WI: Thatcher dies in the 1984 Grand Hotel Bombing

But are there really no historical figures who elicit this kind of hatred in America? Jerry Falwell? George Wallace? Huey Long? Jefferson Davis? Benedict Arnold? Actually, I'm not sure there aren't Presidents who are indeed treated the same way by certain quarters - I seem to remember reading some pretty strong stuff on FreeRepublic in years gone by concerning what should have happened to FDR, and then there was Ann Coulter saying the real question in 1998 should be whether to impeach or assassinate Bill Clinton (which seems to have enhanced her subsequent career, rather than damaged it).
No there are not. The most we get is partisan hatred at the current President, and even that's less than 30% of the population at most.
 
She didn’t, she just prevented unprofitable deadweight from dragging the entire country down with it. She’s hated by those that believed that their unprofitable, subsidised existence at the expense of everyone else was somehow a natural right. If Britain had continued with the cloistered protection of failed industries it would not resemble Greece now, it would never have got that far, but it would have suffered financial ruin similar to Argentina in the 1990s. That Thatcher’s policies were correct is underlined by them being embraced so thoroughly by her opponents.

I don't hate her for what she did ,whether she was right or wrong is, like most things ,debatable and now moot. I do take issue with the fact that she undertook her revolution with what I can only describe as zealous glee.
She was ,and remains the most polarising British politician of modern times.
So British politics ever since have remained insipid with 'spin' ,focus groups and the like.
I wonder if the early demise of such an oversize personality would leave room for the rise of another conviction politician as the downside of this type of politician would not be so readily seen.
I will generalise and say that all politicians have a touch of the peacock in them and an oversize sense of self belief. To be succesful though they have to appear to be all things to all men, and thier flamboyant aspects are suppressed.
We may, if this tendency is encouraged in time see a wider gap between right and left as expressive politics become more acceptable.
Also without wishing to condone acts of terrorism the fact remains that a proportion of the UK would not have shed a tear over her death, after all Spencer Percivil's killer was cheered by large crowds on the way to his execution.:D
The Conservitive party may well win the next election with a sympathy vote but wthout a strong leader they may well split between between 'wets' and 'drys' though this will be of small comfort to Labour who have troubles of their own.
This may well lead to minority governments ruling with 'supply and confidence' agreements with the minor parties.
 
Thatcher is probably the most divisive political figure in recent UK history. I've met people who love her and people who hate her (and I mean hate - here in Scotland I've heard it expressed that it would be okay to have a state funeral for her as long as she's buried alive and they can dance on her grave while she suffocates). Killing her in 1984 probably takes away that divisiveness. The miners will still hate her but she won't have antagonised quite so many people in society and she won't have become what Tories have wet dreams about
 
Maggie Thatcher certainly did seem to arouse huge amounts of hatred especially on the left in the 80's. Looking back on it now, I think she probably thrived on it, on the sense that if 'those sort of people' were opposed to what she was doing then she must be right. She seemed (I am talking about her public persona here, I have no idea what her private thoughts were) to revel in opposition and to draw it on.

As a consequence the moment of the attempt on her life was a moment of profound disjunction for many on the left who did not approve of terrorism, who deplored what had been done, but who probably had a fleeting 'if only' thought, and who also were dismayed by the way in which the event then boosted her popularity again in another sort of Falklands effect.

The damage done by the Thatcher years, which decisively shifted the UK from an industrial to a financial service economy and which began the process of dismantling the welfare state which is now really starting to take hold, is something that is only just beginning to be felt.
 
She didn’t, she just prevented unprofitable deadweight from dragging the entire country down with it.

I find the description of large swathes of people as "unprofitable deadweight", incredibly noxious. This sort of indecency is another part of why there is so much hatred for both Thatcher and Thatcherites, and why it seems so justified.

She’s hated by those that believed that their unprofitable, subsidised existence at the expense of everyone else was somehow a natural right.

No, she's hated (primarily) by all the people who lost their livelihoods and homes because of her policies, many of whom certainly weren't "unprofitable" in any way. My died-in-the-wool Tory parents hate her because her policies cost my father his pension and then his job (with a profitable, private-sector manufacturing company that was asset-stripped) in the mid-90s.

If Britain had continued with the cloistered protection of failed industries it would not resemble Greece now, it would never have got that far, but it would have suffered financial ruin similar to Argentina in the 1990s.

We are in financial ruin, and we've been in a hidden recession for almost thirty years - evidenced by the fact that we've had an ever-growing trade deficit since 1982, a deficit which has streaked well above the highest levels since records began (in the 1660s). That's the cause of the current economic crisis - unmanageable levels of private and subsequently government debt are merely symptoms - and unless we actually do something about it, the austerity will be for naught and we'll have to do this all again in 10 years (if anyone can find anything left to cut at that point). This is what Thatcherism amounts to in retrospect - three decades of using credit cards and zero-deposit mortages to pretend our economy wasn't up the creek.

That Thatcher’s policies were correct is underlined by them being embraced so thoroughly by her opponents.

I'm not sure they can be accurately described as her opponents post-1992. And do you think she will continue to be seen as correct? Or do you think that perhaps, as the Thathcerite era comes to an end and when the impossible becomes inevitable as it seems to every 35 to 40 years, the Thatcherite consensus will come to be seen in exactly the same way as the post-war consensus was after 1979?

Trying to drag this back on topic, Thatcher would be a much less hated figure if she had died in 1984. Those whose sincere reaction at the time was "God must hate Britain" would have had a quite different sincere reaction if the terrorists had been successful, and much of the hatred would have settled on her successor. Still, I don't think it could have possibly made the subsequent era any more Conservative than it was (it was, as someone said above, a "Super-Tory political era"); nor would it have pushed things in the other direction - there was no shortage of ardent Thatcherites who could have taken over.
 
Last edited:
If he were physically capable of it I could easily see Tebbit as Prime MInister

(On comments on her death I think most people would share the outrage at her murder though i was at a National Union of Students conference in the Spring of 1981 and there were cheers when it was announced that Reagan had been shot)
 
The immediate crisis the government was facing was the miners' strike. It had already been going on for about six months at the time of the assassination attempt, and went on for nearly six months longer.

The outcome was going to have major consequences for the government and militant unions. Clashes between the two had been the dominant theme of the British economy for the last 20 years. The miners' strike was the culminating event, and the outcome was Thatcher' most significant victory in her entire ministry, even more significant than the Falklands.

I'm not sure that anyone else in the government had the same determination as Thatcher had. The temptation would be to settle the strike so they could concentrate on the fight in Northern Ireland (which would have escalated). The unions would go back to their old practices and the economy would not recover the way it did in the late 80s.
 
I find the description of large swathes of people as "unprofitable deadweight", incredibly noxious. This sort of indecency is another part of why there is so much hatred for both Thatcher and Thatcherites, and why it seems so justified.

When it comes to describing the NUM "unprofitable deadweight" is probably too nice. How about noxious parasites?

Trying to drag this back on topic, Thatcher would be a much less hated figure if she had died in 1984. Those whose sincere reaction at the time was "God must hate Britain" would have had a quite different sincere reaction if the terrorists had been successful, and much of the hatred would have settled on her successor. Still, I don't think it could have possibly made the subsequent era any more Conservative than it was (it was, as someone said above, a "Super-Tory political era"); nor would it have pushed things in the other direction - there was no shortage of ardent Thatcherites who could have taken over.

Agreed, Thatcher dead in '84 by the IRA means a martyr for the right a topic to be avoided for the left.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
But are there really no historical figures who elicit this kind of hatred in America? Jerry Falwell? George Wallace? Huey Long? Jefferson Davis? Benedict Arnold? Actually, I'm not sure there aren't Presidents who are indeed treated the same way by certain quarters - I seem to remember reading some pretty strong stuff on FreeRepublic in years gone by concerning what should have happened to FDR, and then there was Ann Coulter saying the real question in 1998 should be whether to impeach or assassinate Bill Clinton (which seems to have enhanced her subsequent career, rather than damaged it).

Arnold and Davis probably had that kind of hatred back in the day, but now they are historical persons, harder to hate.

We also had JFK assassinated, when was the last time the UK had an equivalent assassination? Either a King or PM. Maybe people in the UK don't realize how difficult it would be to govern for a few years after a Thatcher death?
 
Top