Margaret Thatcher is dead. Thatcher was not only the United Kingdom’s first female Prime Minister, but she was also the longest serving PM of the twentieth Century. As she passes on, it is important to turn our attention to her ongoing legacy; a legacy that is once again rearing its ugly head.
There are two parts of Margaret Thatcher’s legacy that I want to reflect on today.
Firstly, of course, is Thatcherism. As the ABC describes it:
“Thatcherism’s appeal was to the individual, its rhetoric was all about freedom and an end to class division, about less state control and more private enterprise, about smashing anything that believed in collective power, from trade unions to the Soviet bloc.”
Thatcher’s Chancellor of the Excheaquer, Nigel Lawson, describes Thatcherism in this way:
“Free markets, financial discipline, firm control over public expenditure, tax cuts, nationalism, ‘Victorian values’ (of the Samuel Smiles self-help variety), privatisation and a dash of populism.”
Played out in real terms, Thatcherism, along with Reaganism in the United States, and economic rationalism in Australia, saw the growth of neo-liberalism in modern economic thinking. Neo-liberalism turned to individuals and free market, working against any state involvement, and fighting directly against collectivism, and the union movement. It is difficult to cover everything Thatcher did to move in this direction, but some of her most famous moves included the crushing of the mining unions, the mass privatisation of state assets, cuts to welfare, the sell off of community housing, the implementation of the ‘poll tax’ (which implemented a minimum tax of 20% on all residents) and the famous move away from communitarianism; based in Thatcher’s own comments that “there is no such thing as a society.”
The consequences of these moves were clearly devastating. During Thatcher’s time, unemployment rose to new highs, with the term, “Maggie’s 3 Million” (relating to the 3 million unemployed) being termed. Thatcherism also brought with it a significant rise in poverty rates. Throughout her tenure, poverty rates in the United Kingdom doubled, whilst as she left office 28% of children were below the poverty line. The rise of neoliberalism has also brought with it a significant rise in income inequality. Research last year said that income inequality in the UK was the worst it had been for a 100 years. As professor Danny Dorling said:
“If we look back about 100 years, we can see that inequality in the UK did drop significantly in the 70 years from 1910-1979. More than half of that drop in inequality took place prior to 1939. Since 1979 these inequalities have risen dramatically and continue to rise.”
It is through the very continued existence of neoliberal policy that Thatcher will continue to have her influence. Neo-liberalist policy continued directly with the election of the Blair Labour Government (as Germaine Greer said last night, Blair was Thatcher’s best disciple), and the election of Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron in 2010 has seen Thatcherism rise even higher once again. After cutting public servants, welfare programs, and talks about reforming the NHS, recent months have seen an ever greater push of Thatcherism by the Cameron Government. This program has taken a much more controversial turn with a range of policies in recent months. The most well-known of these is the so called ‘bedroom tax’, or the Spare Room Subsidy, a program where anyone receiving housing benefit payments will have to move or pay a subsidy for each room they have vacant. A whole range of other policies are also being implemented, including cuts to relief for the poor from council taxes, the cut off of legal aid for civil cases, a cut in real terms of benefit payments for the poorest in society and the implementation of a total benefits cap, which is likely to force people who live in places with high property prices out of their homes. All of this will be topped off with the fact that at the same time those who make more than £150,000 a year will have their income tax cut. This is, at its heart, and individualist, Thatcherist, approach. And it means, as Billy Bragg commented, that Thatcherism is as strong as ever:
“The death of Margaret Thatcher is nothing more than a salient reminder of how Britain got into the mess that we are in today. Of why ordinary working people are no longer able to earn enough from one job to support a family; of why there is a shortage of decent affordable housing; of why domestic growth is driven by credit, not by real incomes; of why tax-payers are forced to top up wages; of why a spiteful government seeks to penalise the poor for having an extra bedroom; of why Rupert Murdoch became so powerful; of why cynicism and greed became the hallmarks of our society.”
And this is a legacy that we can see around the world. In Australia we’ve seen many attacks on the welfare recipients, the privatisation of assets both federally and at state levels, an increase in the demands of free trade and ongoing attacks on the union movement. These policies began in earnest with the Hawke and Keating Governments (who were around at the same time as Thatcher) and continued in full force with the election of John Howard. And whilst the current Federal Labor Government has taken a slower approach (providing some extra rights to unions, increasing some taxation on the wealthy etc), Thatcherism looks to be heavily reignited as Tony Abbott heads to the Lodge. As part of his plan abolish the mining tax, Abbott for example has already announced that he would reverse superannuation tax cuts to those in the lowest income brackets. He has also outlined a range of welfare policies, including continuing with welfare quarantining, stripping away unemployment benefits for people in areas where there are skill shortages and overhauling the disability pension. Abbott called his policy a ‘tough-love’ approach. He has also promised to dramatically cut public servant numbers, including abolishing a number of Government Departments, continue to privatise state assets (for example Medibank Private) and has recently announced new attacks on the right to strike. In many ways you can see Abbott’s Thatcherist approach in his speech to the IPA last week. Thatcherism is alive and well not only in the UK, but Australia as well.
The second, and rather interesting, legacy of Thatcher, is the impact she has had on feminism.
Thatcher was clearly no feminist, and she certainly didn’t believe in the collectivist activism that many in the feminist movement are fighting for. She was once quoted to say: “I hate feminism. It is a poison.” In that sense, the impact Thatcher had on feminism should be quite easy to understand; it should simply be a history of a fight against an anti-feminist.
However, in being one of the first conservative woman political leaders in the Western World (or possible the first leader of a major political party?) Thatcher opened up a real challenge for much of feminism. How do we critique her policies, whilst acknowledging that a woman has made it to the top? For many that challenge continues today, and it is a real impact of Thatcher’s legacy. We can see it in the reaction to her death, as many have tried to tread a fine line between criticising her, but also congratulating her for her ‘strength’ and ‘courage’ (why we should congratulate someone for having the strength to crush unions and the poor is beyond me).
But the legacy goes well beyond this. As this challenge rose, so did a strand of feminism, which focused its fights in board rooms and political offices. It is no coincidence that this strand of feminism focused, just like Thatcher, on the individual rather than the collective. Instead of challenging patriachal structures, it looks towards finding acceptance into it – allowing particular women to enter the elite. It’s the sort of feminism that thinks that even though she was violently anti-feminist, that the election of Margaret Thatcher was good for the cause. And the challenge of dealing with this continues today – the celebration of women making it to the top continues, despite the often anti-feminist approaches many of these women take (see for example Julia Gillard in Australia).
Thatcher is now gone. But her legacy, and the awful impacts it has had continues to live on. As she passes away therefore it is worth reflecting on her legacy, and looking at ways to reignite the fights against her ideology. Let us hope that it soon can join its architect.