October 12, 2007

Why Thatcher won

The old British Labour Party suffered a fundamental conflict of interest as a governing party:

- As the Government, it was supposed to run the nationalized industries in the interest of the nation;

- But as the Parliamentary representative of the labour unions, including the huge unions at the bloated and money-losing nationalized industries, it was supposed to help unions extort as much in wages and goldbricking as possible from management (i.e., the Labour Government) and shareholders (i.e., theoretically, the British people).

The result was economic chaos: inflation, strikes, blackouts, garbage heaped up in the streets, bodies left unburied, etc.

By privatizing many nationalized industries and by taming union power in the battle with Stalinist union boss Arthur Scargill's coal miners in the mid 1980s, Thatcher made possible Tony Blair's New Labour Party that, freed from this fatal contradiction, has done so well for itself with the voters.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

You mean Thatcher made Tony Blair possible??!?!?!?
What an evil old hag!!!!

dearieme said...

Alas, it is all too true that Mrs T (of whom my opinion grows with the years) prepared the ground for the loathsome Blair. It's a pity that Labour wasn't destroyed; Conservatives vs Liberals would have been so much healthier.

Madchester said...

Steve, how can you leave VFR off your blog roll? I hope it's just an oversight on your part.

Bruce G Charlton said...

Thatcher's amazing achievement in turning round the British economy (which had been locked into decline for so many years that many real experts thought that is was irreversible) is still not acknowledged by most people in the UK.

Indeed, there is very little analysis of this phenomenon.

Yet it is so remarkable that I cannot think of another example in world history.

Sometimes I find it hard to believe my own memory of the 1970s, and I buy an old book of heavyweight socio-economic analyis published in this era so as to remind myself how informed opinion expected the UK to be a third world failed state by now.

However, I can take no credit for Mrs Thatcher's saving of the nation, since I opposed almost every one of her policies at the time. My excuse is that I worked in the NHS and education sector, where she did no good and perhaps harm by increasing centralization and government control.

But on balance it must be admitted that she was one of the greatest leaders we have ever had.

manindarkhat said...

By privatizing many nationalized industries and by taming union power in the battle with Stalinist union boss Arthur Scargill's coal miners in the mid 1980s, Thatcher made possible Tony Blair's New Labour Party that, freed from this fatal contradiction, has done so well for itself with the voters.

Well, with the diminishing number of people who vote, plus the fraudulent votes organized by ethnic minorities and cynically encouraged by New Labour's "modernization" of voting methods. Thatcher also introduced spin-doctors, began to politicize the civil service and, perhaps most importantly of all, adopted policies pleasing to those who funded her. The very same people later funded Blair:

In fact, it is Michael Levy's extraordinary achievement to have rerouted vast sums of money, which Jewish businessmen had traditionally directed at the Tory Party, into the coffers of New Labour. Never can a spymaster have 'turned' so many agents of influence. The most astonishing defection must be that of the late Sir Emmanuel Kaye, who for years had given and raised funds for the Conservative Party. Even he was pulled into Lord Levy's New Labour tombola.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/newscomment.html?in_article_id=395946&in_page_id=1787

That's an article by the son of Thatcher's Jewish chancellor Nigel Lawson: someone once quipped that there were more Estonians than Etonians in Maggie's cabinet.

Anonymous said...

Mrs. Thatcher and her reforms are proof positive that the economic reforms so beloved by the establishment conservative parties are blind alleys. They don't begin to address the ailments of modern Western societies.

Anonymous said...

Thatcher and the special interests she represented-corporations -won.

Do you admire Maggie Steve for her use of facistic police state tactics against the miners?

Would you be in favor of Hilary using the same facistic police state tactics against West Virginia coal miners?

The miners-who had massive support in the North-were viciously smeared by Rubert Murdoch's print media.

The British Goverment has now developed a taste for police state Stalinst tactics that are now being used to suppress dissent against the race replacement policies of both Labor and the Conservatives.

The Southern English population will live to regret its support for the Thatcher goverment's brutal suppression of the coal miners. A precedent has been set.

Anonymous said...

Steve -- you overlook the most important thing about Thatcher.

She was the last British nationalist. After her came Major, Blair, the colorless Tories who are post-modern, post-national, and obviously elitist.

Yes Thatcher had her corporate cronies (as does Labor) but her most significant accomplishment was being nationalist and promoting middle class values and policies: favoring home ownership, military spending, and other things that benefit middle class people over rich and poor alike.

Now of course Labor and Tories are both competing for the same coalition: rich elites and poor people against the middle. With immigrants as the shock troops against the middle class threats.

Steve Sailer said...

Okay, Larry Auster's blog is back on the list. And I'm sorry to all the others I haven't restored yet. I'm really snowed under at present.

rast said...

another offtopic comment: how about Alan Wall's article today on vdare? It's a topic Steve has written on many times before; in fact quite a lot of the hyperlinks in the article are to stuff by Steve. Good stuff, though doesn't contain any surprises or new concepts for regular isteve readers.

Diversity Is Strength!...But Not For Mexican Beauty Queens

Anonymous said...

Hi Steve, could you please do a post or comment about the recent Robert Lindsay article on blacks and IQ.

http://robertlindsay.blogspot.com/2007/10/skyrocketing-black-iq.html

Anonymous said...

Did thatcher's "economic miracle" involve creating 26% unemployment and declining real wages, steve?

hey steve said...

Okay, Larry Auster's blog is back on the list

Auster is the biggest drama queen on the internet. His hilarious victimology constructed Summer 2007 around his supposed backstabbing by Red Diaper Horowitz tells the reader all he needs to know.

Plus he has an ever-growing blind spot on Israel, AIPAC, and Jewish power in America and the West. VFR used to at least dance around the subject. Now the place is full of hard-hitting diatribes against the looming invasion of the West by alien Islam. But as to the role of alien Judaism in deconstructing the West to a point which Islam could fill the void? Auster is evasive to put it mildly.

Anonymous said...

One of these days I'll figure out how Steve can simultaneously be a fan of Thatcher and all of the great British punk and post-punk bans who despised her and often wrote music in reaction to her policies.

Anonymous said...

" ... (Auster) has an ever-growing blind spot on Israel, AIPAC, and Jewish power in America and the West ... "

Bullsh#t! Lawrence on VFR today:

At the same time, there is ... a gathering movement on the left to treat serious Christianity as a public enemy, and the Jewish organizations have been a part of that, and this needs to be resisted.

The campaign against Coulter gathers steam

Maybe it's you who have an "ever-growing" problem? The fact is VFR addresses Israel/Jewish issues regularly.

Auster linked to the Postville, Iowa meatpacking story recently which is not at all flattering to Orthodox Jews. He is talking about Coulter today and mostly defending her. He talks about Jewish leaders and the ADL etc often, and usually criticizes them mercilessly.

Martin said...

" Anonymous said...

Mrs. Thatcher and her reforms are proof positive that the economic reforms so beloved by the establishment conservative parties are blind alleys. They don't begin to address the ailments of modern Western societies.

10/12/2007 1:08 PM"

Sad to say, but I would have to agree. All of Mrs. Thatchers efforts did not prevent the onset of Tony Blair's "Cool Britannia" - the post-English England, which seems poised to see a regime of ethnic and cultural cleansing the likes of which Britain has not seen since the 6th century A.D.

Vol-in-Law said...

martin:
"(Britain) seems poised to see a regime of ethnic and cultural cleansing the likes of which Britain has not seen since the 6th century A.D."

It's been going on for years now, aided by new 'hate' laws that mean you can be arrested for objecting (it used to be that you could get arrested for inciting violence, now it's for inciting 'hate').
According to official stats, in mid 2004 to mid 2007 around 2.2 million immigrants arrived in the UK, while about half that number of people emigrated, most of the emigrants being native British. Most people now know people who've left or are leaving - old people to Spain, France and Italy, young people to New Zealand, Australia, Canada and USA.

Re Auster, he's generally pro Jewish but certainly attacks Jewish organisation's attempts to eliminate Christianity from American public life, or to maintain mass third world immigration into America, etc. Obviously like most people he doesn't accept the notion above that Judaism is an 'alien presence' in the West - and even if it were alien, it has clearly had many benefits as well as disbenefits, while the benefits of an Islamic presence in the West are, er, less apparent to say the least.

David Davenport said...

Mrs. Thatcher and her reforms are proof positive that the economic reforms so beloved by the establishment conservative parties are blind alleys. They don't begin to address the ailments of modern Western societies.

Both Marg. T. and Ronnie R. were a false dawn for conservativism back in the '80's.

They didn't realize that so-called free trade is not working to the benefit of the English-speaking countries.

They both acquiesced to the de-industrialization of UK and USA with a "potato-chips-or-computer-chips, finance-capitalism-or-industrial-capitalism, it doesn't make any difference" attitude.

(And no, old fashioned coal mines are not my idea of industry.)

Thatcher's amazing achievement in turning round the British economy

How many cars, airplanes, ships, computer components, biotech products, etc., does UK export nowadays? How much advanced technology is pioneered in the UK?

What's holding up the English economy is the flow of Muslim oil money into City of London banks. That's about all there is.

Jim O'Sullivan said...

Shouldn't this be entitled "Why Blair Won"? It doesn't explain why Thatcher won. Come to think of it: it doesn't explain why Blair won, just why he succeeded after he won.

Why the hell did Blair win?

David Davenport said...

Why the hell did Blair win?

How did B. J. Clinton defeet George Herbert Hoover Bush and Bob Dole in successive Presidential elrections?

... The weakness of the opponents, geddit? How many peeeps voted for Chimpy Jr. cuz they just didn't like Owl Snore or the Heinz Ketchup giggolo?

Blair looked better on TV than the other guy. I dunno, blame it own women's suffrage.