Churchill Vs. Thatcher

The lad himself

Only a few years ago Winston Churchill was voted as the "Greatest Briton" in a BBC poll. Narrowly pipping Isambard Kingdom Brunel to the mantel. When you look at Churchill's political career parts of it were not without controversy. He was left in a political wilderness until the moment the Nazis came knocking at our door. Cometh the hour cometh the man as the saying goes. It was not just his famous speeches that got him his reputation. Historians have produced evidence of his decisive input at critical moments too. The work of the Bletchley Park code breakers is now recognised as one of the most significant contributors to allied success behind the lines as it were. but it may not have been. The centre was in need of new equipment (in fact the first working computer) and the Ministry of Supply was of the opinion it needed to fight a war first. Churchill visited the centre and then gave his concise opinion of how important they all were with a short memo to the Ministry that just read "Give them what they want". Churchill appears to have recognised the value of new ideas and technology. It took thirty years of post war freedom to rid us of that mind set.
The decision to carry out carpet bombing of German civilian populations may be one we care to forget. The pro's and cons of that decision are a blog all of their own!
Churchill had been cast into obscurity during the 1930's as something of a political Dinosaur whose political beliefs belonged to a different era. After the carnage of WW1 there was a feeling of a need for change. The nation had gone to war willingly at the behest of the ruling classes and came out feeling decidedly short changed when they were expected to carry on as if nothing had happened. The rise of communism and it's rhetoric at this time  probably contributed  to any sense of injustice. Churchill was for the status quo and was happy to see the army mobilised against his own countrymen to break up strikes in the 1920's. A new political agenda was growing and Churchill found himself on the outside.
He turned it around though and then some during WW2.

So to Lady Thatcher.
I thought of this piece because, although I haven't seen the film the Iron Lady I was concerned we were entering a phase of "rehabilitation" for her political career. I wanted to give some personal perspective.
Thatch (as I shall call her) was by no means an unpopular Prime Minister. 3 straight election victories  tells all you need to know about popularity.
One of my favourite ex politicians Tony Benn (another one people love or hate) categorises politicians into two groups. Road Signs and Weather vanes. Politicians described as weather vanes just went with popular opinion and never stood for anything concrete. Road Signs always pointed the way to somewhere and therefore meant something - "this is the way out of here". He was at the political opposite of Lady Thatcher but respected the fact that she did actually stand for something she was a road sign trying to point us on our way, just in the wrong direction.. In my opinion this is the best thing that can be said for her.
Now be gentle on me because I was not even 13 when she took office. I was incredulous that we should have a WOMAN as prime minister! Only India did things like that. Looks a bit like I had a misogynistic and racist upbringing doesn't it? My only defence was that it was endemic in those days.
The large part of my antipathy towards her tenure is largely in the way she dealt with the unions and the cost felt by those in the "traditional industries" of the country. I remember those days of the winter of discontent quite well. I was only a lad so I have only the news media as it was to go by. Industrial unrest was well reported and quite probably rife. It was a testament against the nationalisation of major industry. Industrial action became a legitimate way of taking a direct pop at government. Looking back after all those years I think change had to come. Perhaps Thatch really did have to take them head on. What the upshot was that her battle pitched communities against each other.  Of course the union leaders of the time deserve to shoulder the blame too. They led their comrades into battle. The miners strike of 1984 was the "pinnacle" if you like. But the cost to those communities?
I recognise pragmatically that the old heavy industries of steel and ship building were no longer viable due to the relative cheapness of foreign competition etc etc. But couldn't the change have been handles more sensitively?
For many Thatch's Legacy is one of decay and despair. Come and visit County Durham and you will find a lot of ex mining towns that only existed due to mining. Overnight they were stripped of their lively hood and left with nothing to replace it. The local economy was not well placed to have the rug pulled from under their feet  in such a way. And it is not just the North East. Take a look at Sheffield, Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool as examples. To a larger or lesser part these areas have regenerated but it has taken a generation. We now talk of families who have never known work. Take a look at the destruction of the old heavy industries to see why.

As a bit of light relief here is a little skit that just highlights the power of the unions of old - sorry but it doesn't play properly but you;ll get the gist