Mrs T

I find the huge variety of opinions expressed about Margaret Thatcher very revealing - revealing of a nation not really at ease with itself, and in many ways divided. Some of the comments are hateful and ignorant. We forget that Mrs T and her government were democratically elected on three separate occasions, and so governed with permission, whatever anyone may think of her. Furthermore, she was a woman of great integrity, who passionately believed that what she was doing was for the good of the nation. Privately, she was known to be caring and sensitive while publicly she was often bullish and strident. Bishop David Sheppard said that he found facing her as nerve-wracking as batting against Australia's fastest bowlers!

Simon Walker in his trilogy The Undefended Leader, likens Margaret Thatcher to F.D. Roosevelt whose leadership he regards as an example of  'the Commanding Strategy' (Leading with Nothing to Lose pp.49-51). Roosevelt became President of the USA in 1933, just after the Great Depression, when the state of the economy was dire. Unemployment was at 25% and industrial output had fallen by more than 50% in just 4 years. Roosevelt's approach was highly interventionist - it had to be - as he had to determine a way forward which would bring hope, confidence and prosperity. Margaret Thatcher came to power in similar times for Britain in 1979. Something had to be done, as strikes paralysed enterprise and strangled the economy. She confronted the unions, as Roosevelt had previously done with a greedy private sector: in both cases, suggests Walker, it was like a new teacher putting his foot down with an unruly class of children, imposing order and demanding compliance with his rules.

The Commanding Strategy is not the only way of leadership, however, and if there is no discernment and no checks, it can lead to an abuse of power, becoming tyrannical. There are plenty of examples of that in history! Ultimately, it was Mrs Ts undoing: she seemed incapable of changing her style and her 'children' revolted - on the streets, because of the infamous poll tax, and in the Cabinet because of her treatment of colleagues. The same democracy which had given her power was also able to take it from her.

I wonder also whether the Falklands factor was particularly unhelpful in this sense: that it encouraged some Britons (inflamed by some sections of the media) to hark back to the glory days of Empire, and to forget that years ago we lost the desire to dominate and to fight. Which is partly why we have this confusion over Mrs Ts legacy. Some regard her as a 'great Briton'; while others see her as having ruined any sense of social cohesion.

The unfortunate thing is that political leaders since Mrs T seem to regard her as a role model, with their TINA (There is No Alternative) language. Although we are a nation in crisis - to some degree of our own making - the Commanding Strategy will not work, unless there is space for others to offer their opinions and work out their own solutions. 

In 1975, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Donald Coggan, issued his Call to the Nation. As I recall, he asked two questions (I cannot find the actual words):

• what kind of nation do we want to become?
• what kind of people should we be to become that nation?

He invited members of the public to write to him with their answers (one letter began 'Dear Chief Godperson'!) It seems to me we still don't know the answers.