No Thatcher

Hkelukka

Banned
So, POD is this.

Instead of rising to power, Thatcher has a stroke and dies sometime in the 1960's and Monetarist policies and Thatchers brand of liberalisation also receive little to no backing in the UK.

What would the UK in the 2011 would be like?

BEtter? Worse? Higher GDP? Lower? Thoughts?

So, in short, depending on who came into power (impossible to determine without specific POD) What would be the likely developement in the UK in the 1970's or so to the 2011? And the modern societal and political problems UK would face?
 
Why would she have a stroke at that age? I´d find it more natural for the POD to be Thatcher deciding not to enter politics.

However, Thatcher wasn´t the only monetarist in the world.
 
Why would she have a stroke at that age? I´d find it more natural for the POD to be Thatcher deciding not to enter politics.

However, Thatcher wasn´t the only monetarist in the world.

Her husband is driving while drunk after some Tory cocktail party and they hit a milk lorry. A more likely death in the 1960's.

Actually Thatcher didn't know much about monetarism until the late 70's. Before that she was just a Tory that didn't like socialists.
 
Without her to take the torch from him, Keith Joseph may take some public speaking lessons and run against Heath in 1975. We could see an even less successful 1979-1983 Tory government, or even a butterflied 1978 election and tiny Labour majority boosted by the 1982 election (held after the Falklands, of course).
 

Thande

Donor
And I suppose stagflation would just heal itself? :rolleyes: Thatcher is certainly open to criticism for a lot of what she did, but she wouldn't have got elected with a rock-steady 43% of the electorate for three successive elections if she wasn't solving a real problem that was there.

This thread is also an example of what I was complaining about the other day, when people feel the need to kill political figures with spectacularly unlikely medical incidents that come out of nowhere rather than the rather more likely possibility of being run over by a bus. Or to be less pointlessly vindictive, perhaps just lose their seat in an election and decide to take a non-political career.
 
And I suppose stagflation would just heal itself? :rolleyes:

Inflation and poor - or at least uneven - economic growth was a big problem throughout the Thatcher years. Indeed they ended with inflation being relatively close to where it had been when they began IIRC.

The structural reforms of the Thatcher years were good, less so the economic management.
 
This thread is also an example of what I was complaining about the other day, when people feel the need to kill political figures with spectacularly unlikely medical incidents that come out of nowhere rather than the rather more likely possibility of being run over by a bus. Or to be less pointlessly vindictive, perhaps just lose their seat in an election and decide to take a non-political career.

Agreed, the most likely POD to keep Thatcher out of politics is to simply have her continue her career as an industrial chemist and spends many successful years developing new types of ice cream for Unilever :cool:
 

Thande

Donor
Agreed, the most likely POD to keep Thatcher out of politics is to simply have her continue her career as an industrial chemist and spends many successful years developing new types of ice cream for Unilever :cool:

As someone who benefited from cheap Unilever products (including Wall's ice cream) at my chemistry department's Unilever-financed canteen, I can certainly get behind that ;)
 
Her husband is driving while drunk after some Tory cocktail party and they hit a milk lorry. A more likely death in the 1960's.

Yeah. Those milk lorries were a major hazard in the 1960s. It's the reason she ended free milk for the under 5s when she was education minister. It wasn't to be spiteful, she was trying to save lives by reducing the number of them on Britain's roads :D
 
Yeah. Those milk lorries were a major hazard in the 1960s. It's the reason she ended free milk for the under 5s when she was education minister. It wasn't to be spiteful, she was trying to save lives by reducing the number of them on Britain's roads :D

I'm glad one person got my poor joke.
 
Why would a POD so early be required? There were so many contingencies from the mid-1970s which led to Thatcher becoming Prime Minister and it's certaintly not the case that a government with similar policies would have been inevitable. She wasn't destined through an inherent greatness of her personality or ideas to gain such prominence from the moment that she entered politics (or indeed far later).
 

Thande

Donor
Why would a POD so early be required? There were so many contingencies from the mid-1970s which led to Thatcher becoming Prime Minister and it's certaintly not the case that a government with similar policies would have been inevitable. She wasn't destined through an inherent greatness of her personality or ideas to gain such prominence from the moment that she entered politics (or indeed far later).

Indeed; I could easily see OTL looking unlikely to people from quite similar timelines ("A female prime minister that early? And one who never held a cabinet post more important than Education before becoming leader?"). If Keith Joseph had kept his mouth shut he'd have remained the darling of the monetarists.
 
And I suppose stagflation would just heal itself? :rolleyes: Thatcher is certainly open to criticism for a lot of what she did, but she wouldn't have got elected with a rock-steady 43% of the electorate for three successive elections if she wasn't solving a real problem that was there.

Stagflation was only a brief phenomenon. In the UK you are really talking 1974, 75 and into 76. It was produced by a combination of the oil price shock and Ted Heath.

Inflation fell to 8% in 1978 while economic growth was over 3%. Thatcher got re elected in 1983 with 43% ish of the vote because Labour tried to commit hara-kiri between 1979-83 and because Argentina was beaten in a war. In 1987 Labour had a hill to climb and had to fight the SDP/Liberal Alliance to secure its position as the main opposition.
 

AndyC

Donor
So, POD is this.

Instead of rising to power, Thatcher has a stroke and dies sometime in the 1960's and Monetarist policies and Thatchers brand of liberalisation also receive little to no backing in the UK.

What would the UK in the 2011 would be like?

BEtter? Worse? Higher GDP? Lower? Thoughts?

So, in short, depending on who came into power (impossible to determine without specific POD) What would be the likely developement in the UK in the 1970's or so to the 2011? And the modern societal and political problems UK would face?

You're never going to get an objective response to this - the Thatcher issue is far too polarizing.

For example:
It's the reason she ended free milk for the under 5s when she was education minister. It wasn't to be spiteful, she was trying to save lives by reducing the number of them on Britain's roads :D

Free school milk was ended for the 11-16 year-olds by Patrick Gordon Walker and Ted Short in 1968. It was ended for 7-11 year-olds in 1971/2 by Margaret Thatcher. It was ended for 5-7 tear-olds in 1977 by Shirley Williams. It has never been ended for under-5 year-olds.

Yet you will always get "Thatcher Thatcher Milk Snatcher" and the unquestioning meme that "Thatcher ended free school milk".

Inflation in 1975-1979 averaged 16.16%. Inflation in 1980-1990 averaged 7.45%. Aside from a downward spike in 1978, between 1974 and 1980, RPI never fell below 14%. Aside from a single upwards spike in 1990, inflation after 1981 never exceeded 8.2%, and for seven years of the Eighties was no higher than 5.2%. It was certainly a patchy record, but far superior to what went before. UK GDP grew nearly one-and-a-half times faster during Thatcher's eleven years than for the five years preceding her, so the "cured stagflation" bit is probably a defensible claim.

My personal view is that the pain of the Thatcher years was at least partially attributable to the failures of both Heath and Wilson to confront the situation before the cure became so painful. Had there been no Thatcher reforms, we'd very possibly be cursing the name of whoever finally did intervene at a later stage, with even greater pain.
 

Hkelukka

Banned
Good response Andy.

My view on Thatcher is, paradoxically, that her goals were right, the privatization of a lot of the old gov heavy industry. But that the method undertaken was wrong. But I suppose there are worse disagreements than on the method.

What I wanted as a debate on what if she hadnt been elected and monetarist policies implemented. What would have been the probable outcome, or would there be a better/worse britain, and if so, what do you base your argument on.

But anyway, i suppose discussions of potential worlds and alternative histories is best reserves for people that do not evoke such strong feelings. We've barely been able to discuss Emperor Kaiser objectivly, not to even think of talking about Hitler, Stalin, or Mao objectively. So there is no way we can discuss a currently living politican with anything even resembling objectivity.

But, i suppose if anyone wants to discuss it in depth they can. If not, i'll jus tlet this thread die now.
 
I thought it was widely understood than in the event of an accident between the Iron Lady and a bus that the bus would come off worst.
 
Monetarist policies were first implemeted by Chancellor of the Exchequer Denis Healey after 1976. Inflation was brought down quickly after that.

Under Thatcher inflation fell below 10% after 1982. However inflation was falling everywhere in the developed world by then and the UK had at best an average record until the 1990's when Thatcher was gone.

No Thatcher means possibly Willie Whitelaw replacing Heath sometime in 1976.

If he wins he would be similar to Heath but less of a buffoon. Higher unemployment caused by the global slump from 1979-82 would mean labour unrest and inflationary pressures would decline anyway. When the economy recovers Britain has more manufacturing industry but a weaker Financial sector and less of a property speculation boom.

GDP is probably similar as it will have been boosted by oil revenues.

Falklands are invaded as OTL. Whitelaw would be reluctant to fight but may be persuaded by the Admiralty that a war is winnable.
 
Why kill Thatcher?

I've been watching the excellent (if bias) BBC Series "Tory, Tory, Tory" recently, and it seems to me that a likelier POD is that Thatcher becomes a chemist. That was her first passion, and a far more likely deterrent to a political career than being spontaneously destroyed in a ball of fire by a milk lorry.

If Thatcher never enters politics, the neo-liberal right loses it's most articulate and appealing voice. Keith Joseph had many of the same problems afflicting the likes of Enoch Powell. His foot-in-mouth syndrome dooms any chance at taking a seat in #10 Downing Street. Heath wins the 1975 leadership contest, and loses to Callaghan in 1979 in a very narrow election. Long term implications: the Conservatives remain more centrist and the UK remains less politically divisive. Also, no New Labour.
 
Top