Did Thatcher make Britain a more selfish country?

It is a curious irony that, with the death of Margaret Thatcher and the release of Ken Loach’s The Spirit of ’45, the two great ideological consensuses of the 20th century should return to sharp focus at the same time.

It is a curious irony that, with the death of Margaret Thatcher and the release of Ken Loach’s The Spirit of ’45, the two great ideological consensuses of the 20th century should return to sharp focus at the same time.

Both ideologies emerged from a country in ruins. One, a spirit of unity, solidarity and class consciousness sewed together a nation torn asunder by war. The other, a state-sponsored sense of competition, aggressive individualism and personal gain tore apart working class communities and threw them to the winds: some soared, others fell.

Contrasting the almost polar opposites of the post-war and Thatcherite consensuses, it might lead one to conclude that Thatcher – in selling off council houses, crushing the unions, destroying traditional working class communities and privatising the economy – made Britain a fundamentally more selfish place.

A place of aspiration, yes, but one where people stood on each others’ shoulders not to reach higher together, but to trample their neighbours into the dirt for one more rung up the ladder.

Complex legacy

I was surprised by the reaction of some traditionally working class school friends of mine to Thatcher’s death.

“I think we have too many foreigners and it was a hell of a lot lower when she was in power,” said one. “I also think we have a major problem with benefit scrounges. What’s wrong in working hard for what you want and need? Why should things be given on a plate or easy to acquire? Why shouldn’t the people who work harder have more?”

My friend went on to say that Thatcher should not be hated for introducing the poll tax because council tax is even more unfair – making those who are better off pay more. Meanwhile, she displayed little sympathy for those who had come from an even more disadvantaged background, buying into the tabloid myth of mass benefit scroungers.

“I come from nothing but have worked my arse off to get something for myself,” she said. “Why should I be punished for that? We have a benefit culture because Labour made it so easy for people to sit on their fat lazy arses and still have a decent wage.”

Whilst built on misconceptions, this argument is hardly uncommon and is typical of the post-Thatcher line that the Sun and the Daily Mail push every day, encouraging working class people to look not to the banks which caused the financial catastrophe or big corporations dodging taxes, but to blame those more vulnerable than themselves, such as benefit claimants and immigrants.

Encouragement for progressives

But has Thatcher really succeeded in making Britain a more selfish place? Not so according to a YouGov-Cambridge poll, which shows Britons continue to favour state responsibility over individualism.

The poll finds that 52 per cent of British people think it is the government’s responsibility to redistribute income, while 78 per cent think it is the government’s job to ensure equal opportunities.

The evidence would seem to suggest that while traditional working class communities may have been broken down, Britain has not emerged into the 21st century a fundamentally selfish country.

In an age of welfare cuts being sold to the country on the basis of tackling a grossly exaggerated “something for nothing culture”, this poll should be encouraging to the left.

On this evidence, Ed Miliband should feel emboldened to be more strident in his opposition to Tory cuts, in shifting the political centre to the left, and burying the Thatcherite consensus. Labour has so far been timid in taking the government to task on austerity, particularly by abstaining on workfare.

Reading between the lines of his speech in Parliament on Thatcher’s legacy – surely as much about himself as it was about the former Conservative Prime Minister – suggests he would like to see himself as a conviction politician breaking the mould.

Now is the time to be bold. Now is the time for him to build a new post-Thatcherite consensus around cooperation, for a Britain of solidarity, not selfishness.

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

3 Responses to “Did Thatcher make Britain a more selfish country?”

  1. cymraesbach

    Just one word -yes

  2. Sparky

    Let us cast our minds back to the 1970s under Labour. The electricians were on strike, and the miners, and the gravediggers, and the hospital porters, and the ambulance drivers, and the refuse collectors and the train drivers, and on and on the list goes. Those groups werent striking for the good of society, they wanted more money. Self interest, pure and simple. It is a left wing invention that Thatcher caused a selfish society. It was already selfish. But the difference was that Thatcher ended once and for the ability of union barons to hold society to ransom.

  3. Sparky

    And imagine the looks on the union barons faces when they were told they were no longer invited to No 10 for beer and sandwiches and incomes policies. When they no longer able to dictate how the country was run and hold the public to ransom for the rights of their members. Brilliant. That the misery of their outdated socialist ideas was slowly being erased and consigned to history. Whilst capitalism isnt perfect its lifted more people out of poverty than socialism ever did, or could.

Comments are closed.