How Margaret Thatcher made Britain great again
As the BBC tells the story of Margaret Thatcher’s downfall in a major new drama, one of Britain’s leading historians assesses her legacy
When Margaret Thatcher was asked what she had changed about British politics, she answered: "Everything." It was uncharacteristically immodest of her, but it was true. After she became prime minister in May 1979, she changed the atmosphere of the pre-emptive cringe that successive ministries of both parties and industrial management had exhibited towards the trade unions ever since the World War Two.
She changed the sense of embarrassment that Britons felt towards the concepts of productivity and profit. She changed British reliance on manufacturing industry just in time, inaugurating the services and information technology industry revolutions.
She changed the attitude of appeasement and post-imperial guilt that had actuated foreign policy making since the Suez Crisis. She changed British politics so fundamentally that the Labour Party had to drop socialism and change its name and objectives in order to get elected.
No one was in any doubt about what Lady Thatcher stood for or believed in
Along with her friend and ideological soulmate Ronald Reagan - the greatest US president since Franklin Roosevelt in the 1940s - Thatcher changed the failing policy of detente with Communism into the confrontational one that eventually brought the Berlin Wall down at the end of her premiership.
She changed the ownership structure of vast industries, exchanging the nebulous concept of 'national' ownership for the more efficient, purer (and ultimately fairer) one of shareholder ownership. She changed the way we financed the European budget.

Meanwhile she fundamentally changed - for the worse - the career paths of the Labour PM Jim Callaghan, the Argentinian junta leader General Galtieri, the next Labour leader Michael Foot, the extreme left-wing National Union of Mineworkers leader Arthur Scargill, the next Labour leader Neil Kinnock and especially the IRA terrorist and hunger-striker Bobby Sands.
Those things that she did not change for the better she would have, if she hadn't been knifed by an over-ambitious cabal of cowards, fools, traitors and - worst of all - Europhiles, who split the Tory party and left it feuding for half a generation, until the advent of David Cameron in 2005.
The election victory of 1992 was largely down to her legacy rather than the non-leadership of her absurd successor John Major, since when the Conservatives were thrice defeated by Tony Blair - an ideological son of Thatcher - at three general elections.
By encouraging George Bush Sr not to 'wobble' during the First Gulf War, she set the international scene that allowed
Filed under: Margaret Thatcher, Conservative Party, David Cameron, Tony Blair, New Labour
- Most Read
- Most Emailed
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10



Comments
Hide comments
FILL IN NAME OF DICTATOR HERE "----------stuck to the practice of saying what (s)he meant and meaning what (s)he said...But (s)he went down fighting for his/her principles; no one was in any doubt about what (s)he stood for or what (s)he believed in."
Posted by MTNB at 3:47pm on February 25, 2009
This article is a joke, obviously. It could have been even funnier for the undead Thatcherites still in mourning, by pointing out that, since that excrescence of a decade, the 80s, led to the debt addiction of a society that abolished industry "..just in time.." (!?!), borrowed trillions from China and threw a party. Now for the hang over.
Posted by allan kessing at 8:21am on February 28, 2009
"She changed British reliance on manufacturing industry just in time, inaugurating the services and information technology industry revolutions" - quite a few Britons would like to have a manufacturing industry right now. "Thatcher changed the failing policy of detente with Communism into the confrontational one that eventually brought the Berlin Wall down at the end of her premiership" - what about Gorbachev? Can we attribute the start of the current 'special' master/poodle relationship that the UK has with the USA to her as well? One point curiously lacking is her support of Pinochet. What principles was she fighting for then I wonder?
Posted by The Anti-Pawn at 12:36pm on March 1, 2009
Thomas O'S re Pinochet - as far as I recall from that time, the right to sell torture implements, human shackles and various tools of internal repression. Trade is sacred after all - remember the ethical foreign policy that Blaahhh promised to implement? How long did that last, days if one is generous.
Posted by allan kessing at 10:39am on March 7, 2009
The writer is an extreme right wing conservative history writer. I don't think that counts as historian; a historian is an academic who studies, teaches and/or writes about history. This conservative buddy of Bush, Rove, and Cheney and a supporter of the disatrous Iraq invasion. He's a journalist.
Posted by Peter Simmons at 10:27am on March 20, 2009
Add comment
You must be signed into your user account to add a comment.