This is getting quite political...
Printable View
This is getting quite political...
Hi there Volya :) Well Maggie is politics without it she would have never made to be who she was/is now.
You see what intrigues me the most is that why all this media attention about her life now that she is dead.
Why could not all this be done while she was alive? she would have at least watched it and thought about it.
been a good thing for her to watch and listen to what people thought and made of her. This would have allowed for time to reflect on her past and hopefully she would have learned and amended things in her head.
I woke up thinking about the Wizard of Oz where the munchkins celebrated the death of the wicked witch and thought, "Hmmm, maybe no one made the connection?"
But apparently the British are way ahead of me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMFjFoq6T9M
I know little about her except what I've read in this thread.
Any clarity on whether it is going to be a state funeral? I've heard rumours today that it is and will cost the tax payers around 10 million. If this is true...:flare:
No, it will be a funeral with full military honours but, according to the BBC yesterday, Mrs Thatcher made it known that she didn't want a state funeral.
Discounting Churchill's wartime premiership, she is considered by many, including myself as possibly the best PM in modern times, but that's not saying much when considering the others.
Why should the "perspective" matter? It is true that we are all self-involved egoists, and we tend to object to crimes that make us suffer more than those that make other people suffer. However, the notion that we SHOULD be self-involved egoists and that our willingeness to torture or assassinate SHOULD be based on whether we are avenging wrongs against our own precious selves is ridiculous. I vaguely remember one legendary figure who, when being tortured to death, said, "Forgive them, my father, they know not what they do."
From what I'm aware the funeral is being paid for out of her own estate and by the government.
Fair enough, but it serves no purpose in itself.
Given that similarity, it seems strange to me that people continue hatred for Mrs Thatcher, who implemented the policies for a purpose, but not the variety of PMs who have come and gone without correcting the lingering negative effects. Her policies may have had hugely detrimental effects for portions of the population but they aimed to serve a greater purpose and many believe it was successful. Do you think it's likely that the population will celebrate the deaths of the PMs who have come and gone since without rectifying the negative consequences of policies which were useful?
We still burn an efigy of Guy Fawkes every year.
Well since you have brought religion into it, I think a biblical qotation might be appropriate.
Deuteronomy 19:21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
Not that I am a great one for biblical quotations, as it is a book that seeks to be all things to all men and it's not
difficult to find an alternative to many of its nostrums.
It's all down to how you interpret it. At the same time as the implementation of policies which made some people unemployed, others were cashing in on the sale of publicly owned assets like the rail network. If you were a winner at the time, no doubt you'd think Thatcher was the best thing since sliced bread. Her schoolmarmy manner was similarly applauded by some sections of society, whilst others - myself included - felt she had a horrible manner.
I think there may be people who would celebrate Tony Blair's death. He, like Thatcher, was in office for over two terms and, as the figurehead, took the flak for what was Labour policy on Iraq. He was hated by a lot of people, though it is a different section of society that fell out with him. As for other PMs - they didn't cause that perception of grievance with large sections as Thatcher and Blair did.