|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Lady Thatcher and State Funerals
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
There was a slot on World at One today on whether Lady Thatcher - who is still alive - should be given a state funeral when she goes, as we all shall, the way of Ninevah, Tyre and Kim Jong-il. This is prompted by this article in the Daily Telegraph by Peter Oborne. Surprisingly perhaps for the Telegraph, he is against the idea.
Leaving aside the distaste one feels about talking about the funeral arrangements for someone who is not dead, what do other shipmates think?
I'm not as paranoidly anti Lady Thatcher as a lot of people are. On balance she did some things that were necessary, some things that were not, some things that look obsessional and malevolent, and should have relinquished the helm sooner. But I don't think she should get a state funeral. It would be deeply divisive. Like that of Ivan the Terrible, much of her political praxis was based on those who were 'one of us', and those, whether in her own party or in the wrong jobs, who were not. The only non-royal in my lifetime to be given one was Churchill and that was for being a great war leader and keeping the Germans out. Apart from that one fundamental fact, he would not have been awarded one on his political record.
There were only two great Prime Ministers in the C20. Both were flawed. Churchill was one of them. The other was not Mrs Thatcher, was though, like Churchill, a war leader and was not given a state funeral.
I do get a bit fed up with the claim that Lady Thatcher is up among the real greats. She isn't. Lady Thatcher is in the Upper Second of PMs, along with Attlee, Macmillan and possibly Baldwin. I don't think anyone ever suggested they should get state funerals. Why should she?
A state funeral is a tribute of national gratitude, an opportunity for public mourning. A state funeral for a controversial figure would look like an opportunity not to mourn but for those who still think of themselves as an 'us' to use their positions in power to crow over those that don't agree with them.
Nor do I want to see a state funeral that is surrounded by hostile demos, which if it were to go ahead, it would be.
That's my view, and I'm not even that anti the Iron Lady. What do other shipmates think?
[ 15. June 2016, 18:43: Message edited by: Belisarius ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
No way. We can't afford it and she doesn't deserve it.
Her 'market forces' agenda is still causing harm. There are two market forces - fear and greed imo. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
I don't really care. I'll just be glad to see her dead.
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
She was the leader of your government for a pretty formative period. You might as well have something of a to-do. You don't really have to feel sorry. Just look like it for a couple hours. Think of it as showing up for the funeral of a malicious aunt that didn't even leave you any money.
I imagine people who don't really know what political movements are really about will show up to hold up tasteless signs, hurl bricks through electronics store windows, and shout either way, so scratch that as a factor.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
Since she hated "The State" why should the state provide her with a funeral?
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
Enoch, I think Attlee deserves a bit better than an upper second. As the poem says:
Few thought him even a starter
Counted themselves very much smarter
But he finished PM, CH and OM
an Earl and a Knight of the Garter
And I'm a filthy Tory.
BTW, I agree with almost every word of Peter Oborn's article.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
Since she hated "The State" why should the state provide her with a funeral?
Exactly. That says it all. (Well, all that can be said on a family website.)
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
And on that theme:
And they that rule in England,
In stately conclave met,
Alas, alas for England,
They have no graves as yet.
I'm hoping the PTB will be more canny than to try. They are big, expensive jollies, given extensive and reverential media coverage, justified by catching 'the mood of the nation'. If they do, then they confirm the rightness of Things As They Are. But if they don't then the establishment is exposed as partisan, and I don't think it wants that.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
A bit premature. If the government of the day should offer one it should be up to the family to say yea or no .
Dooes Baroness Thatcher deserve it ? I would say she does having led U.K. through the early 1980s.
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulBC:
Dooes Baroness Thatcher deserve it ? I would say she does having led U.K. through the early 1980s.
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif) Which wouldn't have been half so traumatic without her.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
She was the leader of your government for a pretty formative period. You might as well have something of a to-do.
Zach, it isn't like that. Our Prime Ministers don't normally get state funerals when in due course they shuffle off their mortal coils. If she got one, it would be difficult thereafter not to argue that every Prime Minister ought to get one.
Trisagion, I'm classing an Upper Second the old way, i.e. a good degree, significantly better than most, whether one agrees with them or not. You only get a First if you're exceptional. Churchill, Lloyd George, Gladstone, Pitt the Younger and Walpole and possibly Disraeli, Peel and Pitt the Elder strike me as the only ones that are even runners for Firsts. Even Palmerston is a bit of a question mark as his main achievements were not as PM.
Lower Second is the default class. Most PMs, Heath, Wilson, Callaghan, Major etc get a Lower Second. The seriously mediocre ones get a Third, or perhaps in Eden's case an Aegrotat. There's only three from the C20 who I'd put in that category.
It's too early to say whether Blair makes Upper Second or not - though I think Iraq means no - and whether Brown is Lower Second or Third.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Considering that Lady Thatcher was all about cutting taxes and red tape, she should be the first to be opposed to a state funeral. That money could go towards healthcare or social programs which she slashed during her premiership.
I believe Our Lord Jesus Christ will tell her "Yes, Maggie, there is such a thing as 'society'", when she enters into the next life.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
I think the only non-partisan way of assessing a prime minister's effectiveness is the degree to which they managed to put their ideals into practice. On this reckoning Thatcher was a very effective PM, inasmuch as Britain after she stepped down was much closer than beforehand to her vision of an ideal society - and I say this as one who generally dislikes Thatcherism.
Post-WW2 the only other PM of her stature (on this reckoning) would be Clement Attlee.
In general, though, I don't see that there's any body in the British establishment that can be trusted to assess whether or not a prime minister gets a state funeral. So either they should all get one or none does.
[ 22. December 2011, 16:51: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
Shove her over the side of a boat.
That it the way the West deals with bastard leaders, isn't it?
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
She was the leader of your government for a pretty formative period. You might as well have something of a to-do.
A "state funeral" is a specific kind of thing, not just "something of a to-do". They are actually quite rare. Monarchs get them (though not even all of them), and giving one to someone who isn't King or Queen is an extremely odd circumstance. Its only ever happened ten times, usually for people who won lots of big wars. And I doubt if even her greatest fans would claim that Mrs Thatcher has anywhere near the historical significance of Isaac Newton, Lord Nelson, or Winston Churchill.
There's a slightly lesser thing called a "ceremonial funeral" which most royalty get, and also some other famous people like Charles Darwin. Even then its not usual for Prme Ministers.
The differences are small in practice - a State Funeral involves lying in State for public viewing with a permanent armed guard (often including members of the Royal Family as well as soldiers) and then the coffin is pulled through London on a gun carriage by large numbers of sailors (the Royal Navy being the Senior Service, having sailors do the job is a greater ceremonial honour than having soldiers do it, though don't tell that to a squaddy in a pub), and the pallbearers will include royalty and military of the equivalent rank of admirals or fieldmarshalls (what the Americans would call five-star generals)
The reason Mrs Thatcher ought not to have one of these "state funerals" or "ceremonial funerals" is that it would be divisive, not uniting. I expect her family know that and wouldn't want one anyway. The theory is that monarchs, and a few absurdly famolus people come to represent the whole nation in some way. However you take that idea, it doesn't apply to Prime Ministers who are party politicians who by definition represent particular interests - their party, their constituency and so on.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
Shove her over the side of a boat.
But then you couldn't have the inscription on the tombstone: Licensed for Dancing.
[ 22. December 2011, 17:07: Message edited by: Firenze ]
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
, or perhaps in Eden's case an Aegrotat.
I like that- exactly right, I think. Maybe Bonar Law too?
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
the coffin is pulled through London on a gun carriage by large numbers of sailors (the Royal Navy being the Senior Service, having sailors do the job is a greater ceremonial honour than having soldiers do it, though don't tell that to a squaddy in a pub)
"I'd rather be pulled by a sailor than a soldier" Hmm! I can see this isn't the greatest line in the circs ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Come to think of it, we could add to the national gaiety by combining it with the RN Field Gun Competition- remove Thatch, dismantle coffin, manhandle both over variety of obstacles on the way to Westminster Abbey, reassemble, re-insert Thatch, nail down, lower into grave- all timed - best run of three wins.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
I don't see anything she did deserving of a state funeral. She'll get a great send-off no doubt from family and supporters who no doubt will provide all the opportunity needed for anyone in the country who wants to, to eulogize her. I'm sure the papers and commentators will be knocking themselves silly to say how fantastic she was.
In many ways she was a phenomenon with incredible talent and the guts to mould a nation to her vision. In a personal capacity to have achieved the position and power she did showed a strength of character and a talent that was then, and still is imo largely lacking in politics.
But the vision was divisive to say the least, and in many opinions her talent used as much for great harm, as for great good. A state occasion would just be one huge magnet for all kinds of trouble to take place.
Arguably her leadership through the Falklands War was the most admirable thing. But none of this, in my opinion, is worth a state-funded occasion which should generally reflect the feelings of a grateful and grieving nation.
Is it true, she herself had expressed the hope to have a state funeral?
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
I think history will see Margaret Thatcher as one of the towering figures of the 20th century, one who accomplished great things. (All towering figures, I suspect, have serious flaws - it goes with having that kind of personality.)
She's one of the three individuals - the others being Ronald Reagan (for whom I never voted) and Pope John II (ditto) - who are principally responsible for bringing down the Iron Curtain. The 98% top income tax rate was just obscene. Living within one's means is generally accounted a good thing. And, yes, I cheered as the Empire Struck Back in the Falklands.
I agree with Mr. Oborn as to her divisiveness; she shouldn't have a state funeral. She certainly deserves burial in the Abbey, though, and the honors that accompany that.
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
Bury her in the Falklands and let them give her a state funeral.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus
I think the only non-partisan way of assessing a prime minister's effectiveness is the degree to which they managed to put their ideals into practice.
I don't agree. I think that's a very bad measure. It's assessing a person on how well they achieve their own self-estimation, rather than how well they actually do their job in the public interest. I don't want a person who becomes prime minister or any other leadership role - this goes for the church as well - so as to fulfill their own dream and impose it on the rest of us.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
I agree with Mr. Oborn as to her divisiveness; she shouldn't have a state funeral. She certainly deserves burial in the Abbey, though, and the honors that accompany that. [/QB]
I don't think there is room in the Abbey. To my knowledge, none of the recent Royals who passed away are buried in the Abbey.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus
I think the only non-partisan way of assessing a prime minister's effectiveness is the degree to which they managed to put their ideals into practice.
I don't agree. I think that's a very bad measure. It's assessing a person on how well they achieve their own self-estimation, rather than how well they actually do their job in the public interest. I don't want a person who becomes prime minister or any other leadership role - this goes for the church as well - so as to fulfill their own dream and impose it on the rest of us.
I see your point, but I did say it was the most non-partisan approach, rather than the best approach.
If it was up to me I would score Thatcher very poorly for having massively increased social divisions and unemployment. But a hard-bitten Tory might consider that a price worth paying for the reforms she did push through. I don't think you can adjudicate on whether my criteria or the putative Tory's criteria are better without taking sides politically, and a state funeral is supposed to be apolitical.
I would dispute these points:
As for "in their own self-estimation", rather, it's the estimation of the party Thatcher represented.
As for "imposed on the rest of us", "the rest of us" supposedly voted for Thatcher*. If Thatcher wasn't representative of us, that's the fault of our electoral system.
* Disclaimer: I didn't, I was born in 1986.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Churchill, Lloyd George, Gladstone, Pitt the Younger and Walpole and possibly Disraeli, Peel and Pitt the Elder strike me as the only ones that are even runners for Firsts. Even Palmerston is a bit of a question mark as his main achievements were not as PM.
Lower Second is the default class. Most PMs, Heath, Wilson, Callaghan, Major etc get a Lower Second. The seriously mediocre ones get a Third, or perhaps in Eden's case an Aegrotat. There's only three from the C20 who I'd put in that category.
It's too early to say whether Blair makes Upper Second or not - though I think Iraq means no - and whether Brown is Lower Second or Third.
Interesting to speculatd on how future historians will look on our recent prime ministers. My guess is that Wilson's reputation will probably go up quite a lot and Thatcher's down a bit with the long view of history, but its only a guess.
Blair is of course one of the four or five greatest Prime Ministers of the Twentieth Century. Its just a pity his career dragged in into the Twenty-First. Three or four brilliant years are all but obscured by five or six shite ones. His reputation would stand much higher now if his Labour colleagues had the guts that Tories always show when its time to throw the previous captain overboard, and shafted him the way the Tories shafted Thatcher when she became a liability.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rossweisse:
She's one of the three individuals - the others being Ronald Reagan (for whom I never voted) and Pope John II (ditto) - who are principally responsible for bringing down the Iron Curtain.
I may be exposing my ignorance, but how did Thatcher help bring down the Iron Curtain? I do know she was opposed to German reunification.
(And why does Thatcher get more credit than, say, Lech Wałęsa or Václav Havel?)
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Darllenwr
Shipmate
# 14520
|
Posted
I would be dubious of giving Lady T. a State Funeral, on the grounds of precedent. Granting Churchill a State Funeral was, I believe, considered exceptional. I doubt that one could call Lady T. 'exceptional'. 'Exceptionable' may be.
My point is, if a State Funeral is granted to Lady T, where does one draw the line? John Major? Gordon Brown? I would have thought it potentially opens up a huge can of worms.
--------------------
If I've told you once, I've told you a million times: I do not exaggerate!
Posts: 1101 | From: The catbox | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Indeed. Mind you, it does say something about the old bat that we're even having this conversation. I can't imagine a similar one being held about any other PM in the last 40-odd years.
And Rossweisse- it's alright to go on about her bringing down the Iron Curtain, but you didn't have to live with her. It was bloody awful. Only good thing about it was that she was an enemy worth having: at least, unlike call-me-Dave, she wasn't always trying to suck up to you by pretending to be your mate.
[ 22. December 2011, 19:16: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Darllenwr
Shipmate
# 14520
|
Posted
Well, I guess she did more to polarise opinion than any other PM in the period you mention...
--------------------
If I've told you once, I've told you a million times: I do not exaggerate!
Posts: 1101 | From: The catbox | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
, or perhaps in Eden's case an Aegrotat.
I like that- exactly right, I think. Maybe Bonar Law too?
Always glad for a nod to the Canadian! ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
And invite the people of Argentina dance on her grave.
I may be wrong, but I'm getting a vibe here that leo's not that keen on Baroness Thatcher?!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Pierre Trudeau in Canada got a State Funeral; in Canada that means lying in state in the Hall of Honour in the Centre Block of Parliament Hill, your casket is draped in the flag and you get a Guard of Honour from the military or the RCMP (the Mounties use military ceremonial and have the status of a regiment of Dragoons).
Trudeau was divisive but he was Prime Minister for 16 years, including the 1980 Quebec Referendum and the 1982 Patriation of the Constitution.
Jack Layton, the recently deceased Leader of HM Loyal Opposition also got a State Funeral. I'm a member of his party but aside from the RCMP escort and lying in state in Parliament it really wasn't a State Funeral. It was fun but after some of the eulogists I think they are going to tighten up on the State Funeral rules.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
Wikipedia has an article on state funerals in the U.K. According to it, Disraeli has offered a state funeral but declined it in his will. Florence Nightingale was offered a state funeral but her family declined it. Would Thatcher's family want such a funeral?
The decision involved is obviously being made long before the historians of the future have made their decisions about Thatcher's worth. A couple of prime ministers in the 1800s were given state funerals; does it seem fair to second-guess those decisions now?
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
We're liberaler with state funerals here. I think all recently deceased presidents have gotten one. Gerald Ford got his, as did Ronald Reagan
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ondergard
Shipmate
# 9324
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
She was the leader of your government for a pretty formative period.
You got that one wrong, Yank. She wasn't the leader of MY government. She was the leader of HER MAJESTY'S Government, and even at her most popular she never commanded the majority of the votes cast in any election, so even in that sense she wasn't the leader of MY government either.
I didn't vote for her, and never would, and neither would I ever vote for any member of the political party she represented, which I consider to be inherently selfish, greedy, divisive, and fundamentally non-Christian. As was Thatcher.
Posts: 276 | From: Essex | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
We're liberaler with state funerals here. I think all recently deceased presidents have gotten one. Gerald Ford got his, as did Ronald Reagan
Zach
But they are your equivalent of royalty,zach...
And the Falklands should have been settled by negotiation, as John Paul II wanted. (He nearly cancelled his GB visit because of the Falklands War.)
Of course she shouldn't have a state funeral.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
We're liberaler with state funerals here. I think all recently deceased presidents have gotten one. Gerald Ford got his, as did Ronald Reagan
Zach
AIUI, American presidents (however partisan their politics may be) have always been perceived as representing the whole nation in a way that British prime ministers never are. Though I am not a royalist, I don't object to the Queen or any monarch being given a state funeral: as Head of State (however undemocratically chosen) they have a representative role. A prime minister is elected by his/her own political party in order to implement the particular politics of that party.
That's why a state funeral for Churchill makes some sense; it wasn't because he was a great prime minister (he wasn't, in peacetime). But he was an effective war leader who led a more or less united nation to victory, and as such represented the nation in a way unlike any other PM before or since.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
Enoch, I think Attlee deserves a bit better than an upper second.
And one of his famous quotes is most apt for the ship:
quote:
Democracy means government by discussion, but it is only effective if you can stop people talking.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
And the Falklands should have been settled by negotiation, as John Paul II wanted. (He nearly cancelled his GB visit because of the Falklands War.)
Interesting. Is there any evidence that further negotiations would have resulted in an Argentine withdrawal?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
We're liberaler with state funerals here. I think all recently deceased presidents have gotten one. Gerald Ford got his, as did Ronald Reagan
And Britain has state funerals for its heads of state. What we're discussing exceptions to that rule: is the US "liberaler" in that regard? From a glance at Wikipedia, it seems there have been five state funerals for non-presidents (all but one for either Unknown Soldiers or Generals-of-the-Army), half the number of non-sovereigns buried in British state funerals (though two were before the American Revolution).
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
A prime minister is elected by his/her own political party in order to implement the particular politics of that party.
Angloid, I thoroughly disagree with that view, even though widely held, especially by political parties. It has inflicted a lot of pain and bad government on our country over the last two generations.
A party leader is elected by a political party to lead that party.
Once a party is in a position to form a government, it's a lot healthier if we take the line that their duty is to govern in the interests of the country as a whole. They are answerable to the Queen. They are her administration, not their own. Through her they are answerable to the rest of us. They are also answerable to God whether they believe in him or not. Once one looks at it that way, it is straightforward that they are not just answerable to their party faithful to exploit their position to impose their party twaddle on the poor dumb electorate - particularly not if they only have 36% of the vote like the previous administration, or if they haven't got a majority at all, like either part of the present one.
Though I admit that's a tangent as against my OP.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
If you're going to have a state funeral, I would say 90% of the population have to revere the person in question. If you even have to discuss whether to do it or not, the answer is "no". Accordingly, the very fact that there is a thread on the topic is enough for me to advise against her having the honour.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldie
Apprentice
# 9478
|
Posted
Thatcher should have a memorial service as Harold Wilson had. Her funeral should be private; that's all that need be said
Posts: 1 | From: West Sussex | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
According to this OpEd piece in the Guardian , her funeral should be totally run by private enterprise.
Quoting from the proposition that is available online:
quote:
"In keeping with the great lady's legacy, Margaret Thatcher's state funeral should be funded and managed by the private sector to offer the best value and choice for end users and other stakeholders. The undersigned believe that the legacy of the former PM deserves nothing less and that offering this unique opportunity is an ideal way to cut government expense and further prove the merits of liberalised economics Baroness Thatcher spearheaded."
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
A prime minister is elected by his/her own political party in order to implement the particular politics of that party.
Angloid, I thoroughly disagree with that view, even though widely held, especially by political parties. It has inflicted a lot of pain and bad government on our country over the last two generations.
Enoch, I totally agree with you. My statement is just describing the de facto situation.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Interesting. Is there any evidence that further negotiations would have resulted in an Argentine withdrawal?
I dare say I would be rather more excitable over an honest to goodness invasion m'self. But I am an excitable sort.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fradgan
Apprentice
# 16455
|
Posted
Give her a State funeral, if for no other reason than that she showed more courage and foresight than any other British pol in my memory. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
"From the moment I picked your book up until I laid it down, I was convulsed with laughter. Someday I intend reading it." - Groucho Marx
Posts: 37 | From: San Gabriel | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
