Thatcher and the Scots

Honest Tom

At the Start
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
1,272
Couldn't believe they never mentioned the introduction of the heating allowance for pensioners which was initially only introduced in England because "the Scots were used to the cold".

PS Not sure if this programme was only shown on STV last night or on the or entire ITV network. Can someone confirm. It was certainly a good illustration of why the woman is so hated up here.
 
Last edited:
I think ITV put that programme on just to annoy the Scots. I don't think it went out in the other regions (sorry, should that be countries?).
 
Surely the question is did she do it? the answer is yes. She said it. I'm afraid its that staright forward. She was (and still is) a disgrace of a PM, and her treatment of the Scots nothing short of a national humiliation
 
Thatchr saw the scots as whingers who harbour grievances and slights for decades and never let go

cant think why...
 
Ever heard of the Highland Clearances, Clive?

Well strictly speaking if you take it back to 1746 you could just as easily argue that the clearances were as much about Scots fighting Scots. Certainly there was no shortage of Scots fighting for the English army at Culloden. It's a fascinating piece of history as it is very much laced with the 'what if' question. If the Jacobites hadn't turned round at Derby, if they hadn't decided to fight on Drumoise Moor, if they hadn't got pinned down in a snow storm the night previous and been able to ambush the English. Perhaps Edinburgh would be the seat of UK government and the South East of England would be the disenfranchised and deprived region of the peripheray
 
She should be burnt at the stake...... horrible woman for what she done to this country, [re manufacturing base and mines then gets coal all imported via a new shipping pontoon at Avonmouth docks ] I would personally pizz over her if she fell down in front of me.................lets hope she's not given a state funeral when she pegs it........????
 
Perhaps Edinburgh would be the seat of UK government and the South East of England would be the disenfranchised and deprived region of the peripheray

Hardly think so given that london was already established as a centre of commerce and that the tradition of stong enterprise (rather than subsidy..) was established. Also geographically london was perfectly placed and the climate somewhat more attractive... new Yorks prosperity is not down to the centre of goverment being there is it? Nor is Hamburg's or Milans

The idea that the SE would be deprived if it wasnt for right wing goverments is surely not a serious one of course
 
Hopefully Scotland will soon be a full member of the EU then it won't be long before we'll be turning back the English boat people at Ardrossan (IMO).
 
A moments silence for Alan Walters, who arguably succeeded Edward Longshanks in the role of 'hammer of the Scots,' who died yesterday.
 
A moments silence for Alan Walters, who arguably succeeded Edward Longshanks in the role of 'hammer of the Scots,' who died yesterday.

He was unlucky with his forcast that the Euro would collapse. He just got the currency wrong.
 
So apart from the usual paranoia and chippiness (lets put it politely...) is anyone going to explain quite how Scotalnd was so hard done by under Tahtcher?

She didnt repeal the overrepresntation in Parliament

That disgraceful "formula" for goverment spending in scotland remained in place

The bankrupt and oversubsidised industries were run down at no more or less of a pace than elsewhere in the UK (Ravenscraig is used as an economic model for dim subsidy and pork barrel politics)

There was the (applaing) poll tax. But we all got that

She might not have liked you as a people, but John smith was well known the be extremely anglophobic (not that such prejudice is right). I suspect it was more that she didnt like the politics and resistance to progress myself....

No doubt someone will come back with a list of minor grievances but the wider picture is clear.

And the point "that we didnt vote for her" can only be made by the seriously dim of course. Basic understanding of democracy would be required first
 
Clivex, I have spent a long time studying electoral systems and I'm afraid I am still seriously dim. It sounds like you might be able to help in relation to the UK FPP version in Parliamentary elections.

For example in 1979, the year Thatcher became PM, the Tories got 43% of the popular vote and 54% of the seats. Labour did proportionatley better with 36%/40%. Yet the Liberals got 14% of the popular vote and 1.5% of the representation. In 1983 she was returned with 59% of the seats for 42% of the vote. Labour overachieved again with 27% of the votes and 31% of the seats. That year the Alliance got, now read this carefully, 3.4% of the representation for 26% of the vote.

Can you unfurl your basic understanding of democracy to explain the fairness of this to me.

Humbly, AC.
 
Last edited:
Well strictly speaking if you take it back to 1746 you could just as easily argue that the clearances were as much about Scots fighting Scots ...

No quibble with that, Warbler. It was a real mish-mash of nationalities (an Italian prince (4th generation Scottish descent), French, Irish, Highland Scots, Lowland Scots and English) involved in that, but mostly due to political and religious sympathies.

I'm related to the family that owned Culloden House and who were actually on the side of the English parliament due to their political and - most important at the time - religious affinity. The aftermath of that battle is what has engendered much of the anti-English feeling, due to the treatment of the people of the Highlands and of the prisoners held by the English. Although I'm inclined to think it is not so much against the English themselves as against their government.

The Clearances were another matter, over 100 years later and purely for financial gain. The people were evicted from their homes, often with violence, to make way for sheep.

Societies were set up (one headed by Prince Albert) to "aid" those who wished to emigrate, which were, in some cases, turned into an elaborate scam whereby the people were forced to pay the very landlord who had evicted them, for the privilege of leaving their homes.

Other cases are recorded where the people were told that if their menfolk enlisted for the army, their homes would be safe. Once the men had gone, the elderly, women and children were evicted anyway.

While the evictions can be argued to have been ordered by Scottish aristocrats, the main culprit was a Yorkshireman married to a high-ranking Scottish lady, who carried the blame for betraying her clansmen.

People have long memories because in rural communities so many still have access to elder members of their families, who remember what their grandparents and great-grandparents have told them. I recall my great aunt (then aged 82) telling me in the 80's about the Dukes of Portland and Buccleuch recruiting amongst the men of Caithness for the First World War, appealing to their "sense of history" as "their loyal clansmen" - with very pursed lips, because she was too ladylike to spit!

PS - If you think the Scots have long memories, try the Irish!
 
an capall./..

i am no apologist for FPTP system...but you know that I am refering to the tired counter argument that " we didnt elect her"

The SE didnt elect Harold Wilson either..of course
 
Thatcher is hated because of her arrogance, mostly. I sometimes wonder whether certain members of her Cabinet advocated the enforcement of the Poll Tax to get rid of her? (It must have been bad to have caused a riot in self-satisfied little Cheltenham.)
 
PS Clive, are the English never paranoid or chippy? They seem to have become awfully careful about not offending their ethnic minorities these days (Scots and Welsh excluded, of course!). :p
 
I have just employed a scottish aquaintance for a month and terrific worker and great bloke ..even though i was concerned about his diet and the fact that he asked for a deep fried bounty and curry sauce at one of londons top fish restaurants

In truth, in london you barely bother where anyone is from. You cant and it matters not one bit of course... But nice to wind up sometimes

im not sure about the welsh though. They should stop that singing and dig up some coal
 
Back
Top