefly at home). I remember the feeling of powerlessness I had as a kid and teenager under her - and a feeling of general depression amongst all the non-Tories in the country. Today I picked up The Guardian when I was out and read about some of her Government's legacies... I feel that this has come at a time when we are taking stock of another recession, and feeling pretty desperate about the society (I know, she didn't believe in one!)we are in. Working with children, I feel most insecure about their future, and feel that parents must have similar worries. All I can do is be as positive as I can with the kids I work with, and help them to have a moral compass, and skills to deal with this future.

Ding dong is number one :)

I am surprised and disappointed at the above thread, that I have read twice. You are writers, I’ve read some of your work so I know you can write, but the majority expressing views here here seem to favour the laziness of an emotional rant employing lots of clichés. Have you considered the following? When mining communities were destroyed, who started that fight? When the police were sent in to bludgeon strikers, how was that different from the way the Empire was built? The difference for me was, the violence was used on Brits and not foreigners. The principle was the same though; politicians directing men of violence under their control to use brutality to have the last word. If the council houses were not sold, the people living in them would still be there so how would there be any more social housing? Not building enough houses to accommodate a growing population is the cause of a lack of housing. I wrote a mail to my dist lists tonight (about 100 friends) asking for their views on Thatcher. I have friends from the left and the right and all shades of grey in between, so I am assured of a heated but civilised debated. This is an extract for my mail. "We should not forget that Mrs. T. destroyed whole communities in the Industrial North and Middle of the country. That is unforgiveable but you can’t get away from the fact that this is how Britain became Great. Look at the countries pillaged in the pursuit of Empire by exactly the same process - destroying communities. That’s is how the map of the world became largely pink - go into a country, take it by force, destroy towns and villages (and therefore people’s lives, i.e. ‘communities’). But as these were Johnny Foreigner and not British, well that was O.K. We were stealing their land and minerals and anything else of value. That’s how an empire is built. The Romans, did it, Genghis Khan, the Spanish, the French, the Dutch, the Belgians, the Germans and the Portuguese. It is the way of the world. Now, when the same principle is applied in-house, there’s an outcry. Why was anyone surprised that politicians ordered that carnage to be visited on our own people? It was just a matter of time before a policy that work successfully abroad came to have applicability within these shores; domination through extreme violence. Separately, who started that fight? Wasn’t it the miners in the mid-70s? and, based just on greed. They got a 35% pay rise and Scargill’s words were “We could have got more.” After several inflation-busting pay rises earlier that decade when they gave Ted Heath a good spanking, they over-estimated their influence on the nation - became complacent (rather as Thatcher did towards the end when she was ousted by her own party members). Believing in their own invincibility, having won every previous fight, the miners were over-confident. In short, they were looking after themselves at the expense of the working class. That sort of pay rise pours petrol on blazing inflation but the miners didn’t care - as long as they were alright, who cares about the rest of the country? Seems selfish to me. So when I hear the current bitterness from destroyed mining communities, I am prompted to ask (i) who started the fight? Ans. the miners, and (ii) Who would pay for it if they won? Ans. the masses, from the galloping inflation resulting from the miners’ pay rise as that was the cost of a nationalised industry keeping open uneconomic pits. As you see, I am not that sympathetic to communities who started a fight out of self-interest and then got a good hiding. As for the well-documented police brutality, you can’t get away from it. The police were violent and ruthless - and ordered to be by Mrs Thatcher. But refer back to the bit above about how you accumulate an empire - you destroy communities with violence. What goes around, comes around. Miners only got what Britain had been dishing out to foreigners for hundreds of years. When it suited us, we looked the other way. Also on the subject of violence, what about the flying pickets who threatened any working man who didn’t agree with them? That was where the phrase “We know where you live” came into common usage - from the pickets. The unions were no angels. They were happy to physically hurt working men who didn’t agree with egotistical leaders." A friend with strong socialist views has written back expressing his alternative view. He's not a writer but was able to keep it pertinent and articulate while expressing valid views contrary to mine in civilised language. Shame on you "writers". By all means tear my arguments apart, but please do it forensically, analytically and preferably with humour if you have the wit. If you're just rude to me, you make my point for me. You're not a writer.

Said like a true writer, Stan. I agree with you entirely. When I went out on strike with the steelworkers it was not because we wanted a massive pay rise, but because we wished to carry on working. The demise of the collieries and the steelworks are testament to that woman's heartless policies. She introduced the damned poll tax and this bastard now introduces the bedroom tax, probably hoping that he will also be remembered for implementing this unfair tax. Sorry, but I have only contempt for a woman who brought the country to its knees.

Wow Bren, how patronising is this. I’m going to write stupidly just to annoy you. Any opinions shared in this forum has NOTHING to do with how well we write and the fact you bring it up more than once shows me you have no argument and are trying to cause a reaction on a writing forum. I take it you are Tory and that you benefited from the bitch, that you made money out of her careless, not giving a shit attitude? I have mentioned earlier, she destroyed Liverpool, she destroyed scousers, and she destroyed football fans in general. She destroyed my family and their friends, knocked them down time and time again, and you know what…? I’m proud I came from a hardworking, struggling, all in it together city, we help each other out when things are shit, we look out for each other, we can party now she is gone and we will stand up against the bastards in charge now. Im proud I come from that and I pity the filthy rich, born with a silver spoon, b(w)ankers who don’t really know how to live. I have struggled all my life with mental illness and I assure you, living with struggle makes you a much, much better person. And yes Ding Dong the Witch is Dead is number one, although the BBC may not play it on the chart show, which is pathetic.

Here, here, music88.

Ditto - it's a pity all of the bastards aren't dead, especially Cameron, who has a personal fortune of some five million, yet he's continuing to bleed the poor dry and not tax the wealthy anywhere near fairly.

Thank you Stan and Hulsey xx Walrus, you are right i worry about a future under Cameron.

Inhumane madness, Blighters.

Hello Stan, Thanks for taking the trouble to answer properly and without the vitriolic rants that peppered the earlier history of this thread. Let me address your points similarly. You say I haven’t made any arguments, which is, I suppose, testament to my lack of writing ability, as I thought I had. Forty five years ago when I was training to become a Tax officer in the Inland Revenue, a very experienced tutor told me something that stuck. He said (more or less), “If you’re explaining a point of tax to a member of the public and he or she can’t understand it, it’s not that they can’t understand. It’s that you haven’t explained it in a way that suits their understanding processes.” I dealt with a variety of people ranging from doctors and nurses at a local hospital to builders and little old ladies, so had to dance to their tune as we offered a counter service in those days. With that in mind, let me try to make those points in other language. The miners were violent men who performed acts of violence against other working class men who did not support them. Thus, when the police did the same to them, they were only being repaid in the same coin - just more of it. If you question their violence, remember that ten people died in the strike of 84-85. One was a taxi driver taking a non-striking miner to work. Plenty of non-striking miners, their families and pets were harmed by way of intimidation and reprisal. The miners were greedy men looking for above-inflation wage rises that would have to be paid for by the rest of us (the masses) to feather their own nests. Look at the history of miners’ awards in the 70s and see when they accepted an award that was equal to or less than inflation. You won’t find one example. They held the country to ransom throughout the 70s, through Wilson, Heath and Callaghan governments - and won every time. So when taking on Thatcher, they believed they were invincible, but unfortunately only used the same tactics that had worked previously. However, their leaders were not as bright as the govt. who stockpiled coal and crafted alliances with other unions and the popular newspapers - and used MI5. If you want to win a fight, don't let your opponent dictate the rules. Not all unions supported them. Some sat on the fence and some opposed them. Not all miners were for the strike. Some regions opposed it. This is a matter of historical record - easily checked. Most of the popular press was against the strike. Only the Morning Star supported them. So don’t present their case as that of the working man. It was that of a self-interested segment of the working class. Talking of class, for the better understanding of any readers to this exchange, I am a Basildon Boy with a Essex accent. I went to school with holes in my shoes and in the knees of my trousers. My dad, a dyed-in-the-wool socialist, worked in a factory and my mum worked in a shop. I had a Secondary Modern education at Woodland Boys School which I left at 16 with no ‘O’ Levels, to work in London as an office junior doing the post and making coffee and doing any other menial task that was presented. I have two sons, one of which moans about his misfortunes. I told him that when you’re looking for someone to blame for your troubles, look in the mirror. And when you’re looking for someone to fix your problems - look in the mirror. That is my attitude to life’s inequities. Mining communities were destroyed because the principles of ‘getting your own way through violence’ used to establish the empire - was used in Britain, not for the first time. Kings did it. Oliver Cromwell did it. As Thatcher just used a tried and tested system, please don’t pretend that she invented it. She was just one of a long line of commanders in British History. A key point was that “It is the way of the world” to use violence to get your own way. You, Hulsey and Music88 are doing that here to try and intimidate me. Look at the violence in your comments. Small dogs yapping, hoping to frighten. Violence of the Tongue is no less violence. Unfortunately for you, I worked at multinationals for 40 years of my life so I’ve had a lifetime of dealing with in intimidation (read the first Wilt novel by Tom Sharpe where the police are trying to intimidate him). Multinationals are hierarchical status-based organisations where managers snap and snarl, leaning on status to back poorly-thought out ‘hidden agenda’ instructions. I suggest you try a bit harder. Thus far your attempts are inadequate. I could have said ‘pitiful’ but I don’t want to use emotive language. Music88, you talk of your struggle with mental illness. From the language of your contribution, I’m guessing Tourettes. Stan - “Leave writers out of it”. The use of the imperative, I notice. Are you used to giving orders? When did we vote you King? Hulsey - I see you supported the steelworkers strike - well done. Working men should stick together. But the steelworkers didn’t support the miners in 84-85. That must have been a kick in the nuts? Did it cross any miners’ minds why they weren’t getting the support of every union and every working class newspaper? Happy to carry on with this. There’s lots more still to come.

Wrong again, my friend. It was the miners who refused to back us steelworkers when we took industrial action and so we repaid them later. A taxman? That figures. And where is the violence in my posts that you speak of? I witnessed colleagues starving, unable to claim anything during the prolonged strike. They were real men, along with their families who refused to give in to this tryrant. I was fortunate, as I was young and living with my parents at the time. It took many years for steelworkers and miners to recover from this tyranny, but we were better for it.

Oops... Tyrant.

My god, you absolute bastard. How dare you be sarcastic against any illness i have. I have borderline personality disorder and borderline schizophrenia. That should give you some lovely coal to stoke the fire, here i'll do it for you....i must have tourettes or have i got two sides to me, oh the other side is hopefully much nicer than this one, is the other side uneducated? schizophrenia must be the reason for so called violence and intimidation? i mean thats how the films portray me?! violence? intimidation? dont be so pathetic and self righteous, myself and im sure Stan and Hulsey, have much better things to do than argue with you and your quite strange beliefs. And to put all the miners in one corner and label them violent men is disgusting, i hope there are none on here to read that.

"Your generalisations and over-simplifications, your lack of any sense of empathy and compassion (even for your own kin), and your patronising and insulting tone are all testatment to a mindset that is so firmly fixed that it would be like attempting to break through concrete with a putty knife." what i wanted to say if i wasnt so angry. perfectly put.

"it's a pity all of the bastards aren't dead" I don't mind the heated political debates, the back-and-forth arguments about what Thatcher did right or wrong, about whether she was a heartless woman who cared nothing for the people of her country. i'd goes as far as to say I enjoy reading certain comments, because it is a way for me to learn and to develop my own view on something I haven't experienced first hand. But again and again, I read of people's excitement over the death of Thatcher, and in this case a call of the death of Cameron and so on... Call for a denouncement of power, not for the death of a human life. Celebrate when destructive leaders are ousted from their position of power, not when frail old women die from a stroke alone in their hotel room.

To slag off the miners, who work in horrendous conditions for a not particularly good salary (and many of them die coughing their lungs up) is inhuman. I worked in a forge for eighteen years in filthy, smoky conditions, but though I was made redundant in 2009 I still cough up graphite, which was used to lubricate the dies. The ones who make money from industry are the factory owners, and the workers are pitifully rewarded - even more so now, when the bulk of the working class are forced to live on minimum wage.

Stan- your words are a testament, not only to your brilliant humanity, but to your wonderful skill as a writer. Old age in itself does not atone for past, inhumane deeds and decisions- of which Thatcher was guilty of many. She did not approve of compassion (as demonstrated by her actions), so she deserves none. I genuinely believe that anyone who cannot see, or refuses to see the damage she did, is either extremely ignorant or worse. The sycophantic tributes that have been occurring I find infinitely more distasteful than the parties celebrating her passing.

I see the violence of the tongue continues. Music88 - yes, I was yanking your chain (and it seems I succeeded), but I am not really that interested in your illness. I have problems of my own in terms of physical and emotional ‘disadvantages’ that impact my life - old age and all that attends it being the least of them. But, unlike you, I don’t choose to parade those problems here seeking the sympathy of strangers. There is a condition known to psychologists called “Poor Me” Syndrome where people advertise their ‘victim’ status. Instead of indulging yourself in another tirade, why don’t you explain to the readers here why you chose to parade your personal problems to strangers? Was it to try and make me back off by feeling sorry for you? Hulsey - my apologies. I misread your 12:45 post. I thought you meant you were a miner. However, now you’ve explained, it’s interesting to see how working class solidarity works - for ‘solidarity’ read ‘payback’. Good to see the working class sticking together. As for explaining the violence in your posts, if you can’t see them I can’t show you. Read them again, perhaps we have different standards when expressing ourselves? I see a quite lot of emotive language. Stan - it’s a shame that you won’t be continuing this debate. You’re the only one presenting arguments. My working class background was mentioned to head off damnation from the baying pack as a person of privilege. That’s all. Nothing more intended. I know my opinions are not that of the masses. As for compassion, I believe I have compassion, e.g. for the miners that lost their communities through Scargill’s hubris. Did Thatcher destroy the mining communities all by herself, or did Scargill and Gormley contribute handsomely? I have compassion for the miners that had their families persecuted by other miners for having a point of view that was not in accord with the bullies. I have compassion for miners that didn’t have a voice - the strike was called without a ballot. In the run up, in a local ballot, Nottinghamshire voted overwhelmingly against a strike (20000 out of 27000) and were then labelled strike-breakers for continuing to work when no union-wide ballot had been conducted - so much for democracy in the NUM. As for generalisations and over-simplifications - that’s not going to change. I use generalisations because they are generally true. I don’t offer generalisations as absolute truths. As for simplification, that’s how my mind works. I break complex things down into small constituent elements. At present, I am completing a spreadsheet that is 1 Mb in size, which has over 100,000 linked cells. You can point to any one cell and I will show you where its content winds up. Yes, I simplify but I keep all the elements and connecting pathways in mind. Lastly, on compassion, I too think it is dreadful that people ever had to work in those condition and then die of lung disease - and this was all the life they could expect. It makes me cry and it makes me angry but this still goes on today around the world. I don’t have a solution and despite the noise you all make about this, neither do you. Effectively, the difference between us is that you choose to beat your breasts in public. I grieve in a private Hell till I can offer a better way. To close, if you think I am inhuman, and it seems that some of you do, read the whole thread again and see how much malicious joy there is at a death and how much more death is wished on others whose crime is to have a viewpoint that differs from yours. I would not wish death on anyone. I have had two death threats in my life and even when those people die, while I will not speak in their honour, I will not celebrate their passing. Everyone is someone’s mother, father, son or daughter and throughout their lives, drew or gave love from that. Love always outranks Revenge in my world.

Love her or loathe her, she sure knows how to stoak a good fire. I loathed her and upped sticks to live in Paris when she brought the Poll Tax in. I couldn't see the point of much back then, continually getting myself in trouble with drugs and gambling. I'd got into a top ten ad agency with my own office overlooking Regents Park but couldn't afford to get there some days because I was busy burning both ends. When I saw that the big shot account directors chose what (they thought) would sell over the creative energy of a campaign, I left to write a novel in Paris (I know, how trite). Business and government seemed hellbent on efficiency over integrity but look what efficiency does when it's now known that one-seventh of the NHS' budget will be blown on malpractice claims! It wasn't just that the squeezing of rights and rubbing out of wrongs made leaving so easy. There was an undeniable feeling that I was one of very few who couldn't get to grips with this new way of living. Everyone I knew was on coke and changed massively with it. I couldn't identify with them and felt I was being left behind on the drug-crazed winner-takes-all mentality. I couldn't shake a feeling that Britain was turning into a money-grabbing, friend-swiping, back-stabbing melting pot of poo but surely that wasn't all because of one person, ie. Thatcher. She felt nothing for the poor and the weak but nor did anyone else in London at that time. It was all champagne and coke and general excess in whatever way it could be had. She was most certainly a product of that era and so it was probably her destiny to be in charge, but blaming her for all the ills of the country is just ridiculous. Britain was awsh with barmy Unionists who liked the sound of their own voice and thought they were politicians (now there's a thought to mull over, if you dare). I hear music 88 loud and clear and there's nothing like a Liverpudlain for keeping sane over the quiet, soulless zing of southern capitalism. I was there last week and couldn't believe how much it had changed since my early years. When I asked for directions, people were so friendly but understated at the same time. One lovely lady said sorry for being nosey about why I was there and where I came from. She just wanted to talk to a stranger. Not so in London. Granted, I'm a plastic scouser (Wallasey, aged 2 to 14) but by God has money been pumped into Liverpool like nobody's business. There are so many foreign students there, especially from China, and without them it just wouldn't have regenerated itself, but the place is a far cry from the boarded-up blocks of beautiful grey architecture of the seventies. I think it's time to understand that while Thatcher was a heartless sow the society that she ignored was no different when money suddenly seemed to be available at all angles. I'm a business numbskull but if I'd had an ounce of sense and taken more responsibility for my future, I'd have saved for a deposit on a flat and maybe made something of my life that would have been useful for my children, but I wasn't. I can't say I'm not regretful about this but I do realise that it was there for the taking if I'd wanted to work for it, and that's what Thatcher was about. She had no sense of humour, never laughed and only cried when her ministers rounded on her and ousted her from office but one thing's for sure; she believed in everything she did. I don't see anyone sharing their own alternative to either Thatcher or Cameron so what exactly are the grounds for complaint? It is what it is and it was what it was. The bedroom tax was invented by those lovely Labour people, who the people see as the only alternative to Tories for Britain. And there lies your problem; that you see only what is there already and not what there could be. If we fought together for an alternative, we would have cause to assume that things could be different, but asking Labour to right wrongs is like asking a tiger for help because a lion's about to eat you. I would like to start an apolitical party called NOTA (None of The Above) to get rid of politicians, bring back manufacturing and agriculture, make a call for all nations' debts to be wiped, re-nationalise banking and to follow pure socialist values in a modern context. I'm a lazy bugger and I'm not about to start wailing from the high street but if anyone fancies coming in on it, what are we waiting for? Lots of people have said I'd be killed pretty quickly if it took off but it feels like I'm killing myself off in many ways. Socialism might seem as if we're taking some of the fun of competition out of the game but I think the long-term rewards of honourable change and our innate need for enjoyment can secure a decent life for all. The rich could keep what they have but they'd have to give back what they couldn't possibly spend in the new world. We'd be doing them a favour. If you have any ideas for how things should be and what the most important policies for change are, put them in this thread. If you wish the status quo to remain and see no alternative, though, you have no right to complain for the way things are.

Hahahahahahahahahaha Brilliant, just brilliant. You are correct I MUST have poor me syndrome, ill just keep quiet and look for your address :)

And for anyone that doesn't get that was sarcasm highlighting this 'violence' that me and stan are showing. I never ever play the victim so don't you dare speak to me like that you poor old man. I pity your insight of the world. And ill leave it there.

"the hugh lie". That the free market is good. And government is bad. Government makes the rules...it decides who benefits from those rules and who is harmed. And increasingly that boils down to the rich and poor. This is inequality imposed from the top. 42% of those born in poverty in the US will stay there. In Denmark it's 24%...Great Britain 30%...The problem is that by every index you can measure, inequality is worsening in Britain. In December [2012] the Office for National Statistics found that the richest 10% of people in Britain own 40% of the national wealth. In London and the south-east, one in eight households has almost £1m of assets. The bottom half of the country has almost no net property wealth and only £4000 in pension savings. For them, there is just rising prices and the ever diminishing possibility of things ever being different from them or their children. "Where America leads sadly the rest of the world follows." Half of the US's total assets are now owned by just 400 people.' Inequality for all that's what we call democracy. There were 85 000 miners in 1984-5. If you want to look at their working conditions I suggest Emile Zola's 'Germinal'. They hadn't changed that much since then. Scargill and Gormley before him were determined to get the best deal for their workers. That's what union leaders do. He also suggested at the time that we should be investing in alternative energies of wind and sea. He predicted if they lost the strike the union movement was finished and most pits would close. Holding the country to ransom? We didn't have to pay billions of pounds to bail them out like we did the bankers and then, of course, watch them whinge because their bonuses were being capped. It's also worth remembering that Thatcher was finished, and expected to lose the next election, but the Falkland's factor won her political capital and she could do pretty much what she liked. She did stockpile coal in advance of the strike and she did make scabs that broke the picket line wealthy. Thatcher increased the number of police and their pay soon outstripped that of primary school teachers they were commensurate with. What Thatcher also did was encourage the police to break the law. For those of a literary bent I'd refer them to Shakespeare's 'The Tragedy of Richard the Second'. No man or Iron Lady is above the law. Hillsborough is a good example of this. Weber talks about 'life chances'. Kids that are born poor will stay poor. I don't call that much of a chance I call that an outrage. Thatcherism is strip-mining of the poor for the gains of a few. Thatcherism is not dead. It is very much alive-unfortunately.

My mums best friend is from Wallasey! You are right about foreign students etc in Liverpool now!! And we were capital of culture last year, with the art biannual across the city each year it brings in lots of people it's great. I also agree about an alternative and how labour are just as bad, in fact that's why the Tories won!! Because people who voted labour started to vote lib dem, and they would never win so the votes were split and the bastards got in. It's a huge mess and I don't see an alternative for a long time.

Brilliant post celticman

I’ll be leaving this thread now as I have achieved my aim. Anyone see what it was? Some clues… Nothing to do with Thatcher or the miners or health issues. Look beneath the surface of what I said. Stan, I don’t expect you to guess it. I enjoyed our exchanges on the topsoil but you take things too literally to understand my way of expressing thoughts so are unlikely to see what I was doing. I tend towards hiding metamessages within messages, e.g. Love outranks Revenge. The main clue is in the whole thread. Look how it starts and meanders in an orgy of rude, emotional outbursts - and look how it is now. What has changed? I will still read your comments to watch how this thread continues. Scratch, interesting remark from you. You don't seem to find the abuse coming my way from Music 88 and others worthy of comment? How very even-handed of you. Stan, you mentioned that Music88 was offended by my remark but no one asked if I was offended by hers. Again, how even-handed.

So, calling me patronising and 'writing stupidly, just to annoy' me is not attacking me? Sorry Scratch. I hadn't realised that this was a compliment. Then I suppose "i hate her and ill have a little chuckle on sunday if Ding Dong the Witch is Dead reaches number one. (its 4th in the charts at the moment!)" was also not a personal insult referring to a dead woman. No vitriol there then. Looks like I have a lot to learn about insults - almost as much as some have to learn about punctuation. As for carrying on with this, there was another 700 word essay after I wrote that. There can be more if required, but expect this to get rougher.

The digression of this thread is a particularly good example of debate as a dying art. Intellectual limitations are further corroded by the vilification of the few by the many, and to hell with the subject of debate. Prickly touchiness to grab at personal insult as reason to digress in discussion and vent anger dispels any decent argument, especially when even commenting is generally ignored. Celticman's post is interesting and rounded, and adds to the debate, although I've forgotten what it was now. As any school teacher will tell you, the problem of teaching isn't the children but the bickering, snide comments and trouble made by their peers.

Arguably Thatcher’s greatest legacy is the council house sales. Before she came to power three of us could, in a morning, tile a roof of what we laughably called ‘dolly houses’. These were mainly Barret; Wimpey Homes were slightly roomier. It’s no great surprise then that compared to our continental neighbours France and Germany, on average, our living space is smaller. The illusion of space is created in new build homes by using mirrors, lighting, and double-beds that are six foot rather than the standard size of six- foot- four. Furniture is also sized down. We live in a Lilliputian world. Council house sales were based on notion of fairness. People paid rent their whole life and never owned the property. Discounts were given and properties that were nominally valued at £20 000 were suddenly worth £50 000, £60 000…£100 000. Multiply that by a factor of ten or twenty for London. Some people became wealthy. In Scotland, the rateable value of a house was determined by banding. In simple terms, house price and location. Those in better areas paid more because there houses were worth more. The Poll tax was a simple solution supported by the nouveau rich. People with property bought other properties to rent to those left behind; those that didn’t have a mortgage and would need to rent for the whole of their lives. Councils with the best of their properties cherry picked no longer had the same leverage to borrow money. Rents for existing properties followed the market. For those on Housing benefit this didn’t seem to matter. But Councils no longer built houses. Eighty per cent of Housing benefit prior to Thatcher went on building new homes; twenty per cent on paying rent. Those figures are now reversed. Eighty per cent of housing benefits goes to landlords. This is more than disability/sickness or unemployment benefit. Council housing has become a rare and expensive commodity. Part of the problem is that those in work also receive housing benefit. In the race to outdo each other in giving workers the minimal wage on which to live the government has had to subsidise your Asdas, Amazons and Costcos. Oh happy is a land fit for heroes.

Scratch, once again, you deciding what is a personal attack and what is not - does not make it so. I took Music88’s comment as a personal attack and responded. I didn’t start that, she did. If you can’t see it as an attack on me, I don’t really care. I thought it was. That’s all that counts. Perception is reality. We can debate the semantics of this but that will achieve nothing other than to show that you focus on words and I look at why those words were used. There is a trend nowadays to lash out - and then hide behind “isms”, Human Rights and the requiring of respect to avoid a rebuke. I don’t subscribe to any of that so don’t expect it from me. You certainly won’t impose it on me. When I am attacked, I don’t believe in the proportional response. I respond disproportionately - toss a pebble at me and I will chuck a boulder back again, learned 30 years ago from Sun Tzu’s Art of War. I know that those of you who can only take things literally will focus on the word “War” - how dull and unimaginative you are. Look beneath the surface at what that book offers - it shows ways of dealing with people, concepts on how to reward and how to chastise, concepts for leadership therefore not understood by the herd. As for leaving the thread ‘as I have achieved my aim’, that is true. I entered the forum as I was disappointed by the tone up to that point, i.e. a river of abuse; glee at a death and wishing death on others. This is a writers’ forum yet most of what had been contributed was the unoriginal baying of a nasty, vicious pack in grammatically-poor and ill-punctuated Twitterspeak. There were occasional oases of insight in a desert of vicious nastiness but for the most part, it was the desert. My aim was to get people to debate Thatcher’s performance as a PM and as a person - and to examine the miners’ behaviour from the early 70s to the 84/85 strike as a contribution to the destruction of their own communities. I was looking for ‘a civilised debate’ as that is where knowledge is expanded by hearing things that you didn’t know previously - and acquiring knowledge is the main reason for being here at all. Having had real contributions from Steve Elliot 04, The Walrus, Celticman, Blighters Rock and most of all, Stan, I felt I had achieved my aim - I had started a proper debate. I asked for guesses as to what my aim was. No one responded. Perhaps too hypnotised by the misdirection - unable to look beneath the surface, or perhaps you just didn't care? On having my points ‘cogently dismantled’, frankly, I didn’t see that at any point. Again, you saying so doesn't make it true. Contrary to the behaviour of the masses, I like being corrected as my knowledge is expanded as a consequence. Apart from the enlightening contributions of the four genuine minds above, all I saw was incorrect conclusions about what I had said, based on assumptions. Let’s tackle a few of those. From Stan - ‘Violence of language is better than physical violence’. No it’s not. There, that’s dealt with that, your way, Scratch, a simple contradiction and hope the other person accepts it. If I were to offer a proper argument, I would ask what measurement system enables such a conclusion? Physical violence leaves visible scars. Violence of the tongue leaves mental and emotional scars. I would love to hear a description of the measurement system that evaluates mental scars as preferable to physical ones. Stan’s assumptions were portrayed by incorrect conclusions presented as fact, underlined by the use of ‘presumably’ in his piece, indicating his attitude at that time. I was also accused of condoning violence, again, an assumption. I don’t condone it. It is always wrong but it is an inescapable part of history, of human nature. Look at the violence shown in this thread, nasty, vicious stuff, yet here it is, a testament to the nature of those who have posted their joy at a death and their hopes for another. As for violence to build an empire versus violence to defend your community/lifestyle, I didn’t condone or criticise either. I mentioned those to point out that violence towards others is a human trait and has been all the way through the history of mankind. While there is testosterone, I see it as inescapable, a point made for me by so many comments in this thread. As for my use of generalisations, I didn’t see any criticisms of the statements branding all Scousers, miners and the working class as decent, honourable people. Apparently, it’s alright to generalise sometimes, just not when I do it. As mentioned previously, how even-handed. So, I wanted to leave as people who like to take things literally were misinterpreting my comments to suit their way of thinking, and justify their earlier comments. People judge by their own standards, that is a truism of life. I don’t mind these judgements when they are of me and my words. I only want the respect of people I respect and from what I’ve seen in this thread, that is a very low number. 'You'll be known by the company you keep.' - Michael Scheuer. I’ll be leaving this site - not just the thread - as I don’t care for the company of the great majority here. If anyone knows what I have to do to terminate my userid, please let me know.

Must admit im not going to miss you Bren. Stan, love how you describe the thread title, Very true!

Indeed I think this thread is slowing down the site.

Don't leave Bren, please, we'll miss you..... Like the plague.

Hello Bren27 - if you want to delete your username, I think all you need to do is go to your account, click edit, scroll to the bottom and then click delete. If that doesn't work, just drop Tony an email and I'm sure he'd be happy to do it for you. Hope that helps. Bye!

Bren 27 - 'I’ll be leaving this thread now as I have achieved my aim. Anyone see what it was? Some clues… Nothing to do with Thatcher or the miners or health issues. Look beneath the surface of what I said.' Subliminal bullying or just file toothed abuse? Is there anything beneath the surface? Disgusted by your belittling, vitriolic and poorly justified attacks on a person with a mental health diagnosis who was merely expressing his/her political views on a forum. You have lost control of yourself. It has been taken so far from the political post of Thatcher and become a venomous attack on individual person's characters with marked intellectual deficit. As a writer, I am astounded that you are unable to present a more pertinent argument in relation to Thatcher's influence, and social outcomes, in concurrence with your own beliefs. If you struggle to present factual arguments with weight and bias, do something else instead. Your persistently long diatribes of personal insults towards other members, has quite frankly, put me off my dinner of Thatch Rolls and chips.

Well said, Vera. Another toothless, deluded jerk walks, although I'm sure his bland ego will take peeks in the hope of finding allies. No such luck, Bren.

Justice for the 96.

Margaret Thatcher did not take power through the barrel of a gun. She won three free and democratic elections. Anything she did she had been given a mandate to do by the people. I voted for her and I'm glad I did.

Yup. Enough. Get over it.

Poor bloke. Scargill's got a lot to answer for.