A conundrum although Thomas Sowell has a point. The problem arises when people feel entitled to other's money and it becomes a lifestyle instead of a safety net.
Today Margaret Thatcher will be laid to rest and in future years documents and papers from her terms in office will become public. That's when historians and others will be able to give a clearer picture of her leadership.
This past week I've seen so many anti-Thatcher protestors who weren't even a twinkle in their parents' eye. Were they a form of rent-a-protest? I doubt if many realise that the plans for today were drawn up by the Labour party and approved by Tony Blair when he was in office.
Others have organised a protest by attending the funeral then turning their backs when the hearse passes. Stupid really. The expense of travel and food seems an excessive sum to pay just in the hope that their backs will be seen on the BBC. However, everyone (still) has the right to peaceful protest in this country and if they want to spend their money in that manner that is their right.
I've read quite a few eulogies to the Iron Lady and this is one I feel comes from the heart. It's good to know that loyalty is not dead and there are those who will stick with their political leaders, not for financial gain but out of a strong sense of affinity.
May she rest in peace.
Posts
8 comments:
A thought-provoking conundrum, Rosie.
So all governments are greedy; some (and their politicians) much more-so than others.
There is a new word entering the language – ‘Thaturation’ – the state of being stuffed to over capacity with every minutiae of the life and times of Mrs Thatcher.
She is dead. May she rest in peace. May her family have the funeral for her that they would wish.
But, for the rest - the press, the media and the politicians – enough!
The cynic in me is beginning to wonder if perhaps Mr Cameron et al are over egging the occasion to fit their own political purpose.
I read a comment elsewhere that Margaret Thatcher must have been one heck of a powerful tyrant if her opponents only felt able to 'celebrate' after she was dead.
Certainly waiting 23 years is a bit silly otherwise.
The other interesting thing is how few of her policies have been reversed subsequently. Section 28 of the Local Government Act is the only one that comes to mind. Perhaps an indication of who our new masters are now?
I was also struck how Alan Johnson on BBC Radio 4's "Any Questions?" denounced the closed shop and him an ex-postal worker. I suspect the Labour party is rather glad that Mrs. T did what she did, a double-win for them, she did what they knew needed to be done and took the bullet for them.
True Joe, although I'd say the politicians are greedy. Perhaps they start off with the best intentions but most become greedy. It comes with power.
Now JRB, do you really expect a negative reply to your last sentence? :)
She was powerful Jim and used her power for what she thought was the greater good of the country. Certainly she wasn't on the make like some of her successors.
That's a good point about the policies.
Thank you for the link and for your kind words.
A pleasure Tom.
Post a Comment