In deference to our Open Thread on Saturday, Monckton submitted this for WUWT readers. It is insightful and worth a read IMHO – Anthony
By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, courtesy of wnd.com
It will be from Heaven that Margaret Thatcher, the greatest friend the United States ever had, will observe the now-inescapable disintegration of the dismal European tyranny-by-clerk whose failure she foresaw even as it brought her down.
Margaret was unique: a fierce champion of people against government, taxpayers against bureaucrats, workers against unions, us against Them, free markets against state control, privatization against nationalization, liberty against socialism, democracy against Communism, prosperity against national bankruptcy, law against international terrorism, independence against global governance; a visionary among pygmies; a doer among dreamers; a statesman among politicians; a destroyer of tyrannies from arrogant Argentina via incursive Iraq to the savage Soviet Union.
It is a measure of the myopia and ingratitude of her Parliamentary colleagues that, when she famously said “No, no, no!” at the despatch-box in response to a scheming proposal by the unelected arch-Kommissar of Brussels that the European Parliament of Eunuchs should supplant national Parliaments and that the hidden cabal of faceless Kommissars should become Europe’s supreme government and the fumbling European Council its senile senate, they ejected her from office and, in so doing, resumed the sad, comfortable decline of the nation that she had briefly and gloriously made great again.
Never did she forget the special relationship that has long and happily united the Old Country to the New. She shared the noble ambition of your great President, Ronald Reagan, that throughout the world all should have the chance to live the life, enjoy the liberty, and celebrate the happiness that your Founding Fathers had bequeathed to you in their last Will and Testament, the Constitution of the United States. I know that my many friends in your athletic democracy will mourn her with as heartfelt a sense of loss as my own.
The sonorous eulogies and glittering panegyrics will be spoken by others greater than I. But I, who had the honor to serve as one of her six policy advisors at the height of her premiership, will affectionately remember her and her late husband, Denis, not only for all that they did but for all that they were; not only for the great acts of State but for the little human kindnesses to which they devoted no less thought and energy.
When Britain’s greatest postwar Prime Minister was fighting a losing battle for her political life, I wrote her a letter urging her to fight on against the moaning Minnies who had encircled her. Within the day, though she was struggling to govern her country while parrying her party, she wrote back to me in her own hand, to say how grateful she was that I had written and to promise that if she could carry on she would.
I had neither expected nor deserved a reply: but that master of the unexpected gave me the undeserved. For no small part of her success lay in the unfailing loyalty she inspired in those to whom she was so unfailingly loyal.
Margaret savored her Soviet soubriquet “the Iron Lady”, and always remained conscious that, as Britain’s first woman Prime Minister, she must be seen to be tough enough to do the job – the only man in the Cabinet.
It was said of her that at a Cabinet dinner the waiter asked her what she would like to eat. She replied, “I’ll have the steak.”
“And the vegetables?”
“They’ll have the steak too.”
Yet her reputation for never listening was entirely unfounded. When she was given unwelcome advice, she would say in the plainest terms exactly what she thought of it. But then she would always pause. The advisor had two choices: to cut and run in the face of the onslaught, in which event she would have little respect for him, or to stand his ground and argue his case.
If the advisor was well briefed and had responded well to her first salvo of sharply-directed questions, she would say, “I want to hear more about this, dear.” She would tiptoe archly to the bookcase in the study and reach behind a tome for a bottle of indifferent whisky and two cut-glass tumblers.
At my last official meeting with her, scheduled as a ten-minute farewell, I asked if I could give her one last fourpence-worth of advice. She agreed, but bristled when I told her what I had been working on. “Don’t be so silly, dear! You know perfectly well that I can’t possibly agree to that.” Then, as always, she paused. I stood my ground. A salvo of questions. Out came the whisky from behind the bookshelf. I was still there an hour and a half later.
The following year, during her third general election, I told the story in the London Evening Standard. Within an hour of the paper hitting the streets, a message of thanks came from her office. Unfailing loyalty again. She won by a 100-seat majority.
To the last, her political instinct never left her. One afternoon, Sir Ronald Millar, the colorful playwright who wrote her speeches, took her onstage at the Haymarket Theater, which he owned. She gazed up at the rows of seats, turned to Ronnie and said, “What a wonderful place for a political rally!”
During the long speech-writing sessions that preceded every major speech, Ronnie would suggest a phrase and Margaret would rearrange it several times. Every so often, she would dart across to Denis, sitting nearby with a gin and tonic. She would try the line out on him. If he did not like it, he would drawl, “No, no – that won’t fly!”
A couple of years ago her “kitchen cabinet” invited her to dinner. For two hours she was her vigorous old self. I sat opposite her. Late in the evening, I saw she was tiring and gave her a thumbs-up. Instantly she revived, smiled radiantly, and returned the gesture – using both thumbs.
It was not hard to see why Margaret and Denis Thatcher were the most popular couple among the old stagers working at 10 Downing Street since the Macmillans. Now they are reunited; and I pray, in the words of St. Thomas More, that they may be merry in Heaven. They have both earned it. Let her be given a State Funeral. Nothing less will do.
Peter Hannan says:
April 14, 2013 at 2:49 am
Statement of interest: my maternal grandfather was a miner in South Wales, and my posture about miners anywhere is that I support them, be they right or wrong.
Should I take it than that you support throwing concrete blocks off bridges and killing taxi drivers? That actually happened during the miners strike, and in South Wales too. Just Google David Wilkie.
Stephen Wilde says:
April 14, 2013 at 12:27 am
Just take the cost from the contributions to the EU that she saved us.
—————————————————————-
She’d saved us a damned sight more if she had got us the hell out instead of signing the Single European Act.
OK, ‘artwest’ and others, somebody has to do it. Please read this and tell me what part of it you disagree with.
Society
23.9.87
M Thatcher, Woman’s Own
I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand”I have a problem, it is the Government’s job to cope with it!” or”I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!” “I am homeless, the Government must house me!” and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations, because there is no such thing as an entitlement unless someone has first met an obligation and it is, I think, one of the tragedies in which many of the benefits we give, which were meant to reassure people that if they were sick or ill there was a safety net and there was help, that many of the benefits which were meant to help people who were unfortunate ” It is all right. We joined together and we have these insurance schemes to look after it” . That was the objective, but somehow there are some people who have been manipulating the system and so some of those help and benefits that were meant to say to people:”All right, if you cannot get a job, you shall have a basic standard of living!” but when people come and say:”But what is the point of working? I can get as much on the dole!” You say:”Look” It is not from the dole. It is your neighbour who is supplying it and if you can earn your own living then really you have a duty to do it and you will feel very much better!
I agree with the contribution of C. Monckton, however part of that legacy as quoted below from Communication from the (EU) commission to the EU parliament (march 2013), is seen to be still deep rooted with our non-elected rulers in brussels.
“The first decade of the 21st century was the warmest on record and the summer of 2012
witnessed the unprecedented melting of Arctic sea ice. Extreme weather events witnessed
during 2012, such as the extreme drought and wildfires in Southern Europe and the US,
followed by unprecedented storms and flooding inparts of Asia, the Caribbean and North
America, although not individuallyattributable to climate change, are consistent with science
projecting that their frequency and impact will increase as our climate changes further. Even
as the global economic growth slowed, human-induced emissions of the greenhouse gases
(GHGs) that cause global warmingcontinue to rise dramatically.Although the science of climate change is clearand the impacts are increasingly visible,actions to address climate change continue to fall far short of what is needed. The most recentUNEP “gap report” shows that countries’ unconditional pledges to reduce GHG emissions, iffully implemented, will deliver no more than onethird of what is needed by 2020 to prevent a dangerous 2º C rise in global mean temperature above pre-industriallevels. “
No great statesman is so divisive. Thatcher was more than that. She introduced the UK to the governmental equivalent of knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing. I can’t imagine how a country so steeped in austerity as its current conservative prime minister insists (“we”re all in this together”) can find £8,000,000 in loose change to bury someone who has more wealth than this on her own. She never wanted the State to pay for anything when she was alive.
Privatise her funeral and may the cheapest bidder win. It’s what she would have wanted.
And the problem with all the current parties?
They know the cost of nothing.
1,2 trillion in borrowing
5.3 trillion in pensions debts
0.4 trillion in PFI
0.1 trillion in nuclear decommissioning
….
7 trillion in debts
0.55 trillion in tax
07 trillion spending.
Very simply, what ever you value, you won’t get.
Mr Green Genes says:
April 14, 2013 at 3:59 am
Peter Hannan says:
April 14, 2013 at 2:49 am
Statement of interest: my maternal grandfather was a miner in South Wales, and my posture about miners anywhere is that I support them, be they right or wrong.
Should I take it than that you support throwing concrete blocks off bridges and killing taxi drivers? That actually happened during the miners strike, and in South Wales too. Just Google David Wilkie.
Indeed Mr Green Genes. A good point, as well as the police who beat peacefully demonstrating miners half to death and paid off mortgages with the enhanced payments for such work. Thatcher not only succeeded in dividing society and decimating communities in the pursuit of political goals, she also drove us closer to civil war than any other ruler since Charles the first. There were bad actions on both sides, but it was the communities and citizens of the UK who suffered in the long term. By the way we are eternally grateful to her in Wales, without her premiership Wales, Scotland and Ireland would never have voted for devolution from England. We should put up a statue to her in the Welsh Government building.
Jeef says:
April 14, 2013 at 4:06 am
No great statesman is so divisive. Thatcher was more than that. She introduced the UK to the governmental equivalent of knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing. I can’t imagine how a country so steeped in austerity as its current conservative prime minister insists (“we”re all in this together”) can find £8,000,000 in loose change to bury someone who has more wealth than this on her own. She never wanted the State to pay for anything when she was alive.
Privatise her funeral and may the cheapest bidder win. It’s what she would have wanted.
Can I also suggest the service is broadcast on pay to view television only?
“Gareth Phillips says:
April 14, 2013 at 4:08 am
Can I also suggest the service is broadcast on pay to view television only?”
There is no such thing as free TV, anywhere. For the BBC, you have the license fee. For ITV etc, you pay through product purchases advertised on commercial TV.
SamG. Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to think state control, is beneficial both to the individual and the population as a whole as opposed to countries with free market economies. I think the opposite. Can you please name a country that has nationalised industries and state control of all aspects of life that has a better standard of living than say the USA or UK?
Wow, keeping the politics off this site??? Really?? Surely, one only needs to read “one” AGW post, “scientific” “report”, “consensus” building IPCC drivel study, to understand that “this” issue is not about science and totally about “politics” and how much can “we the people” be snookered from our lifelong savings…..
The politics and the science and the divisions matter little in this case. The World has lost a great mind. Such minds are rare and one can do worse than study them carefully, to learn and to be wiser. That is what matters, little vegetables.
Gareth Phillips says:
April 14, 2013 at 4:08 am
“Privatise her funeral and may the cheapest bidder win. It’s what she would have wanted.”
You liked the economic system that preceded her better? The strike of the undertakers?
Come on, weasel yourself out of that…
As the science of AGW has political, financial and religious corollaries it seems fair to debate them occasionally. I find points on both sides to agree with in this thread. Two terms of not more than 4 years is the maximum any leader can rule without getting ideas of infallibility.
In the 1980’s Margaret Thatcher initially fell for the Global Warming scare. However, she fairly quickly saw through it and latterly was a fierce critic of the scams and scares and bogus science that has led to the current pseudo-sociialsist anti-capitalist secular religion wrapped up in greenery (watermelons). She called the warmist ‘doomsters’, and as the only ever Brisitsh Prime Minister to hold a science degree she questioned the notion that CO2 was the prime forcer of climate. Even better she mocked Al Gore. She was the Iron Lady and on key issues was ‘Not for Turning’, but she knew how to think and when she saw through a scam, like the Global Warming scare, she had the wit, intelligence, and humility to change her mind. A TRULY GREAT lady; not just a politicial but a very great statesman and human being. May she rest in peace.
By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, courtesy of wnd.com: “But I, who had the honor to serve as one of her six policy advisors at the height of her premiership, … she wrote back to me in her own hand, to say how grateful she was that I had written and to promise that if she could carry on she would … At my last official meeting with her,… I told the story in the London Evening Standard. Within an hour of the paper hitting the streets, a message of thanks came from her office … A couple of years ago her “kitchen cabinet” invited her to dinner. For two hours she was her vigorous old self. I sat opposite her. Late in the evening, I saw she was tiring and gave her a thumbs-up. Instantly she revived, smiled radiantly, and returned the gesture – using both thumbs … “
==========================================================
I will believe all that when I see the evidence.
Confusing Climate Scepticism with Right Wing politics seems to be WUWT’s preferred method of foot-shooting.
Verity Jones says:
April 14, 2013 at 4:19 am
@gareth Phillips 2013/04/14 at 12:42 am
You might be surprised by the actual figures re coal mine closure:
“…the facts show that far more coal mines closed under the Labour Prime Ministers Harold Wilson and James Callaghan.”
Thanks Verity, I fully believe that. The difference being that they closed the smaller or inefficient mines, Thatcher closed the lot and started to import coal from as far away as Poland. People who bought up the mines such as Tower Colliery found them to be profitable which leads me to believe the closures were carried out at least in part for political ends. Of course if she had made some sort of alternate investment in these mining communities things may not have been so catastrophic, but as it was, it was a case of every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost. If you or I were part of a mining community we may have fought for our family, jobs and future, after all, what else did these communities have?
DirkH says:
April 14, 2013 at 4:17 am
Gareth Phillips says:
April 14, 2013 at 4:08 am
“Privatise her funeral and may the cheapest bidder win. It’s what she would have wanted.”
You liked the economic system that preceded her better? The strike of the undertakers?
Come on, weasel yourself out of that…
Easy DirkH, I did not write that particular line, it was in my quote., it was written by Jeef, As in politics, check your facts before posting. Cheers G
> And this is the problem with this thread, Anthony, we are now discussing party politics instead of the Climate Scam.
In case you haven’t noticed, the Climate Scam is laced with party politics. Look on the bright side, at least we’re discussing someone involved in fundamental changes in the world instead of Lady Gaga or Honey Boo-boo.
Gareth Phillips
“…it is immoral to say the least. Margaret Thatcher was an important politician who’s influence “
Small point: the apostrophe here is an abbreviation for ‘who is’ or maybe ‘who has’. You meant to write ‘whose’.
“If you or I were part of a mining community we may have fought for our family, jobs and future, after all, what else did these communities have?”
You would have received far more consideration if you had not kept disrupting the supply with the avowed intent of bringing down the elected government.
The final Scargill induced strike was arranged without a ballot and did not have majority support even amongst the miners.
Thatcher was forced into a defensive position and had little choice. Fortunately she knew what to expect from Scargill and had prepared well for it.
If the miners had restrained Scargill’s purely political agenda then any necessary further shrinkage of the coal industry could have been managed with adequate support for the communities and individuals affected.
You let Scargill destroy your communities in a stupid political escapade.
andrewmharding
I’m flummoxed. How did you conclude that this was my position?
Please read my post again, particularly the article.
There is no free-market system anywhere; not in Britain, the U.S or Australia. These are democratic socialist countries. Ironically, China’s communism is more free market; Sweden’s democratic socialism is tempered with more market freedom. Conservatives are not free market/small government types. They are the enemy of individuals and protectors of monopoly, banking oligarchs and war profiteers. Conservatives push entitlements like drug dealers to hopelessly addicted junkies of confiscated wealth.
Reagan and Thatcher, to this day, are poster children of the mythical “free market”, “fiscal conservative” It’s a not only a lie, but damages the plight of those against illegitimate power and pro-market, where accountability reigns and losses aren’t socialised.
King of Cool:
At April 14, 2013 at 2:58 am you say
I have seen nothing which could justify such an offensive and disgraceful insult to Anthony Watts.
Richard
When the rich good samaritan saw what Scargill was doing to the mining industry, the rich good samaritan would have helped the victims as well as defeating the evil Scargill.
The vitriol of the left will never cease to amaze me,
As for those “suggesting” that politics be left out of Anthony’s blog, get real. if you haven’t figured out that AGW is a political issue………………………………….