Sunday, June 04, 2006

Blair plans state funeral for Thatcher

The final proof that Blair is losing all touch with reality comes with the news that he intends to allow Margaret Thatcher to have a state funeral because of her "unique" contribution to British politics during the 1980s.

She made a unique contribution all right. She took unemployment to 4 million, destroyed Britain as a manufacturing base and set gay rights back with the introduction of Clause 28.

This would be the first state funeral allowed to a commoner since Winston Churchill, the man who saved Europe from the scourge of Nazism.

There has been quite widespread incomprehension at the decision.

Prof Richard Bellamy, an expert in the British constitution at Essex University, said the decision was "unusual". "The only two prime ministers that I can remember getting state funerals were Churchill and the Duke of Wellington.

"They could be seen as people who saved the country in times of dire need... It is hard to think of the Falklands as being in that category.

"The claim would be that she fundamentally altered the character of the British state, but we could say the same about Clement Attlee. I'm pretty gobsmacked that it's being considered. One can only assume that this is yet another example of Blair being totally out of step with the population, not to say his own party.

"I guess the fact that we have had a number of big funerals lately sort of lowers the benchmark; it becomes less of a rare event."

Glasgow Labour MP Iain Davidson predicted that the revelation would not go down well within the Labour Party.

He said: "Churchill at least was a unifying force. Thatcher was almost entirely a divisive influence."

Indeed, Thatcher was famous as a politician who did not believe in consensus.
To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.
The idea of allowing a state funeral for such a divisive figure is unheard of. State funerals are supposed to unite the nation in grief, this one would split it in rancour.

I actually find myself in agreement with Gerald Warner who argues that this is Blair's final two finger salute to a Labour Party that he has come to despise.
Yet this is a political move by Tony Blair. He has always been semi-detached from his party. Recently they have come to regard each other with reciprocal loathing. As he prepares for the international lecture circuit, this gesture would put helpful blue water between himself and the party he despises, gaining him respectability among the geopolitical chattering classes.
Peter Kilfoyle amply sums up the way many of us feel:

Like her pupil, Tony Blair, she had a totally corrosive effect on the nation whilst in the grip of the arrogance of power. Few tears were shed when her own party brought her down. Too many had suffered from her narrow and vindictive approach to what should have been the common good. When the time comes, those who loved her will mourn her. The rest of us will simply remember.

I will remember. I will remember entire streets where I grew up where not a single adult male had a job. I will remember her describing working class miners as "the enemy within." I will remember her referring to the very people she had made unemployed as "social security scroungers."

Blair is playing with fire here. No-one likes to think of acts of protest taking place at someone's funeral, but Thatcher is such a divisive figure that were a state funeral to go ahead it is impossible to imagine that people wouldn't want to have their very different memory of this appalling woman recorded.

The woman who called Nelson Mandela a "terrorist" and considered General Pinochet a close friend is not worthy of such an honour.

Blair should remember that Thatcher's most famous appalling quotation was:
There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and women, and there are families.
It is fundamentally wrong that he should ask the very society that she did not believe in to honour her in this way.

Click title for full article.

Related Articles:

An American perspective from Anything They Say

7 comments:

dove said...

Brilliant article. The area where I live and work is still struggling to recover from the damage she did to -- well, suffice it to say there is no part of the social fabric that she did not stretch to fraying point.

The thought of giving her a state funeral would be a slap in the face to people here -- and, as you rightly observe, to South Africans and Chileans as well.

Presumably it is Mr Tony Poodle's idea of an easy way to grab votes off the Tory's.

Kel said...

Thanks Dove. And I do love your blog.

I don't even think he's trying to win votes off the Tories, I think he's giving the finger to the Old Labour left as he's always loathed us.

The idea of celebrating the life of that woman fills me with rage.

My family grew up in one of the worst council estates in Britain and my mother's lifetime wish was to move to a better area. Still hellish by middle class standards, but to my mother it was the promised land.

Then Thatcher sold off council houses and all the escape routes vanished.

Add to that the carnage she created as she pitted working class men against working class men during the miners strike, with one side heavily protected by a politically motivated police force, and you'll understand why I think she's simply the nearest thing Downing Street has ever seen to the personification of evil.

The only way I would ever visit her grave would be to dance on it.

Sorry, I know that's over the top, but Thatcher brings out that reaction in me.

I once saw her in the street and found myself physically recoiling the way people do from vampires.

Blair is simply taking the piss.

Brown, or somebody - anybody - who still appreciates Labour values, out to take Blair aside and say, "Enough's enough". Now you REALLY have to go.

dove said...

I'm not sure that your reaction is over the top, actually. She has responsibility for ruining a lot of lives, both here and elsewhere.

And on reflection, I think you're probably right that it's Blair's idea of giving the finger.

I'm glad you like In Flight -- I think you've got a good thing going here. Anyway, feel free to comment over there -- the folks who drop by from time to time are generally a pretty friendly bunch.

Ingrid said...

Kel, I guess I must have been busy preparing for my own blog, and in between family commitments reading other's that I missed the fact that she died. Good grief. When Diana died I could understand that she was given a state funeral even though her in laws were loathed to do so, but it was good pr to honour the feelings of so many people. Thatcher on the other hand had a disdain for the ordinary people plus always always was a commoner. In essence, what is more common than the disregard a person bestows on others? She does not deserve a state funeral because of plain protocol and even if she had done (the)a world of good, this is not where tax payers money should go. Hopefully it will not come about..if so..make sure that you can ignore your laws (since they have made it more difficult to express opinions publicly with the Terror act etc, britains version of Homeland Security nonsense) and I think that people ought to go out in droves protesting her true legacy!
Ingrid

theBhc said...

Ingrid,

No, Thatcher did not die. she is still alive and 80, as the article says. I guess Kel won't get to do any dancing just yet....

Which further makes it appear that this is simply Blair's political hackery gone wild. Why propose this when the old bat is alive and, by all appearances, still well?

Kel said...

No, bhc. The dancing is at the moment on hold :-)

Which, as you rightly point out, makes Blair's plans all the more puzzling.

Hopefully he will not still be PM by the time the devil comes to welcome his "sister" into her new abode.

Ingrid said...

Sorry, did not have time to read the article..so she's still alive? What a bizarre statement than to mention she's worthy of a state funeral...kickbacks anyone?
weird,
Ingrid