Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?

Abbott said this today.

 

Does it mean we are going to have riots in the street?

 

How can this be good for us?

Photobucket
Message 1 of 39
Latest reply
38 REPLIES 38

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?

without the Polish Pope none of it would have happened.

Photobucket
Message 21 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?


@**meep** wrote:

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

@**meep** wrote:

@donnashuggy wrote:

The only thing I liked was the movie about her.

 

She's a cold blooded murderer (indirectly)


To me, she was a saviour. 

 

 

 


An interesting concept. Who did she save, and from whom did she save them.


Interesting?

 

I am referring to Thatcher's support of Solidarity (as per my earlier post)   Without that support, as Lech Walesa said, what was achieved would not have been possible. 

 

I keep making the same mistake by assuming that all this is common knowledge.

 

 

 


It's the less common knowledge that bothers me.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/feb/28/iraq.politics1

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/304516.stm

Message 22 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?


@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

@**meep** wrote:

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

@**meep** wrote:

@donnashuggy wrote:

The only thing I liked was the movie about her.

 

She's a cold blooded murderer (indirectly)


To me, she was a saviour. 

 

 

 


An interesting concept. Who did she save, and from whom did she save them.


Interesting?

 

I am referring to Thatcher's support of Solidarity (as per my earlier post)   Without that support, as Lech Walesa said, what was achieved would not have been possible. 

 

I keep making the same mistake by assuming that all this is common knowledge.

 

 

 


It's the less common knowledge that bothers me.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/feb/28/iraq.politics1

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/304516.stm


 

 

That's fair enough.   After all, the OP asked:  "....what does this mean to you?"

 

 

 

 

Message 23 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?


@donnashuggy wrote:

without the Polish Pope none of it would have happened.


Did you read the link?  Thatcher was considered part of the anti-communist “Holy Trinity” – consisting of John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and herself. 

 

 

 

Speaking of the 80's - "The Amazing 80's" is on TV tonight.  Should be fun.

 

 

Nite Smiley Happy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Message 24 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?

they were both terrible leaders with horrible legacies.  she destroyed britain.  i can't see how Australia can win either way in this election.  it is between tweedle dumb and tweedle even dumber and I can't even work out which is which.

Such is life.
Message 25 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?


@**meep** wrote:

@***super_nova*** wrote:

@**meep** wrote:

@donnashuggy wrote:

The only thing I liked was the movie about her.

 

She's a cold blooded murderer (indirectly)


To me, she was a saviour. 

 

 

 


Do you really believe that the Eastern Block collapsed because Reagan and Thatcher told them to make changes?  I think that things changed because of some very brave people in the Soviet Union who put on the line not only their own lives, but lives of all their families.  In the past anybody making little bit of waves ended up in Siberia.  It makes me sick when Reagan is being credited with the change. 


 

Its not what I believe, it is what I know.  I was there.   The fall of Communism did not begin in the Soviet Union.

 

 


It would not happened if Soviet Union did not collapse, and it was Gorbachev who at great personal risk made it possible.  Just like in Hungary in 1956 or Czechoslovakia 1968, the west would not be able to do anything if the USSR did not let it happen.  Thatcher and Reagan making pretty speeches did not bring the change.  It was people like Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa, but most importantly so  many others who fought, and were imprisoned, and beaten and tortured. 

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Voltaire: “Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities, Can Make You Commit Atrocities” .
Message 26 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?

Super nova, you underestimate what Thatcher's (and Reagan's) support  of Solidarity meant.   I was there when Martial Law was imposed and am very aware of the persecutions.    Its actually really difficult to explain what impact even a symbolic gesture could have on the whole nation.  But it was so much more than that.

 

 

Interesting that you mention Walesa.  I would love to translate his famous speeches from during that time but that would take me a long time and frankly, I don't think too many people would be interested.

 

 

I will post what Lech Walesa said about Thatcher earlier this year:

 

"When I look back upon those momentous days of the late 1980s, the liberation of Eastern Europe from communism, I know that Solidarity started something at the Gdansk shipyards that triggered a domino-effect of change behind the Iron Curtain.

 

Without Solidarity it would not have been possible. And Solidarity’s strength came, quite literally, from solidarity – from the determination of Poles to stand together in a common struggle: workers and intellectuals, believers and non-believers, young and old. That was the first step to victory.

 

But on its own it would not have been enough. Without Solidarity’s friends in Britain, the changes we wanted to achieve would not have been possible. Because for us it was also vital to know that our fight had the support of the democratic world. Margaret Thatcher's  support was crucial. She had always been among our friends, and in those dark days she showed it.

 

In 1988 we were very weak after years of fighting under martial law. We needed help. Then Margaret Thatcher came to visit me and Solidarity’s other leaders in Gdansk.

 

It was strange, our first meeting, because I had heard about her strong character, and I rather wondered what she would make of a trade unionist like me. After all, I knew that she had had a difficult time with the unions in Britain. But what came through was her good spirit and decisiveness. Beyond any ideology, she had respect for human dignity and respect for democracy.

 

She knew very well what our union was all about. She knew it was more than simply a workers’ rights organisation, that at its heart it was a movement to secure freedom for millions of people. In our battle this was the only thing that mattered, and so that first meeting between us was a real building block of freedom and democracy.

 

Back then we were serious, because the enemy was so dangerous. Now, however, I am able to look back at my ease. I am grateful for the memories of Margaret Thatcher. I will always admire her class and tenacity"

 

Message 27 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?

It was interesting time; Maggie supporting Polish unions while destroying British Unions and the lives of people in UK .  She would have supported anybody who would be trying to weaken the USSR, if there was a nasty fascist dictator around, she would have supported him.  Just ask her good friend Augusto Pinochet.   

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Voltaire: “Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities, Can Make You Commit Atrocities” .
Message 28 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?

emulate thatcher and reagen, ha !

thatcher got 'erself owned by murdoch, early in the story.


"Part of the global success of Thatcherism was the key support of Ronald Reagan. As George Schulz describes it, they were “ideological soulmates” – the ultimate ‘80s power couple. But Thatcher’s special transatlantic relationship was predated and enabled by another: with the Australian-born media mogul Rupert Murdoch.

He was the son of a media baron, she the daughter of a grocer, but they had a common heritage of non-conformist Protestantism—in his case Scottish Presbyterianism, in hers the Methodist movement. Both went to Oxford University and chafed at the snobbery of English elites.  Together they formed a radical right-wing populism that railed against the “establishment” even when they became rapidly part of it.

On the day of the general election in May 1979, Murdoch’s tabloid the Sun—which had only just taken over from the Daily Mirror as the nation’s bestselling paper—shifted from its traditional Labour support with a front- page editorial arguing Thatcher’s election would be better for the working classes.

It didn’t quite turn out like that.  Within two years of Thatcher taking office, British unemployment had risen to 2 million. Damian Barr, whose book Maggie and Me is published by Bloomsbury next month, was the child of a Scottish steelworker at the time, and saw the direct effect on his family and his community. “She ripped the heart out of the community,” he told The Daily Beast. “My family were no longer working class, but effectively underclass, living on benefits.”

Mid-way through her first term, Thatcher was polling as the most unpopular prime minister in recent history, but the real threat did not come from a divided opposition or disaffected country but from members of her own party.

 

Behind the ideological marriage of Reagan and Thatcher then, Rupert Murdoch was the best man.

 

It was just at this moment that Murdoch launched a bid for the Times Group Newspapers. The deal should have been referred to the competition authorities as Murdoch already owned a substantial chunk of Fleet Street. But as revealed by the Thatcher archives during the Leveson Inquiry into press ethics last year, Murdoch secretly met with the prime minister at her country residence in Chequers in early 1981 to discuss the takeover.

 

The deal was waived through, and The Times, often considered the in-house journal of the British ruling classes, joined the tabloids in supporting Thatcher’s radical right-wing reforms.

She won by a landslide in the 1983 election—albeit with a smaller share of the vote. When Murdoch moved his News International newsgroup to a new headquarters in Wapping overnight in 1986, he was widely hailed as a savior of the British press. The nightly confrontations with print union pickets outside the new building became almost as iconic of the ‘80s as the miners' strike two years before. Thatcher promised Murdoch stalwart police support, sowing the seeds of a close relationship between News International and the Metropolitan police, that would cause problems during the hacking scandal exposed in 2011.

As one of her ministers, Sir Norman Fowler, recently described it, Thatcher’s motive was quite simple. "Why are you so opposed to Rupert?" she would ask critics of Murdoch. "He is going to get us in."

 

But Thatcher owed Murdoch more than just press advocacy.  As the minutes from the 1981 meeting make clear, Murdoch offered to introduce Maggie to key players behind the scenes in Washington just before Reagan was to be inaugurated as president. He’d already relocated to New York from London several years before Thatcher’s election, and was attuned to the combative style of American new right thinking, especially from senior Nixon aides like Roger Ailes (who would go on to run Murdoch’s Fox News Network) and Pat Buchanan, who came up with the tactic of “positive polarization” around social issues.

 

She never forgot her debt. Even on the brink of being forced to resign in 1990, she waived through a merger of his off-shore company Sky with the licensed British satellite company, BSB. Thus Britain’s satellite monopoly, BSkyB, which now as 50% higher revenues than the BBC, was born."

Message 29 of 39
Latest reply

Emulate Thatcher and Reagan - what does this mean to you?

That sounds about as accurate as you can get.

Photobucket
Message 30 of 39
Latest reply