Things you have recently learnt
Comments
-
You make absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Although, the idea that Thatcher has a lot to do with the current landscape (repetition, repetition) piddles on your Empirical chips.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
pinno said:
You make absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Although, the idea that Thatcher has a lot to do with the current landscape (repetition, repetition) piddles on your Empirical chips.
Methinks RC is being a contrarian for the sake of it, more than usual. I'll admit I do find it odd when some of my younger friends, who were born well after the Thatcher era, hold her up as a hate figure (I'd not deny that emotion to people affected at the time by her policies), but that's quite different from suggesting she's not still of considerable historic interest. Even at the time, one had the sense that she would be of interest in the future.0 -
It is impossible to separate our current landscape from Thatcher.
We are still living in the society she created.
Every PM since has simply twiddled. Even Blair. Blair simply tried to bring more balance and equity but made no attempt to fundamentally change the model.
We are still living in Thatchers Britain.0 -
morstar said:
It is impossible to separate our current landscape from Thatcher.
We are still living in the society she created.
Every PM since has simply twiddled. Even Blair. Blair simply tried to bring more balance and equity but made no attempt to fundamentally change the model.
We are still living in Thatchers Britain.
1 -
If proof were needed!briantrumpet said:morstar said:It is impossible to separate our current landscape from Thatcher.
We are still living in the society she created.
Every PM since has simply twiddled. Even Blair. Blair simply tried to bring more balance and equity but made no attempt to fundamentally change the model.
We are still living in Thatchers Britain.0 -
I literally said I’m not making a historical point but whatever.briantrumpet said:pinno said:You make absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Although, the idea that Thatcher has a lot to do with the current landscape (repetition, repetition) piddles on your Empirical chips.
Methinks RC is being a contrarian for the sake of it, more than usual. I'll admit I do find it odd when some of my younger friends, who were born well after the Thatcher era, hold her up as a hate figure (I'd not deny that emotion to people affected at the time by her policies), but that's quite different from suggesting she's not still of considerable historic interest. Even at the time, one had the sense that she would be of interest in the future.0 -
-
It was 40 years ago! Get over it!
Lots of things have shaped the U.K. but all old people bang on about are Churchill and Thatcher.
Yawn yawn. Only they are fighting the ‘80s battles.0 -
It's a lot more recent than most statues.rick_chasey said:Oldies do seem obsessed with her. It was 30-40 years ago!
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]2 -
History - get over it! It's all old stuff!!
Dang, that's a lot of university courses up the spout.0 -
80's battles that shaped Employment law, Union rules, Councils, our relationship with the EU, our Nuclear capabilities, tenancy agreements, Council tax (Poll tax), PFI's, privatization, the Housing act, deregulation, the Education reform act 1988, the Anglo-Irish agreement...rick_chasey said:It was 40 years ago! Get over it!
Lots of things have shaped the U.K. but all old people bang on about are Churchill and Thatcher.
Yawn yawn. Only they are fighting the ‘80s battles.
India went in '47, Kenya '63, Zimbabwe '80. Abolition of slavery 1833. Get over it.
I refer to me previous suggestion regarding your views on Empire.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Missed one: Monetarist economic theories based on Milton Freidman.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
Makes you wonder why anyone would do a history degree.briantrumpet said:History - get over it! It's all old stuff!!
Dang, that's a lot of university courses up the spout."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
Pointless that modern history bollox innit.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
I am quite happy to ignore history for all subjects if that is what you are saying.rick_chasey said:
Oh my god.pblakeney said:Missing the point that she formed the country into what it was when you were in your teens and twenties. Things would have been very different without her.
That’s not what I’m saying.
Stops pesky protests for one.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Can't we just be selective about the problem(s) and then find the right sort of historical event(s) that sort of points to why we have the problem(s) now?pblakeney said:
I am quite happy to ignore history for all subjects if that is what you are saying.rick_chasey said:
Oh my god.pblakeney said:Missing the point that she formed the country into what it was when you were in your teens and twenties. Things would have been very different without her.
That’s not what I’m saying.
Stops pesky protests for one.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
No that’s also not what I’m saying.pblakeney said:
I am quite happy to ignore history for all subjects if that is what you are saying.rick_chasey said:
Oh my god.pblakeney said:Missing the point that she formed the country into what it was when you were in your teens and twenties. Things would have been very different without her.
That’s not what I’m saying.
Stops pesky protests for one.0 -
That’s not what I’m saying.pinno said:
Can't we just be selective about the problem(s) and then find the right sort of historical event(s) that sort of points to why we have the problem(s) now?pblakeney said:
I am quite happy to ignore history for all subjects if that is what you are saying.rick_chasey said:
Oh my god.pblakeney said:Missing the point that she formed the country into what it was when you were in your teens and twenties. Things would have been very different without her.
That’s not what I’m saying.
Stops pesky protests for one.0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Makes you wonder why anyone would do a history degree.briantrumpet said:History - get over it! It's all old stuff!!
Dang, that's a lot of university courses up the spout.
But if you don't do a history degree, how do you get to put a modern day spin on events long past to suit your agenda?
0 -
Ok you lot since I obviously didn’t make it clear.
Plenty of things have had serious effects on history.
Loads. Seriously. Go study it. It’s loads.
Thatcher and Churchill are a part of that. But so is a lot else.
But in day-to-day chat people of a certain age ( over 45) seem to reach for them all the time. Constantly. Way more than their importance would imply, however important that is. And sure, she was very important and significant.
I have various theories for it.
For Churchill it’s obvious; a lot of folk have not gotten over winning the war, even if they were born well after the fact. They’re grasping for some kind of relevance for the U.K. in the world order.
For Thatcher it’s partly to do with the fact she shaped *their* lives. She came around a time that there was a lot of change anyway around the world.
But it’s weird that people talk about modern politics with people who were born well after the fact and constantly say “ah she’s still winding you up”
Here’s a tip for discussing politics for under 45s. She’s history and nothing more. She doesn’t boil people’s p!ss unless their parents made a thing of it. Politicians would do well to realise this as well, whether you’re Mark Francois or Jeremy Corbyn.
There been 40 years of opportunities to move on from what she’s done. Just because she was an important figure in your formative years doesn’t warrant the outsized attention older folk give her.
To listen to a lot of people you’d think she’s been the only one leading the past 30 years.
0 -
Things I have (not so) recently learned.
Oldies are very defensive about criticising them banging on about Thatcher.0 -
I suppose I could be considered an oldie. I have referenced the great lady quite a few times on this forum to get a rise out of lefties and I have rarely been disappointed.rick_chasey said:Things I have (not so) recently learned.
Oldies are very defensive about criticising them banging on about Thatcher.
As for being just us oldies, go back and look at the street parties and demos that greeted her death. Look at the people involved. They are not just oldies but include people not born when Thatcher became PM.0 -
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.3 -
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.0 -
You may need to re-write it then.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
If writings get continuously misinterpreted then they need to be clarified.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.2 -
Is there any fringe you don’t assume is a majority?ballysmate said:
I suppose I could be considered an oldie. I have referenced the great lady quite a few times on this forum to get a rise out of lefties and I have rarely been disappointed.rick_chasey said:Things I have (not so) recently learned.
Oldies are very defensive about criticising them banging on about Thatcher.
As for being just us oldies, go back and look at the street parties and demos that greeted her death. Look at the people involved. They are not just oldies but include people not born when Thatcher became PM.0 -
As Blakey says, you seem to have problems expressing yourself and you should also perhaps brush up on your reading comprehension.0
-
Baby boomers were raised on a diet of war heros. Most knew all the famous battles and heros from the war. I don't think it has much to with world order.rick_chasey said:
For Churchill it’s obvious; a lot of folk have not gotten over winning the war, even if they were born well after the fact. They’re grasping for some kind of relevance for the U.K. in the world order.
The downside of glorifying the war in this way without actually experiencing it is it makes people more gung-ho about dropping bombs and wars in general.2 -
TheBigBean said:
Baby boomers were raised on a diet of war heros. Most knew all the famous battles and heros from the war. I don't think it has much to with world order.rick_chasey said:
For Churchill it’s obvious; a lot of folk have not gotten over winning the war, even if they were born well after the fact. They’re grasping for some kind of relevance for the U.K. in the world order.
The downside of glorifying the war in this way without actually experiencing it is it makes people more gung-ho about dropping bombs and wars in general.
It's interesting quizzing my young pupils about films: two of the staples of my youth - Westerns and war films - just don't figure for them, and I think they find the over-representation of those genres in selections of 'great movie themes' rather weird.1 -
Personally, I don't think I've ever really discussed Thatcher on this forum prior to this thread. I am not hung up on her. She did both good and bad. She was ideologically driven which can mean blinkered but she was principled and consistent.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.
However, you are being completely inconsistent if you think some history is really important whilst she is just a n other leader.
She didn't just coincide with a period of change, she was a driving force behind a radical shift in our country. The bedrock of our current economic policies, many of you which you both benefit from and some you despise came from her.
If you don't want to debate politics in 2020, yes, she can be consigned to history. Seeing as you are highly engaged in political debate and regularly debate UK domestic politics, to dismiss her significance on all ages is absurd. If you want to attack conservative thinking, you need to be able to attack her legacy.
I'd agree she is about to become less relevant. Only now after the transition period will we be truly moving into a new period where her policies are no longer the key influencing factor of our political landscape.
I'm no Thatcher fan but I'd take her visionary leadership over bumbling out of the Eu on a whimsical unsubstantiated ideology.0
