注册 登录
滑铁卢中文论坛 返回首页

风萧萧的个人空间 http://www.shuicheng.ca/bbs/?61910 [收藏] [复制] [分享] [RSS]

日志

Margaret Thatcher, ‘Iron Lady’ Who Set Britain on New Course, Dies at 87

已有 1963 次阅读2017-8-13 15:36 |个人分类:英国



Margaret Thatcher, ‘Iron Lady’ Who Set Britain on New Course, Dies at 87

Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Margaret Thatcher, the first female prime minister of Britain, held the office for 11 years. More Photos »

Margaret Thatcher, the “Iron Lady” of British politics, who set her country on a rightward economic course, led it to victory in the Falklands war and helped guide the United States and the Soviet Union through the cold war’s difficult last years, died on Monday in London. She was 87.

Multimedia
Readers' Reactions
Chris Parkinson · Preston, England
She got the Falklands right. She got most of the rest: the industrial base and Europe, wrong. She was way too decisive.

Readers’ Comments

"She was right on a lot of things but deeply flawed on others. She changed Britain by ripping it apart. A great leader, maybe. An important one, undoubtedly."
chrisnorton66, Santa Barbara, California

Her spokesman, Tim Bell, said she died of a stroke at the Ritz Hotel. She had been in poor health for months and had suffered from dementia.

Prime Minister David Cameron cut short a visit to Continental Europe to return to Britain after receiving the news, and Queen Elizabeth II authorized a ceremonial funeral with military honors — a notch below a state funeral — at St. Paul’s Cathedral in London. A statement from the White House said that “the world has lost one of the great champions of freedom and liberty, and America has lost a true friend.”

Mrs. Thatcher was the first woman to become prime minister of Britain and the first to lead a major Western power in modern times. Hard-driving and hardheaded, she led her Conservative Party to three straight election wins and held office for 11 years — May 1979 to November 1990 — longer than any other British politician in the 20th century.

The strong economic medicine she administered to a country sickened by inflation, budget deficits and industrial unrest brought her wide swings in popularity, culminating with a revolt among her own cabinet ministers in her final year and her shout of “No! No! No!” in the House of Commons to any further integration with Europe.

But by the time she left office, the principles known as Thatcherism — the belief that economic freedom and individual liberty are interdependent, that personal responsibility and hard work are the only ways to national prosperity, and that the free-market democracies must stand firm against aggression — had won many disciples. Even some of her strongest critics accorded her a grudging respect.

At home, Mrs. Thatcher’s political successes were decisive. She broke the power of the labor unions and forced the Labour Party to abandon its commitment to nationalized industry, redefine the role of the welfare state and accept the importance of the free market.

Abroad, she won new esteem for a country that had been in decline since its costly victory in World War II. After leaving office, she was honored as Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven. But during her first years in power, even many Tories feared that her election might prove a terrible mistake.

In October 1980, 17 months into her first term, Mrs. Thatcher faced disaster. More businesses were failing and more people were out of work than at any time since the Great Depression. Racial and class tensions smoldered. Even her close advisers worried that her push to stanch inflation, sell off nationalized industry and deregulate the economy was devastating the poor, undermining the middle class and courting chaos.

At the Conservative Party conference that month, the moderates grumbled that they were being led by a free-market ideologue oblivious to life on the street and the exigencies of realpolitik. With electoral defeat staring them in the face, cabinet members warned, now was surely a time for compromise.

To Mrs. Thatcher, they could not be more wrong. “I am not a consensus politician,” she said. “I am a conviction politician.”

In an address to the party, she played on the title of Christopher Fry’s popular play “The Lady’s Not for Burning” in insisting that she would press forward with her policies. “You turn if you want to,” she told the faltering assembly. “The lady’s not for turning.”

Her resolve did the trick. A party revolt was thwarted, the Tories hunkered down, and Mrs. Thatcher went on to achieve great victories. She turned the Conservatives, long associated with the status quo, into the party of reform. Her policies revitalized British business, spurred industrial growth and swelled the middle class.

But her third term was riddled with setbacks. Dissension over monetary policy, taxes and Britain’s place in the European Community caused her government to give up hard-won gains against inflation and unemployment. By the time she was ousted in another Tory revolt — this one over her resistance to expanding Britain’s role in a European Union — the economy was in a recession and her reputation tarnished.

To her enemies she was — as Denis Healey, chancellor of the Exchequer in Harold Wilson’s government, called her — “La Pasionaria of Privilege,” a woman who railed against the evils of poverty but who was callous and unsympathetic to the plight of the have-nots. Her policies, her opponents said, were cruel and shortsighted, widened the gap between rich and poor and worsened the plight of the poorest.

Mrs. Thatcher’s relentless hostility to the Soviet Union and her persistent call to modernize Britain’s nuclear forces fed fears of nuclear war and even worried moderates in her own party. It also caught the Kremlin’s attention. After she gave a hard-line speech in 1976, the Soviet press gave her a sobriquet of which she was proud: the Iron Lady.

Yet when she saw an opening, Mrs. Thatcher proved willing to bend. She was one of the first Western leaders to recognize that the Soviets would soon be led by a member of a new generation,Mikhail S. Gorbachev, and invited him to Britain in December 1984, three months before he came to power. “I like Mr. Gorbachev,” she said. “We can do business together.”

Her rapport with the new Soviet leader and her friendship with PresidentRonald Reaganmade Mrs. Thatcher a vital link between the White House and the Kremlin in their tense negotiations to halt the arms race of the 1980s.

Brisk and argumentative, she was rarely willing to concede a point and loath to compromise. Colleagues who disagreed with her were often deluged in a sea of facts, or what many referred to as being “handbagged.”

“She had high standards, and she expected everyone to do their work,” John O’Sullivan, a special adviser to the prime minister, recalled in 1999. “But there was a distinction. She was tougher on her ministers than she was on her personal staff. The more humble the position, the nicer she was.”

Though she was the first woman to lead a major political party in the West, she rubbed many feminists the wrong way. “The battle for women’s rights has largely been won,” she declared. “I hate those strident tones we hear from some women’s libbers.” She relished being impolitic. “You don’t follow the crowd,” she said. “You make up your own mind.”

The arts and academic establishments loathed her for cutting their financing and called her tastes provincial, her values narrow-minded. In 1985, two years into her second term, she was proposed for an honorary doctorate at Oxford, a laurel traditionally offered prime ministers who had attended the university, as she had. The proposal, after a faculty debate, was rejected.

Yet her popularity remained high.

“Margaret Thatcher evoked extreme feelings,” wrote Ronald Millar, a playwright and speechwriter for the prime minister. “To some she could do no right, to others no wrong. Indifference was not an option. She could stir almost physical hostility in normally rational people, while she inspired deathless devotion in others.”

The Grocer’s Daughter

Margaret Hilda Roberts was born on Oct. 13, 1925, in Grantham, Lincolnshire, 100 miles north of London. Her family lived in a cold-water flat above a grocery store owned by her father, Alfred, the son of a shoemaker. Alfred Roberts was also a Methodist preacher and local politician, and he and his wife, Beatrice, reared Margaret and her older sister, Muriel, to follow the tenets of Methodism: personal responsibility, hard work and traditional moral values.

Margaret learned politics at her father’s knee, joining him as he campaigned for alderman and borough councilman as an independent. “Politics was in my bloodstream,” she said.

She won a scholarship to Kesteven and Grantham Girls School. In 1943, at 17, she was admitted to Somerville College, Oxford, to study chemistry. Barred from joining the Oxford Union debating society — it did not admit women until 1963 — she became a member of the Oxford University Conservative Association and its president in 1946. She graduated in 1947 and earned a master’s degree in chemistry, then worked as a chemical researcher and studied law.

Entering politics, she was selected at 23 to be a Conservative candidate for Parliament, and in 1949 she met Denis Thatcher, a well-to-do businessman and former artillery officer who had been decorated for bravery during World War II. They married in December 1951. In August 1953, Mrs. Thatcher gave birth to twins, Mark and Carol, who survive her, along with grandchildren. (Sir Denis died in 2003.) That December, she was admitted to the bar and came to specialize in patent and tax law.

As the couple prospered, Mrs. Thatcher gained the financial independence to devote herself to politics. “Being prime minister is a lonely job,” she wrote in her memoir, “The Downing Street Years” (1993). “It has to be; you cannot lead from the crowd. But with Denis there, I was never alone.”

In 1950 she campaigned to be a member of Parliament from Dartford, a Labour Party preserve. She was the youngest woman to run for a seat that year, a time when Prime Minister Clement Attlee, who had oustedWinston Churchillin an upset on July 5, 1945, was seeking re-election. Mr. Attlee had gone on to create a welfare state that promised full employment, state ownership of industry, public housing and a national health service. As expected, Mrs. Thatcher was defeated. She ran again the next year, and lost, but she did better than expected in both races.

In 1951 the Tories began a 13-year run as the party in power, first under the aging Churchill and then under Anthony Eden, Harold Macmillan and Alec Douglas-Home. But in exchange for support on foreign affairs, the Tories compromised with the unions and accepted the government’s growing role in the marketplace. This “policy of consensus” was successful. Mr. Macmillan, seeking re-election in 1959, said, “Most people have never had it so good.”

Few Tories dared voice misgivings as inflation spread, productivity dropped and deficits grew. Mrs. Thatcher, elected to the House of Commons that year from the largely middle-class Finchley district in north London, was among those who swallowed their doubts.

In 1964, the Tories, exhausted by scandal, a souring economy and internal divisions, lost power to Harold Wilson’s Labour Party. But as the economy grew more feeble and the unions more militant, Mr. Wilson was ousted in 1970 by the Conservative leader,Edward Heath. He appointed Mrs. Thatcher secretary for education.

As a Conservative cabinet minister, she fought budget cuts in the university system and pushed to rebuild schools in poor areas with a zeal, as Hugo Young wrote in his critical 1989 biography, “The Iron Lady,"that “would have done credit to the best of the socialists.”

But it was her effort to restrict a free-milk program for schoolchildren that made her a national figure. Though poor children were exempt from the cutbacks, and the previous Labour government had also reduced free milk in schools, the opposition leapt to the attack. When Mrs. Thatcher argued in Parliament that the cuts would help finance more worthwhile programs, she was jeered. The tabloids labeled her “Thatcher the Milk Snatcher.” Her children were taunted at school. Her husband, worried, suggested that perhaps she should quit politics.

The government stood firm on the milk issue. But as the economy worsened, Mr. Heath retreated, imposing wage and price controls as inflation surged and igniting strikes. His U-turn angered the Tory right. Moreover, it proved futile. In the wake of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, the oil-producing nations of OPEC imposed huge price increases that stoked inflation. By winter 1974 Mr. Wilson was back in power.

The following December, the Conservative Party revised its rules for choosing a leader and opened a series of votes to the rank and file. Mrs. Thatcher, in what many regarded as an act of political gall, declared her candidacy. One British bookmaker, Ladbrokes, put the odds against her at 50 to 1.

Mrs. Thatcher finished ahead of Mr. Heath on the first ballot, 130 to 119. It was not enough for victory, but Mr. Heath was forced to drop out. In the second ballot, on Feb. 11, 1975, Mrs. Thatcher defeated the other contenders, all of them men.

For the next four years, as Labour ran the country, she fought to reshape her party. The conservatism she espoused was guided by the tenets of classic liberalism: faith in the individual, in economic freedom and in limited government power. But she had to contend with conservatism’s basic reluctance to change with the times.

As the party of tradition, the Tories had little place for women in its upper echelons. All party leaders, for example, joined the Carlton Club, which excluded women. The club would not change its rules for Mrs. Thatcher, but she was accorded an honorary membership. Still, resentment lingered. At a party conference Mr. Heath studiously ignored her.

Mrs. Thatcher’s prescription for change was based on the ideas of the conservative economists Friedrich von Hayek andMilton Friedman. Hayek believed that political and economic freedom were inseparable; Friedman argued that economic productivity and inflation were determined by the amount of money the government put into the economy, and that the heavy government spending advocated by Keynesian economics distorted the natural strength of the marketplace.

Mrs. Thatcher and her allies asserted that the Tory policy of consensus had allowed the country to lurch leftward as each successive leader, seeking the middle of the road, was forced to compromise with a leftist agenda. For her part, she cared little for theories. She called for an all-out attack on inflation, pledged to denationalize basic industry and promised to curb union power.

By the mid-1970s, Britain was the sick man of Europe. Nearly half of the average taxpayer’s income went to the state, which now determined compensation for a third of the nation’s work force: those employed by nationalized industries. In late 1978 and early ’79, strikes paralyzed Britain. As the “winter of discontent” dragged on, Prime Minister James Callaghan, of the Labour Party, failed to survive a no-confidence vote and called an election for May 3.

Callaghan, who was known as Sunny Jim, drew higher personal ratings in opinion polls than Mrs. Thatcher. But on election day the Tories walked away with 43.9 percent of the vote. Labour received 37 percent and the Liberals 13.8 percent. It was the largest swing to the right in postwar history.

First Term

Mrs. Thatcher moved swiftly. “I came to office with one deliberate intent,” she later said. “To change Britain from a dependent to a self-reliant society, from a give-it-to-me to a do-it-yourself nation.”

It was a painful beginning. Income tax cuts balanced by rising gasoline duties and sales taxes fueled inflation. Unemployment spread as she slashed subsidies to faltering industries. Tight money policies drove up interest rates to as high as 22 percent, strengthening the pound, hobbling investment at home and hurting competitiveness overseas. A record 10,000 businesses went bankrupt. Saying it would take years to cure Britain of the havoc wrought by socialism, Mrs. Thatcher warned, “Things will get worse before they get better.”

In the summer of 1981 — the same one in which Charles, the Prince of Wales, married Lady Diana Spencer— discontent boiled over into days of rioting in the London district of Brixton; the inner cities of Liverpool, Manchester and Bristol; and many other areas. Televised reports of rioting, arson and looting shocked the nation. The prime minister, resisting advisers who counseled more social spending and jobs programs, called for greater police powers. Yet, in the face of national shame over the violence, she was forced to give way.

There were other compromises. Retreating from its declaration that state industries must sink or swim in the free market, the government came to the aid of British Airways and British Steel.

Mrs. Thatcher later said that 1981 was her worst year in office. But by the spring of 1982, things were looking up. Inflation was falling; so was the value of the pound, which gave a boost to Britain’s exports and, along with tax cuts, began to feed economic growth.

In foreign affairs, she won some small victories. Standing up to the European Community, she argued that her country paid out much more to the organization than it got back in benefits, and won a significant reduction in contributions. Though her rhetoric and style had caught the world’s eye, she had yet to stake a position as a world leader. Then, on April 2, 1982, Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands.

British settlers had lived on those remote islands in the South Atlantic, long claimed by Argentina, since the 1820s, and negotiations over their future had been dragging on for years. The Argentine military junta under Gen. Leopoldo Galtieri, eager to divert attention from economic and social unrest, moved to take the Falklands by force, gambling that once the islands were occupied, Argentine forces would never be ousted.

As the United States and other allies pushed for talks to avoid bloodshed, Mrs. Thatcher ordered a Royal Navy fleet to the South Atlantic. In a 10-week war, the British retook the islands in fighting that left some 250 British servicemen and more than 1,000 Argentines dead. The victory doomed Argentina’s military government and cemented Mrs. Thatcher’s reputation as a leader to be reckoned with.

Second Term

Her political fortunes were enhanced by squabbling among her opponents. Far-left factions and militant union leaders were gaining strength in the Labour Party as economic discontent and tensions with the Soviet Union grew.

In 1980, Mrs. Thatcher and PresidentJimmy Carterhad agreed to deploy American intermediate-range cruise missiles in Britain in response to a Soviet buildup in Eastern Europe. Under Mr. Reagan, who succeeded Mr. Carter the next year, the United States, with Mrs. Thatcher’s support, persuaded other European allies to deploy the missiles. The arms buildups ignited demonstrations across Western Europe.

When Mrs. Thatcher called an election in June 1983, Labour’s new chief,Michael Foot, campaigned for a unilateral ban on nuclear weapons, withdrawal from the European Community, further nationalization of industry and a huge jobs program.

Mr. Foot’s turn to the left alienated Labour’s center and right wing, and this time the bookmakers put the odds heavily in Mrs. Thatcher’s favor, and they had no regrets. The conservatives won 397 of the 650 seats in Parliament, the biggest swing in voting since Labour’s landslide victory against Churchill in 1945. The working class voted heavily for the Conservatives.

It was an axiom of British politics that one never picked a quarrel with the pope or the National Union of Mineworkers. Mrs. Thatcher flouted it. The coal mines, nationalized in 1947, were widely seen as unprofitable, overstaffed and obsolescent, and in 1984 the government announced plans to shut down several mines and to eliminate 20,000 of the industry’s 180,000 jobs.

In response, Arthur Scargill, the Marxist president of the union, used union rules to elude a rank-and-file vote and, on March 6, 1984, called a walkout.

It was a violent strike. Night after night, the television news broadcast images of hundreds of miners battling the police. On Nov. 30, at a mine in South Wales, a taxi driver taking a miner to work was fatally injured when a concrete slab was dropped on his cab.

Though the episode shocked the Labour Party and many miners, Mr. Scargill refused to condemn it, alienating Neil Kinnock, the new Labour leader, and other supporters. As members of his own union sought to have the strike declared illegal, newspaper cartoons pictured Mr. Scargill flinching under Mrs. Thatcher’s flailing handbag. The strike finally ended in March 1985, after 362 days, without a settlement.

‘Popular Capitalism’

Mrs. Thatcher now pushed harder to fulfill her vision of “popular capitalism.” The sale of state-owned industries shifted some 900,000 jobs into the private sector. More than one million public housing units were sold to their occupants. And the chancellor of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson, announced in 1985 that for the first time since the 1960s, the Treasury would not require deficit spending in its next fiscal budget.

Across the Atlantic, Mr. Reagan cheered Britain’s turnaround. He and Mrs. Thatcher did not always agree; he thought she was too reluctant on cutting taxes, while she was wary of his insouciance over rising federal deficits. When Mr. Reagan, without warning the British, ordered troops to invade the Caribbean nation of Grenada, a member of the Commonwealth, in the wake of a Communist coup, Mrs. Thatcher gave him a dressing down. Nevertheless, the Reagan-Thatcher axis was, in the words of Hugo Young, “the most enduring personal alliance in the Western world throughout the 1980s.”

The prime minister supported Mr. Reagan’s stand against Communism, echoing White House assertions that Fidel Castro’s Cuba was exporting revolution to Nicaragua and other Latin American states. She was equally vigorous in supporting the United States’ fight against terrorism. In April 1986, after terrorist attacks in Western Europe, the United States sought permission to launch American warplanes from bases in Britain for attacks on Libya. Mrs. Thatcher granted it. The bombing destroyed the living quarters of the Libyan leader, Col.Muammar el-Qaddafi. Mrs. Thatcher’s support for the mission outraged many Britons. But she said that terrorism demanded a united response.

Mrs. Thatcher had shown similar resolve at the Conservative Party conference in Brighton in 1984. On the evening of Oct. 12, as she worked on a speech in her hotel room, a bomb exploded on the floor below, killing four people and wounding more than 30. Among the dead was the wife of the Tories’ chief whip, John Wakeham. A cabinet minister, Norman Tebbit, and his wife were wounded. The Irish Republican Army claimed responsibility. The next day Mrs. Thatcher addressed the party as planned, declaring, “All attempts to destroy democracy by terrorism will fail.”

Despite the sectarian violence, Northern Ireland was not high on her agenda. Mrs. Thatcher saw the troubles there as intractable and her policies as simply preserving the status quo.

She was more flexible over South Africa, where the struggle against institutionalized racism was growing more violent. Though she regarded apartheid as repugnant, she initially refused to impose economic sanctions on South Africa, arguing that apartheid would ultimately be undone by greater trade and the prosperity and yearnings for democracy that come with it. But pressured by other Commonwealth countries, she grudgingly reversed herself.

On another problem involving the British Empire’s complex legacy, Mrs. Thatcher had more success, at least at first. In 1984, Britain reached an agreement with China over the fate of Hong Kong, which was to revert to China in 1997. Under a formula of “one country, two systems,” the political freedoms and economic structure of Britain’s wealthiest colony would stand for 50 years, preserving Hong Kong’s capitalist economy under a Communist state.

But in the turmoil after the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, China, fearing a democratic Hong Kong’s influence on the mainland, was far less amenable to granting the territory representative government. When the British governor, Chris Patten, handed over the colony to China in 1997, Hong Kong’s political future remained uncertain.

The Cold War’s End

“Some of these diplomatic minuets you have to go through I cannot stand,” Mrs. Thatcher once said, by way of paying a compliment to Mr. Gorbachev. He forsook rhetoric for blunt realism, she said, and “that suits me better.”

In the 1980s, the Soviet Union was rife with political disillusion and economic chaos. The Reagan administration sought to add pressure by moving ahead with high-tech weapons, including plans for the Strategic Defense Initiative, the space-based defense system known as Star Wars, which would in theory enable the United States to intercept incoming nuclear missiles.

Mr. Gorbachev was unalterably opposed to Star Wars, as were many in the West. Mrs. Thatcher was also against it, though she publicly supported it. At a White House meeting she warned that the project was a costly pipe dream. “I am a chemist,” she is said to have told the president. “I know it won’t work.”

But she changed her mind after being assured that Britain would receive a goodly share of the business in researching and developing the system. At a meeting in Washington in December 1984, she helped draft a position on Star Wars, later adopted by Mr. Reagan, that assured the Soviets that the program would enhance nuclear deterrence, not undercut it, and that it would not get in the way of arms control talks.

Nevertheless, it did. During a summit meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland, in October 1986, Mr. Reagan and Mr. Gorbachev came close to an agreement to ban nuclear weapons altogether. But when Mr. Gorbachev insisted first on an American promise to drop the Strategic Defense Initiative, Mr. Reagan refused, and the negotiations fell apart.

The president’s position infuriated his critics. But many people in NATO and the Pentagon were relieved. “The fact is that nuclear weapons have prevented not only nuclear war but conventional war in Europe for 40 years,” Mrs. Thatcher said in a speech. “That is why we depend and will continue to depend on nuclear weapons for our defense.”

Mrs. Thatcher did not fare so well in other battles. In the face of popular opposition, she retreated from plans to privatize the water industry and the National Health Service, replace college grants with a student loan program, cut back pensions and revamp the social security system. Many predicted she would not win a third term. But the economy continued to work in her favor. When she called an election for June 1987, the Tories were returned to power.

Third Term

That October, Wall Street crashed. In the following months, disagreements among the Tories over Britain’s future in the European Community and a series of other events forced Mrs. Thatcher to surrender hard-fought gains.

She believed that linking the pound to other currencies would erode Britain’s political independence. Mr. Lawson, her chancellor of the Exchequer, argued that it would be better to lay the groundwork for joining the European monetary system by tying the pound to the more stable German mark. Without telling the prime minister, Mr. Lawson, in January 1987, had informally begun to peg the pound to the mark.

Meanwhile, the government’s tax-cutting and easy-credit policies fed an investment and housing boom, again fueling inflation. Mr. Lawson, reluctant to allow the value of the pound to rise above the ceiling he had imposed to keep it in range with the mark, ignored calls for higher interest rates. As his actions became apparent, the prime minister accused him of misleading her and warned that the practice had to stop.

But Mr. Lawson and his supporters saw the European monetary system not only as a step toward European integration but also as a safeguard against the kind of wide swings in the pound’s value that had so disrupted Britain’s economic health in the past. On this fundamental issue the Tories were split, the two sides set on a collision course.

As inflation rose, Mr. Lawson reversed himself and raised interest rates. The sudden effort to stanch the money flow threw Britain into recession. In October 1989, Mr. Lawson resigned, but many devoted Thatcherites admitted that she bore much of the blame.

Other misjudgments were laid at her door. In an effort to make the local authorities more accountable for the way they spent tax money, Mrs. Thatcher pushed through a measure that replaced property taxes with a “poll tax” on all adult residents of a community. The tax was intended to make everyone, not just property owners, pay for local government services. In practice, the measure was manifestly unfair and deeply unpopular. In March 1990, protests flared into riots. Within her own party, there was a growing feeling that the Iron Lady had become a liability.

The Fall

That November, tensions among the Tories exploded. The deputy prime minister, Geoffrey Howe, the last survivor of the original Thatcher cabinet of 1979, was known for his loyalty, though he disagreed with the prime minister’s policy toward Europe. Now their differences came to a boil. At a cabinet meeting, “Margaret was incredibly rude to Geoffrey,” Kenneth Baker, another minister, recalled. “It was the last straw for Geoffrey, and he resigned that night.”

The next day Michael Heseltine, a former defense minister who favored greater links with Europe, announced that he would challenge Mrs. Thatcher for the party leadership. On Nov. 20, as the prime minister was attending a summit meeting in Paris, the Tories took a vote. For Mrs. Thatcher, whose approval ratings in the polls were falling, the outcome was bleak: though she beat Mr. Heseltine, 204 votes to 152, under party rules her majority was not strong enough for her to keep her place.

The race, now wide open, took an unexpected turn. Mrs. Thatcher was awaiting results of the party ballot with her family and friends at 10 Downing Street when she learned that Mr. Heseltine had lost to the soft-spoken chancellor of the Exchequer,John Major, a protégé of hers. When someone said that her colleagues had done an awful turn, she replied, “We’re in politics, dear.”

Though vowing at first to “fight on and fight to win” the second ballot, she was persuaded to withdraw. After speaking to the queen, calling world leaders and making a final speech to the House of Commons, she resigned on Nov. 28, 1990, leaving 10 Downing Street in tears and feeling betrayed.

After leaving office, Mrs. Thatcher traveled widely and drew huge crowds on the lecture circuit. She sat in the House of Lords as Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven, wrote her memoir and devoted herself to the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, to further her values.

She remained forthright in expressing her opinions. During her final months in office, she had bolstered President George Bush in his efforts to build a United Nations coalition to oppose Iraq after it invaded Kuwait on Aug. 2, 1990. At the time of the invasion, Mrs. Thatcher was meeting with Mr. Bush and other world leaders at the Aspen Institute in Colorado. “Remember, George,” she is said to have told him, “this is no time to go wobbly.”

In retirement, she continued to call for firmness in the face of aggression, advocating Western intervention to stop the ethnic bloodshed in the Balkans in the early 1990s. After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, she endorsed PresidentGeorge W. Bush’s policy of sanctioning pre-emptive strikes against governments that sponsored terrorism. She also backed the war to oust the Iraqi leader,Saddam Hussein.

By then, according to her daughter, Mrs. Thatcher had begun to show signs of the dementia that would overtake her and become, to much criticism, the focus of “Iron Lady,” a 2011 film about her withMeryl Streepin the title role.

But while she was of sound mind, Mrs. Thatcher never let up on her anti-Europe views. “In my lifetime, all the problems have come from mainland Europe, and all the solutions have come from the English-speaking nations across the world,” she told the Conservative Party conference in 1999. Her words drew predictable outrage, but few doubted that Mrs. Thatcher, as usual, had meant exactly what she said.

She also did not shy from criticizing her successors’ actions, including Mr. Major’s handling of the economy. Her frankness often embarrassed the Tories. It seemed to many that Mrs. Thatcher preferred Labour’s new leader,Tony Blair, to Mr. Major.

That perception was not surprising, since Mr. Blair’s victory over Mr. Major in 1997 seemed in a curious way to emphasize the success of Mrs. Thatcher’s policies. Mr. Blair led his “New Labour” party to victory on a platform that promised to liberate business from government restrictions, end taxes that discouraged investment and reduce dependence on the state.

Mrs. Thatcher’s legacy, “in most respects, is uncontested by the Blair government,” Mr. Young, her biographer, said in a 1999 interview. “It made rather concrete something she once said: ‘My task will not be completed until the Labour Party has become like the Conservative Party, a party of capitalism.’ ”

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: April 8, 2013

An earlier version of this obituary misquoted Lady Thatcher when, in an address to her party, she played on the title of Christopher Fry’s play “The Lady’s Not for Burning.” She said: “You turn if you want to. The lady’s not for turning.” She did not say, “Turn if you like.”

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: April 17, 2013

An obituary on April 9 about the former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher overstated what is known about one aspect of a 1986 bombing of Libya carried out by the United States with the Thatcher government’s support. Although initial news reports, in The Times and elsewhere, said Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s baby daughter was killed in that attack, her death was never confirmed, and reporting in recent years has shown that Qaddafi most likely lied about her death. Therefore it is probably not the case that the bombing “killed one of his children.”

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: July 22, 2013

An earlier version of this obituary misstated the political leanings of the British governments elected during the 35 years before Lady Thatcher took office as prime minister in 1979. There were several Conservative as well as Labour governments during those years. She did not “reverse 35 years of left-wing government.”

949 Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

KINDELANISSAQUAH, WA
Politicians get in the way usually but because corporations rule the world it's probably a good thing they exist, in some cases. Thatcher favored the rich and that isn't exactly endearing to the majority. She caused a lot of problems due to her biases, often biasis that were harmful. However, she could make things interesting but what England needed was a more balanced person with a good understanding of simple math. If the wealthy have all the money, consumer spending stagnates, and jobs disappear. Is England better off during and after Thatcher? Most admit probably not. But, she did what she thought was best but what she thought was best obviously wasn't. This wasn't a thing that boosts women's image of their sex, this was about getting an entire nation on track for prosperity without destroying the planet and our chances of surviving this century. We have this amazing capacity to choose stupid paths when biases exist. What's needed is a person or persons with the intelligence to choose those with minds that can calculate the effects of empowering the wealthy while destroying the less fortunate before such decisions are made. She never figured out the draconian effect of a controlling class that demands we labor on their behalf, while they referred to the majority as the "unwashed." Egomania often occurs when people not that bright or balanced are loosed on the world, the irony is, persons who want to lead, rarely know how to lead and end up making a mess of things.
April 10, 2013 at 7:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

David BartlettKeweenaw Bay, MI

So many mean-spirited comments. If this is all the respect that seemingly so many can muster for the dead, what does that say about how we view the living?
April 10, 2013 at 7:56 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

RickPortland, Oregon
She crushed British working families while in office, then lived out her life in luxury at the Ritz.

Says it all.
April 9, 2013 at 10:31 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

xxxxxx
It seems to be an assumption that because an individual has had great impact and through it caused fundamental changes, that such an individual commands respect. It would all depend, wouldn't it, on WHAT that impact has been. 

Looking at their respective legacies quite dispassionately, it does appear, according to quite a few highly respected economists and historians, as well as social and political scientists, that Thatcher and Reagan's impact over the past three decades has been a monumental disaster. 

They're gone now. Let their loved ones grieve for them, and let the rest of us get down to the business of rebuilding our societies so that we may once again to be working democracies.
April 9, 2013 at 10:30 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

lucretius114silver spring, md
.....In February 1975, Margaret Thatcher was elected leader of the British Conservative Party. The Institute of Economic Affairs arranged a meeting between Friedrich von Hayek and Thatcher in London soon after. During Thatcher's only visit to the Conservative Research Department in the summer of 1975, a speaker had prepared a paper on why the "middle way" was the pragmatic path the Conservative Party should take, avoiding the extremes of left and right. Before he had finished, Thatcher "reached into her briefcase and took out a book. It was Hayek's 'The Constitution of Liberty'. Interrupting our pragmatist, she held the book up for all of us to see. 'This', she said sternly, 'is what we believe', and banged Hayek down on the table"....

.
April 9, 2013 at 3:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

George PAPA
Thatcher, the worst thing that could have happened to Britain, then and now.

She set Britain on the path of mediocrity, illusions of past grandeur, and putting her at the "periphery" of everything.

It is to the ever-lasting glory of the Tories that they finally pushed her out when she lost all connection to Britons' plight.

Not that it makes current Tories any better, but they can at least refer to her ignominious demise before they get booted out at the next election.
April 9, 2013 at 3:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Sarah MacPA
I don't understand how the US news media can minimize the extent of damage Thatcher's policies did not only in England, Scotland and Wales but also how she set back the peace process by at least 15 years with her hard-line attitude towards the IRA; letting 10 men die on hunger strike and in turn becoming the poster child for additional recruitment to the IRA. I am reminded of a cartoon captioned "Glass Houses" showing Thatcher having tea with Mikhail Gorbachev. In response to Thatcher's query about Soviet political prisoners, Gorbachev's rejoinder is "How are your Irish?"
April 9, 2013 at 3:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Essex GirlCalifornia
Margaret Thatcher was always a lot more popular in the USA than she was at home. Take it from an immigrant who lived through Thatcherism but lives here now, she was incredibly divisive, and whether she meant it or not she came across as patronizing at best and utterly uncaring at worse. Whole areas of the nation were laid waste with industrial decimation. What do I recall from those years? "There is no such thing as society," a 1987 quote, which I think pretty much summed up her every-man-for-himself attitude, plus the Poll Tax, and of course the "Loadsamoney" London financial deregulation. Do I have anything good to say? She did concentrate everyone's minds on the need for efficiency, which was no bad thing. But believe me, not everyone is mourning her.
April 9, 2013 at 3:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

LamosHouston
Thanks, Lady Thatcher.

When I first visited Britain in 1980, I was appalled by the poverty and hopelessness of everyone I met. When I returned 15 years late, I saw a different country. 

Bully for you, as well, for standing up to Argentina's bullies and for standing fast with the US.
April 9, 2013 at 3:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

PatriciaRochester, NY
In an eight page (online) article on Margaret Thatcher's 11 year stint as Britain's Prime Minister, it's a shame that the New York Times chose to include only two small, very dismissive paragraphs about the Troubles in Northern Ireland during Mrs. Thatcher's time. One gets the feeling that if it hadn't been for the IRA's attempt on Mrs. Thatcher's life, Northern Ireland wouldn't have been mentioned at all in this article. 

Margaret Thatcher wasn't in power at the beginning of the Troubles, but once she was Prime Minister, she chose to dig in her heels and continue the murderous occupation of the north by British troops. Her callousness about the situation there also led her in 1981 to ignore the pleas of ten young men and let them die on hunger strike rather than give in to their rather modest demands to be treated as political prisoners. Yet there's not a mention of this in the New York Times.
April 9, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

IsabelLondon, UK
It's hard to mourn a politician who's done as much lasting damage to British society as Margaret Thatcher. Her ruthless and devisive policies destroyed whole industries and hundred of thousands of jobs, leaving Britain ever more dependent on the financial services that have unleashed bankers' greed, financial ruin and, now, the most cruel austerity. Thanks to Thatcherism, our country has become a more unequal, more mean-spirited, and much less civilised society to live in. 

Americans often idolise Thatcher. But they didn't have to suffer her policies or live with her legacy. Perhaps they'd regard her differently if they had. 

I feel more sad about the death of Annette Funicello. I loved watching her on TV as a British kid living in Connecticut in the late 1950's. She brought warmth and enjoyment to people's lives - that's a legacy worth leaving. I was sorry to learn that she suffered from MS and I'm sorry that she's gone.
April 9, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

phosbeinOrlando
We need more women like Lady Thatcher.
April 9, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Ellen BalfourLong Island
Has anyone besides me drawn a connection in mind between Margaret Thatcher and Ayn Rand? Thatcher makes me think of Rand with power. A complete emphasis on individual responsibility. One must pull oneself up by one's bootstraps if one wants to have a tolerable place in this world.

11:22 a.m.
April 9, 2013 at 3:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

A moralesMonterrey, Mexico
She triggered love from one side and hate from others. But she got respect from everyone.
April 9, 2013 at 3:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

StephanieDC
In response to Joe, Susan, MSPWEHO, and others who replied to my original comment:

1. You are correct that childhood poverty soared in Thatcher's time...but it also did post-Thatcher as well (look at Major, the poverty rate was even worse under him.) No leadership is perfect and I could point to equally tragic consequences in any administration before or since. Doesn't make it right, but it exists.
2. Reagan & Thatcher shared comparable political platforms, and while there are some contrasts, they are far more similar than they are different.
3. Being conservative does not equate to being heartless or unconcerned about the welfare of the people. And it does not mean you seek to oppress certain members of society; I would wager that if Thatcher were in power today some of her opinions on moral or social issues may have changed. As for my personal interests, I am far more concerned with foreign policy and economic aspects, and it is my belief that government should not legislate morality, nor does it have a place in determining what our communities and religious institutions should do. Thatcher was also rather libertarian in these beliefs as well.

Lastly, with regards to your personal vendetta against anyone or anything conservative, I'd like to leave you with some of Maggie's own wise words: "I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left."
April 9, 2013 at 3:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

MarkCanada
Her passing is something that happens to all of us at some point in time, she lived through normal life expectancy and at this particular moment is of zero interest or significance, notwithstanding all the media hype surrounding it. She ceased to matter from the day her own party forced her from office - any of her policies could have been continued or reversed by any subsequent administration as they saw fit. As a firm supporter of apartheid in South Africa and a destroyer of the social fabric of many communities in Great Britain, she will be remembered. As a ruthless economic reformer she will also be remembered - one could write books about the merits of these reforms, but the thoughtless and care-less manner in which they were implemented is incontestable. I can't wait till the media gets back to regular programming - more important things are happening in the world which deserve not to be displaced by this inevitable and meaningless event.
April 9, 2013 at 3:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

VioletLondon
What a bizarrely praiseful and sympathetic account of Margaret Thatcher's life and devastating legacy. And somehow in its longwindedness, this article completely fails to mention Northern Ireland.

FYI: http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2013/04/hundreds-attend-thatcher-street-party...
April 9, 2013 at 3:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

PanicalepPanicale, Italy
Let's not canonize the Iron Lady too soon, lest her deficiencies be overlooked. First and foremost her shortcomings were recognized by her own Tory Party, which showed her the front door of Downing Street. At the end of her reign she showed her true colours, i.e. obstinacy, even in face of her obvious failures. She was no consensus builder, but rather, "My Way or the Highway." The Tories took the Highway and she was left tearing on her exit. Only then did she ever show any emotion, and it was because she felt hurt and betrayed. She never had emotion for the many Britons that she herself hurt.
Her legacy is a UK bereft of its former industrial might and now, with the the oil and gas fields are dwindling, there are only Banking and Service sectors surviving. The UK Pound is alone and naked in the world set for another Soros onslaught and further devaluation.
Inflation in the UK is the highest in Europe. National Debt in the UK is also the highest within the Common Market. Poverty is creeping up the social ladder and
the UK's Health Care System is being destroyed by lack of funds in the current government's adamant adherence to the Iron Lady's fiscal policies.
No compassion shown to those without an adequate safety net to aid them through hard times caused by sole dependence on the Banking and Service sectors.
Should Scotland exit the UK and take with them their rightful energy fields as they join the EU as a separate country and the Common Currency, woe be Thatcherism.
April 9, 2013 at 3:10 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

James MurphyProvidence Forge, Virginia
In short, she was a disaster. Now, "Eton Boy" is trying to emulate her. He won't succeed. The next election is a forgone conclusion. Labour will return to power. We need no more Thatchers.
April 9, 2013 at 10:31 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

EDUK
People should not forget that Thatcher's Tories denounced Nelson Mandela as a black terrorist who deserved to be shot.
April 9, 2013 at 10:30 a.m.RECOMMENDED11

Eleanore1946Old Bridge NJ
Margaret Thatcher was a conservative like all conservatives. Watching the money people earn at the bottom and middle while ignoring the thievery and corruption at the top. Her nose was like all conservative noses...so high in the air, one good rain storm would have drowned her. 

Not many in England liked her Reaganesque Trickle Up. And just like Ronald Reagan, she ignored the recession she caused her country. 

The problem with conservatives today is that none of them admit they are crony capitalists. In other words, it's Pay to Play or else!
April 9, 2013 at 10:30 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

Ellen BalfourLong Island
Joe Scarborough asserted on his MSNBC "Morning Joe" program today that one cannot find a Democrat who won't say something nice about Ronald Reagan, and yet citizens of the UK have been denouncing Margaret Thatcher. I am an American Democrat who does not have anything nice to say about Ronald Reagan. I am fascinated about the comments posted here by citizens of the UK that are critical of Thatcher. The British have a much more colorful way of deriding someone. I loved the description of Thatcher's "ghastly braying voice".

I didn't experience Thatcher, but I was reminded yesterday of the film "Billy Elliot", set in northern England during the 1984-1985 coal miners strike. This was apparently a defining moment, weakening unions and victorious for Thatcher.

8:15 a.m.
April 9, 2013 at 10:30 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

SusannaGreenville, SC
Early in her tenure at prime minister, unemployment in Britain was at 13%. When she left, it was 5.8%. Maggie, my hero, I so wish you were here.
April 9, 2013 at 10:29 a.m.

bignybugsnew york
yes, just like in the U.S., where we lowered the 'unemployment' rate by making it possible for more people to work at Walmart for USD9.00 per hour with no benefits. If that kind of thing makes someone your hero ... well ...
April 9, 2013 at 2:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

JohnHartford
Verified
NYT Pick
She is undoubtedly one of the four most important British prime ministers of the 20th century (the other three are Asquith, Lloyd George and Churchill) with considerable achievements to her name. That said at times like this reputations get over hyped. When she was removed from office by her own party (an event unique in modern British political history) the economy was in a mess, inflation running at around 9% and the official lending rate 15%. She was reviled at home (her approval was in the 20's) and essentially ignored by the other EU leaders for her quarrelsomeness and attempts to block the re-unification of Germany. The main charges against her are that she de-industrialized Britain and by pursuing relentlessly supply side economic policies increased income inequalities and severely damaged public services. They're both valid although it's only fair to say that in the former she had plenty of help from organized labor who had no interest in the sort of accomodations required to enable Britain to cope with globalization.
April 9, 2013 at 10:29 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

VLondon
"Margaret Thatcher was the most divisive and destructive Prime Minister of modern times. Mass Unemployment, factory closures, communities destroyed – this is her legacy. She was a fighter and her enemy was the British working class. Her victories were aided by the politically corrupt leaders of the Labour Party and of many Trades Unions. It is because of policies begun by her that we are in this mess today. Other prime ministers have followed her path, notably Tony Blair. She was the organ grinder, he was the monkey. Remember she called Mandela a terrorist and took tea with the torturer and murderer Pinochet. How should we honour her? Let’s privatise her funeral. Put it out to competitive tender and accept the cheapest bid. It’s what she would have wanted." 

-- Ken Loach
April 9, 2013 at 10:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

OspreyCambridge, Engand
Mrs. Thatcher's premiership was framed by two major factors: Huge income from North Sea Oil (NSO) coming on-stream just at her first election; and Value Added Tax (VAT). 

NSO allowed her to place major contracts at uncompetitive prices with the nationalised industries (aircraft, shipbuilding, automotive, airlines etc.) to swell their profits and thus sell them back to the public who already owned them - as 'privatisation' - and at an inflated share valuation, further swelling her income. 

By doubling VAT from 7.5% to 15% she was able to reduce the top tax-rate from 83% to 45%, favouring the richest, inviting foreign investment, but at huge cost to the general public. 

Add the 'Falklands factor', for which more people died than the entire population of those islands; decimation of the Trade Unions; the headlong decline (or overseas purchase) of the privatised industries; and the 2008 world financial crisis originating from the 'big bang' - and you get a slightly different view of the Thatcher legacy.
April 9, 2013 at 10:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

Daryl Hunteryellowstone
I watched many good retrospectives about the Iron Lady yesterday, it was a great trip back in time. A time that made us hopeful and thinking that our children had a bright future. What happened to that time?
April 9, 2013 at 10:27 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

RickPortland, Oregon
What happened? Reality.
April 10, 2013 at 7:50 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

bob westwest melbourne,fl
Usually when a notable or anyone dies whether he/she is liked or disliked, people generally are gracious. However, Mrs Thatchers legacy is very tainted. She and Reagan were dividers to quote GWB, and knew how to bring out hate in people.
April 9, 2013 at 10:27 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

burgermouthuk
Some suggest she was cruel about the Irish hunger strikers - allowing them to die. Worth being clear: the hunger strikers wanted political status and that's why they protested. But in any analysis, they weren't political prisoners. They didn't deserve political status. They were inside because they'd blown people up. They were not like, for example, the Cuban political prisoners we see today who go on hunger strike, who are jailed because Castro thinks they're dangerous. Those guys haven't hurt anyone - they just want a say in how their country is run. 

The Irish terrorists had some idea Thatcher would weaken because she was female. Wrong.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

txbadonetooEl Paso, TX
God Bless Prime Minister Thatcher. She was a lady and she did great things for England. To those who claim she didn't care about the poor and the middle class - she took unemployment from 13.5% to 5.8% during her tenure - and she restored private industry to the people - not to Government.

I will miss her and I will always respect her. Our current President could learn from her actions.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

David Feingold, Ph.D.Philadelphia/Bangkok
Let's see: She tried and nearly succeeded in destroying one of the finest university systems in the world, she elevated crony capitalism to a virtue, she showed her love for the poor by making so many of them, acted the spoiled brat toward Europe, and is most memorable as a Spitting Image puppet as a hectoring scold.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

DavidTDorset, UK
Simply the best!
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

bersing634St. Paul, MN.
Thacherism is the precursor to fascism. This is evident when analyzing the current Cameron regime. To understand the long- term implications of Thatcherism, you must remember one thing: when Thatcher took power in 1979, 1 in 7 British children lived in poverty. Today, more than 1 in 3 British children live in poverty. Essentially, Thatcherism has degraded Britain's stock of human capital, which is why the British economy is so hollowed out and financialized with virtually zero upward social mobility. The point has been reached where plutocracy and democracy have become irreconcilable; hence the reprise of the bourgeois love affair with fascism, which will soon become the only way in which the ruling class can suppress the increasingly desperate proletariat and continue to increase its percentage of the national income.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

BobPortland, Oregon
Ding Dong, the witch is dead! I don't mean to be cruel, but she definitely made a lot of peoples lives worse then they might have been. Together with Reagan, they initiated the evisceration of the middle class, to say nothing of what they did to the poor. She died at the Ritz while receiving the best health care money could buy, unlike so many of those who were left to suffer neglect as a result of her policies.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

MortonUK
Thatcher used legislation and the police to pummel the miners and assault demonstrators and peace campaigners, steering the country towards the current police state. 

She supported the private arms industry with public funds (Export Credit Guarantees). Indeed her unscrupulous son made his millions from this evil trade by exploiting his mother’s name and connections. 

She carried out a calculated war against Argentina. The sinking of the Belgrano was a war crime. And she backed murderous tyrants like Pinochet, Suharto and Pol Pot. One month after the Halabja atrocity, her government gave Saddam Hussain £340m in Export Credit Guarantees to buy weapons. And she was a friend of Apartheid South Africa. calling Nelson Mandela a terrorist.

She was no friend of freedom, peace or democracy.
April 9, 2013 at 1:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

MortonUK
Thatcher’s deregulation of the city of London has led directly to the current global economic crisis. The city may provide a tax bonanza for the country, but pillages wealth from the rest of the world and destabilises the global economy. Unfettered Capitalism is going to lead the world to ruin, and very likely World War III.

The West has benefited from cheap goods from Asia and China (and Africa), but at the expense of exploiting workers and sweatshop practices. At the same time, outsourcing and downward pressure on wages has weakened the domestic jobs market and diminished workers' bargaining power.

With oil revenues in decline, few National Assets left to sell, devaluation of the currency, the cost of foreign goods rising, a highly indebted population, a low wage economy and the demolition of the welfare state... welcome to Fascist Britain, Margaret Thatcher’s legacy.
April 9, 2013 at 1:58 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

MortonUK
Margaret Thatcher squandered the oil wealth, allowing the gargantuan profits to flow into private coffers, neglecting to set up an oil fund for the people as Norway has done. 

Moreover, she sold off the National Assets for the benefit of big business, providing a short term boost to the public finances at the expense of rising utility bills and ramshackle public services further down the line. 

The middle classes and sections of the working class were bought off with cheap shares in the stampede to privatisation. But the poorest were robbed of their stake hold. She enriched her wealthy backers but further impoverished the poor and created a disinherited underclass. 

She lowered taxes for the rich, private equity, venture capital and corporations, while increasing the tax burden further down the scale with VAT hikes, stealth taxes and pernicious schemes like the Poll Tax. 

She was a friend of the rich and an enemy of the poor.
April 9, 2013 at 1:58 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

MatthewBrisbane
Thatcher fought to end communism in the East, but Thatcherite policies effected many people in British society by cutting back welfare state. While promoting neo-liberal ideologues which ended the middle classes in that country, but military were sent to the Falklands to stop Argentinians from getting it and keep it British. So she was an Iron Lady she fought for want she believed in.
April 9, 2013 at 1:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

clsPA
It's truly amazing that this lengthy obit does not mention Northern Ireland (and her disastrous, inhumane handling of its affairs) even once.
April 9, 2013 at 1:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

burgermouthuk
cls, the hunger strikers wanted political status. Political prisoners are the courageous dissidents we see in Cuba, who don't advocate or use violence. Not thugs who were jailed for acts of sickening brutality. She was right not to cave.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

Alberto P. Abreus, RARSC Architects, Cliffside Park, NJ
@ burgermouth: the hunger strikers wanted political status...unlike...hmmm...everybody else, particularly those in "public" office and corporations. I get it now.
April 9, 2013 at 3:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

ricardo ishmaelSan Diego, CA
What i want to know is which Premier league club was hers? All what you could admire about her was that, unlike Obama, bless his heart, you actually knew where she stood. Unfortunately, much of the time she stood in the wrong place.
April 8, 2013 at 11:55 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

COLLINSIRELAND
No true are words spoken
April 8, 2013 at 11:55 p.m.

Dave KayVT
Despite the correction on Thatcher's famous remark--"You turn if you want to. The lady's not for turning"--the Times omitted her opening line providing humor and context: "To those waiting with bated breath for that media catch phrase the U-turn, I have only one thing to say...." This is straight from the video accompanying the obit!
April 8, 2013 at 11:50 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

BBeckerTampa
Thatcher helped create the embodiment of an Orwellian surveillance state.
April 8, 2013 at 11:50 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

DavidPalo Alto, CA
The divide between the rich and poor is the rot at the capitalist system. It will be its undoing if it does indeed fall to another economic system.

The system works when real incentives exist for people to prosper through education, training and hard work. 

Mavericks with true insight like Henry Ford understood his workers had to be paid enough to afford to buy his cars. 

Margaret Thatcher understood no such thing. She believed in trickle-down magic because she consorted with those trickling down.

Margaret Thatcher refused to believe that she did not have all the answers. 

In the end her own country and party rejected her extremism, may she rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 11:50 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

JeanNorwich, UK
In the months before Thatcher was elected the dead overflowed the mortuaries and the corpses of our loved ones had to be stored in refrigerated trucks. The grave diggers were on strike. Striking toilet cleaners and kitchen porters picketing the hospitals decided whose children were sick or injured enough to see a doctor. Our children played in the trash that was piled above head height in the streets, because the bin men were on strike, and the rat population exploded. The unions ousted one government after the other.

After Thatcher was elected we were a free people once again.
April 8, 2013 at 11:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

curtislos angeles
In other words, those horrid people who do the dirty work like cleaning your toilets and carting off your garbage were put back in their place, and you were free once again to pretend they don't exist - certainly you didn't have to acknowledge their humanity or their dignity any more.

I can see why Maggie was your heroine.
April 9, 2013 at 1:09 a.m.RECOMMENDED12

burgermouthuk
curtis, not really. Thatcher did many things I disagree with. But unions ran closed shops (i.e. compulsory membership) bullied people into pointless strikes, and shunned secret ballots. The effect on communities was dire and the effect on our economy worse. We were an international laughing stock, utterly uncompetitive. Now our economy might not be in great shape, but it's holding up better than those of our European competitors.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

JeanNorwich, UK
By making blanket assumptions about my background you have abandoned reality; the facts have a bone or two to pick with you. The calluses on my hands give the lie to most of this silliness - I'm a 180lb working man with a 48" chest, most recently a landscaper, house painter and plasterer; my body has been shaped by grinding physical labour since I was 12 years old. I've also got a sweet degree and a batch of post graduate diplomas, but I don't let that go to my head. My weekends are spent as a volunteer coaching novices on how to grow their own food for free.

So no, I don't regard those in low skilled jobs as 'horrid' - that would be very silly, if not schizophrenic. Not quite as silly perhaps as condemning someone for objecting to corpses stinking up the place for months at a time, or unqualified service staff making clinical decisions about the urgency of a child's medical treatment. No, when I say that 'we are free' Curtis I mean that those who want to work, can work; that people who need to bury their dead can bury their dead; that parents who want medical treatment for their children don't have to parade the child in front of a picket of kitchen porters before they get to see a doctor.

I don't deny the kitchen porter his humanity - I do ask rational questions about his medical competence, and his right to deny medical treatment to other people's children in a fully tax funded health service. You have your own opinions on that score; good luck with that.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

COLLINSIRELAND
Watching this woman being made some sort of democratic martyr makes me ill. She introduced internment in Northern Ireland and watched on as people died on hunger strike for their right to equality. She not only hid the undeniable truth of the Hillsborough disaster but allowed those poor families to be tainted with the blame which belonged solely to those under her control. She may have delivered economically in the long run but she has ruined so many lives in order to do that. Time will unveil her for what she really was
April 8, 2013 at 10:59 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

JeanNorwich, UK
Internment was introduced in August 1971 by the Irish-born Brian Faulkner, prime minister of the devolved Northern Irish parliament, more than 8 years before Thatcher came to power. Edward Heath was prime minister of the UK at the time, and his cabinet - of which Thatcher was a member - argued for 'balanced measures' - the banning of Loyalist Marches, suspension of gun clubs and in particular the arrest of UVF loyalists in addition to Republicans. 

The Hunger Strikers starved themselves to death not for 'equality' but the right to be considered 'political prisoners' for the murders they had committed. How does the term 'equality' apply when they were very specifically asking for special treatment?

If you know of any credible source linking the Hillsborough stadium disaster directly to Thatcher's 'say so' please quote that source. Even if it's just some bloke you met in a pub sometime slurring over his beer, that would add some objectivity to your claims.

My father's background is Irish Catholic; I was born in Liverpool and I was a student in Sheffield in April 1989, where I watched the disaster unfold on TV before making my way to the stadium.
April 9, 2013 at 2:39 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

OldEngineerSE Michigan
Thatcher's policies reversed a decades-long slide for the UK, reversing inecsapable poverty, technological Ludditism, manufacturing malaise, and global competitive disadvantage.
Our current administration seems not to have read the history.
April 8, 2013 at 10:59 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

johnandrechakmontana
The “Iron” queen of the global conservatives, Thatcher’s quote-“there is no such thing as society, just men and women” has served as guide line for American politicians from Reagan to Rand Paul to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, a twin to Saint Ayn Rand’s Ode to Selfishness! While beating their collective chests about a society and nation founded on “Judeo-Christian Morality” with one of their more recent fights to downgrade Scientific Evolutionary Theory the Right has whole-hearted embraced this version of Social Darwinism, of every man for himself and the hindmost for women and children. To the traveler lying beaten on the road, the family struck by financial or medical disaster (or both) they would simply suggest that “you better hope you are networked with a Samaritan.” And what exactly have these conservatives conserved, when one surveys families, communities towns and cities laid low by their politics of unbridled capitalism?
April 8, 2013 at 10:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

JeanNorwich, UK
”There is no such thing as society”.

“... they never quoted the rest. I went on to say: There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then to look after our neighbour. My meaning, clear at the time but subsequently distorted beyond recognition, was that society was not an abstraction, separate from the men and women who composed it, but a living structure of individuals, families, neighbours and voluntary associations.“ Margaret Thatcher.

"That detail derives from the work of Friedrich Hayek, which was much admired by Margaret Thatcher. The ... most enduring social institutions are shaped by spontaneous evolution, rather than by intellectual design. That “there is no such thing as society” reflects the idea that inter-dependent social systems and institutions bring a natural order to human affairs. Its details are evident in the common law, in rituals and in customs and practices handed down the generations."

"Such “natural” structures are denigrated by left-of-centre intellectuals who sense that humankind can achieve a more rational order by design. Or, as Hayek writes, “One’s initial surprise at finding that intelligent people tend to be socialists diminishes when one realises that, of course, intelligent people will tend to overvalue intelligence.”
G.R.Steele.

Don't ever let the facts get in your way, Montana.
April 9, 2013 at 2:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Alberto P. Abreus, RARSC Architects, Cliffside Park, NJ
They have 'conserved' the wealth, rights and power of others straight into their private coffers. Isn't that enough?
April 9, 2013 at 3:09 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

sunnynyc
So many hateful comments here. She was the longest serving PM in Britain's history. Facts trump hate.
April 8, 2013 at 10:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

TaureanQueens, NY
Well, what would one expect from a nation of shopkeepers: keep your nose clean; keep your nose to the grindstone; hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
April 9, 2013 at 4:54 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

ChrisArizona
She, along with Reagan, pushed policies that made the rich richer and everyone else poorer.

I despise both of them.
April 8, 2013 at 10:31 p.m.RECOMMENDED21

MauiyankeeHaiku, HI
It is so sad that this military genius, the woman who single handedly led her nation to the its' most glorious military victory of the 20th Century,

Las Malvinas,

would be over shadowed in that instance by Saint Ronnie and his glorious strategic defeat of the communist threat to the entire world, mainly

Grenada.

Without these two great military heroes, the 21 st Century would have been a much different place.
April 8, 2013 at 10:31 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Alberto P. Abreus, RARSC Architects, Cliffside Park, NJ
"Without these two great military heroes, the 21 st Century would have been a much different place."

Yes! And unquestionably better too.
April 9, 2013 at 3:09 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Richard NavasBellingham, WA
Verified
I believe Lady Thatcher would be horrified at what became of the American Republic Party. I think she would have particular distain for the just-make-junk-up GOP types, and the simpleton VP choices.
April 8, 2013 at 10:30 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

ToussaintQueens, NY
Due to the prevailing lousy journalism and historiography, what really happened in Britain in the 1970s has been misrepresented. People speak of the Thatcherite revolution as if this women brought about the rise of conservative policies across the major industrialized world. In actual fact, the Labour government of Callaghan was already preaching monetarism over Keynesianism by 1975! By 1978 Callaghan was battling the T.U.C. union.

Not accidentally, Reagan was elected a year and a half after Thatcher. (Again, one could see the beginnings of the conservative policies in the end of Carter's presidency and in the U.S. Congress). In 1982 Germany would vote for Helmut Kohl. Even when the so-called socialists got elected in the early 1980s -- like Mitterand in France and Gonzalez in Spain -- after 6 to 12 months in power they reversed course and pursued conservative policies. 

Clearly, there was a more general social force leading to these many different societies to all turn to dramatically more conservative policies. And I would say that social force was clearly the economic decline of the time. How much the economic decline led to biased news coverage that helped the conservatives win or the decline just led people to choose the right, or something else, i don't know. 

But Thatcher did not make Britain conservative. The serious economic problems of Britain, in the context of globalizing trade, made Britain elevate Thatcher to power and made other societies turn to the right.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

RalphNSLI
Really, I think Americans shouldn't be allowed to comment on the deaths - or the lives - of non-American leaders. You are so desperately ignorant of the realities, nuances or context of those about whom you comment. You link Thatcher with Churchill simply because both were British and seemed resolute, or perhaps because she liked to link herself with him. In fact Churchill would have seen her as a megalomaniacal and hopelessly politically rigid person in whom resolution was the singular quality. You link her with Reagan, when in fact she led him, and he and his administration worked against her as often as not - such as when they almost undermined Britain's fight to regain the Falklands before a volte face upon realising with whom they were truly aligned. And then the most foolish among you suggest the situation in the US today is akin to that in Britain when she was first elected when, in fact, it is the twisted application of her ill considered policies that has put the US economy into the ruinous position in which it is now placed. Mourn her as a human being passed on, sure, but for goodness sake don't for a moment imagine you understand her or the nation she governed, let alone the entire world beyond. You don't.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

TrevorNSydney Australia
Thatcher revived the class system in the UK, which should have well and truly ended after the WW1 and WW2. She atacked the poor, the working class and their unions while rewarding the rich and titled. She pursued the Irish and escalated that sad conflict. 

Her true legacy was when she deregulated the banks and privatised everything in sight. Just like in the USA, privatisation has not made anyone better off and the bank deregulation sowed the seeds of the 2007 GFC we are still experiencing today.

She may have had some good points but the things I remember most are the stories of the dispossesed freezing after having their electricity cut off, or the stories of old men and women queing for water at a public tap because they could not pay their bills. These were the very same people who delivered the 2 world war victories and who had a right to expect a fair share of the rewards of peace.
April 8, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

Jane DavsonUpstate New York
Margaret Thatcher was a wonderful leader when it came to running a country. She understood the needs of the people of Briton and really took care of them as well as the rest of us. She worked with everyone around the world and really made everyone else look good. She was just simply amazing and I was glad to check on what the British were doing during her run. It is going to go down as a really good part of their history one that we will all enjoy learning.
April 8, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

MaryOBrooklyn
Something these two arch conservatives had in common: dementia.
April 8, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

bignybugsnew york
and we elected them multiple times -- quite a comment on the quality of our electorates (!)
April 9, 2013 at 2:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Mygg W Fivepennsylvania
Even though I was a teenager at the time, I remember her and Reagan - cut from the same cloth, slashing benefits and social institutions for the working class, putting the mentally ill out on the street, scolding the people she was elected to serve. A cold-hearted person detached from reality. She introduced a particularly vile meanness to the political stage. A terrible person.
April 8, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

WesatchEverywhere
"Margaret Thatcher feed market forces" ????

Funny, if that were the case, the heads of the biggest banks, central banks and commercial banks would be sitting behind bars instead of being bailed out touted as heroes for wrecking the world financial system.

And that is the result of the brand of capitalism Thatcher and Reagan created which is simply putting their hands in our pockets, taking what is ours and putting it in their pockets. Sorta sounds like socialism for the 1%?
April 8, 2013 at 9:26 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

AlexLos Angeles, CA
Governing isn't about conviction; it's about using the best evidence for the best policy proposal and seeing if that works, again using evidence. It's about whatever works. It's a science.
April 8, 2013 at 9:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

LynnNevada
She certainly didn't embody the Christian principles of caring for each other. I think there was something terribly wrong with her. Her rigidity was a tragedy for England. Most conservative thinking is as tragic as hers and it creates bad consequences that the world is still wrestling with. She ruled by appealing to the worst in people, and we never learn by those mistakes. There will probably be more like her in our future, unfortunately.
April 8, 2013 at 9:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

KimberlyCalifornia
Rest in Peace, Mrs. Thatcher. A courageous and strong woman.
April 8, 2013 at 9:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

Dan KravitzHarpswell, Me
I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more. 

Unfortunately millions of wage slaves still have to.

I still thank her for her minor role in freeing Eastern Europe and even more for her instrumental role in freeing Argentina.

Dan Kravitz
April 8, 2013 at 9:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

ChrisMexico
Which Margaret Thatcher should we mourn? The one who opposed sanctions on apartheid South Africa? The one who praised Augusto Pinochet for "bringing democracy to Chile"? The one who took milk from the mouths of poor children? The one who used the most ruthless measures to crush the Miners Strike?

People are dancing in streets in Brixton, Belfast and other working class neighborhoods across the UK. Undoubtedly that offends many people who have no special sympathy for Thatcher. But it is a reminder, at this moment in which she is being sanctified, that she destroyed many peoples lives. Poor children who grew up in England under Thatcher still say "She took my milk." And she did. Her vision of "freedom" was always little more than the freedom of the rich to squeeze the poor a little harder.

These periods of public mourning following the deaths of heads of state are political events. They take advantage of our reluctance to "speak ill of the dead" to rewrite history and transform villains into saints. Thatcher is dead. Regrettably her legacy lives on in the willing of a US president who promised Hope and Change to cut Social Security. Whether you choose to dance tonight or not, you will have to fight tomorrow against the cramped and ugly world Maggie Thatcher helped make.
April 8, 2013 at 8:45 p.m.RECOMMENDED15

Dave CoullScotland
"Her legacy is of public division, private selfishness, and a cult of greed, which together shackle far more of the human spirit than they ever set free."
April 8, 2013 at 8:27 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

QTCatchNY
We need more conviction politicians in America, that's for sure. If we had more on both sides of the aisle, and they were less disrespectful of process, I think it would lead to a huge change for the better.
April 8, 2013 at 8:26 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

KathleenWilkes-Barre
I am writing to the Public Editor about the gross omission in this piece of nothing more than two sentences about Thatcher's long and confrontational role in Northern Ireland, including the death of 10 Irish hunger strikers. The hunger strikers are not even mentioned. This omission reflects beyond poorly on the Times' historical accuracy - by neglecting what was one of the enduring memories and tragedies of her tenure and which received worldwide coverage.
April 8, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED19

georgeyoCitrus Heights, CA
Interesting how Britain's Labour Party can say nothing kind on the day of her death. That shows how petty the Labour Party really is. She, Reagan, and Gorbachev changed the world for the better. It is what has happened since that has put us in a terrible state. May she rest in peace, and may her children find peace at this time.
April 8, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Bill AppledorfBritish Columbia
Verified
Cut taxes on the rich and tax receipts will go up.

Cut spending on the poor and the poor will be more prosperous.

Bust unions and workers will have bigger paychecks.

Offshore jobs and employment will increase.

Deregulate the banks and the financial sector will be more stable.

"There is no such thing as society, only individual men and women."

What a bunch of baloney.
April 8, 2013 at 8:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED24

Bill AppledorfBritish Columbia
Verified
Privatize the railroads and service will improve.

Privatize the hospitals and health care costs will decrease.

Cut funds to public schools and education will improve.

Neoliberal nonsense.

Pretexts under which to transfer a nation's wealth into the pockets of the 1%.
April 8, 2013 at 8:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED19

Donald SeekinsWaipahu HI
Verified
Many people criticized Thatcher for her harsh and confrontational style, her seeming lack of humanity when dealing with anyone who opposed her. But the true judgment of Thatcher is how her policies changed the country she ruled. No one would begrudge her prickly personality if she had brought lasting prosperity to the regions outside London or Britain's re-industrialization, but instead she turned what had been the world's foremost social democracy into a financial system to which a country just happened to be attached. Thatcher planted deeply in British soil the "ethic" that a ruling class can be absolutely bereft of noblesse oblige, and thoroughly pleased with itself.
April 8, 2013 at 8:03 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

Concerned ReaderBoston
Margaret Thatcher saved Britain from being an irrelevant country run by unions that produced nothing of value. Due to her reformations it retains a still vital economy and respect on the world stage.
April 8, 2013 at 7:56 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

Alberto P. Abreus, RARSC Architects, Cliffside Park, NJ
And she made Britain an irrelevant country run by banksters, oligarchs and authoritarians instead. Change does not mean better, it simply means change.
April 9, 2013 at 3:09 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Sleetmute12Anchorage, Alaska
While I have mixed feelings about Thatcher's legacy -- tough treatment of labour and the policies which stifled economic opportunity for some and widened the gap between right and poor -- I admired her singularity of purpose and clarity of vision, her toughness, he stamina. She was a leader -- so while my resentments may be intellectual, my admiration is purely human.
April 8, 2013 at 7:56 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

JeffWNC
You are not the first to state this position, but it's one I can't understand. You all seem to be saying, "I hate what she did, and my, she did it so well!"
April 8, 2013 at 9:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

MauiyankeeHaiku, HI
There is no denying that Ms. Thatcher remains one of the most important leaders of the 20th Century. Not Stalin, not Hitler, not Lenin, not Churchill, not Roosevelt, not Mandela.

Then there is the greatest military victory of the 20th Century: Las Malvinas.

The British economic miracle is her lasting legacy, much like the American economy is the Reagan/Bush legacy.

And she was no Kamela......or Diana.
April 8, 2013 at 7:56 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Roberto MarsicanoMilan, Italy
Before praising the work of Mrs Thatcher, it would be better to read the book "Going South" (http://www.amazon.com/Going-South-Britain-Third-Economy/dp/0230392547) which describes a United Kingdom which will have a Third World economy by 2014.
April 8, 2013 at 7:55 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

RobertUSA
What would Darwin say?
April 8, 2013 at 7:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Mike SivierWales, UK
Having lived through the Thatcher years and the changes her government perpetrated on British society, allow me to assure you that there is little reason to heap praise upon her.
The entire thrust of her thinking was to ensure that the rich and powerful became richer and more powerful, and the poor - especially those with intelligence and/or ability - would be denied any chance of prosperity or success.
What's the American Dream all about? Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness? Everybody created equal, with opportunity for each according to their ability or achievement, regardless of social class or circumstances of birth?
The Thatcher government is a rejection of all those aspirations, as is the current Cameron government, which is its natural successor.
The Thatcher government deprived people of their liberty by creating a large underclass of unemployed people and using the threat of unemployment to depress workers' wages. As a result, they did not have the disposable funds to take advantage of the sell-offs of national utilities such as British Gas and British Telecom. She sold social housing but did not build any to replace it. She used the police as a tool of political repression, rather than as guardians of the law. She used taxation in a similar manner, crippling the poor with punitive measures such as the hated Poll Tax - a flat-rate charge, effectively a tax cut for the rich, but a huge tax hike for the poor. That was her fatal error, of course.
April 8, 2013 at 7:35 p.m.RECOMMENDED17

Jerry DelamaterNew Haven CT
Someone once said that Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi were proof that women could be as bad at governing as men. So true!
April 8, 2013 at 7:34 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

MTDC
My family moved to Scotland in 1978 with my father's (U.S.) government job when I was 9. Having visited my mother's family in England the previous year, I thought I knew what to expect. The reason that Margaret Thatcher won, from my perspective, (and most of our neighbor's) was because the Union's were out of control. During the Christmas season, all the major trade union's went "on strike" for two weeks to add to their vacation. We had no heat for two weeks, no electricity for two weeks, no trash pick up, etc. This was during the middle of a horribly cold winter. Our village was a coal mining village and very much pro-Labour. Not after that fiasco. The average person was so angry that Mrs. Thatcher won even in the village we lived in. It became so ingrained in the average person's mind, that Labour had to run as "New Labour" under Tony Blair to have a prayer of winning. Lot of interesting comments today but I suspect most are from people who did not live in the U.K. in 1979.
April 8, 2013 at 7:34 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Concerned ReaderBoston
The reason I respect Maggie so much is that she had the strength to break the unions. The UK is much better for it.
April 8, 2013 at 8:27 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

cjSydney
Annette Funicello, also died today. 

And of the two, who brought greater joy and happiness to the world? And greater division and misery?
April 8, 2013 at 7:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

JakeWisconsin
Ah, Annette. I had a big crush on her when I was in second grade, and I'll always remember her fondly.
April 9, 2013 at 7:17 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Frances O'Neill ZimmermanSan Diego, CA
All I can suggest is go see the 1989 film of Peter Greenaway: "The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover." It's all about Thatcher England.
April 8, 2013 at 7:16 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

paulineliverpool
Come to Liverpool and we will tell you what rally went on.
April 8, 2013 at 7:16 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

CeadanNew Jersey
Neither she nor Ronald Reagan could have accomplished the degradation of the middle and working classes and the exaltation of corporate power and mindless greed in their respective nations without the complicity of a corporate-controlled media. Fittingly, it is they, not the people, who mourn her passing today.
April 8, 2013 at 7:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED25

rUS
Superbly put.
April 8, 2013 at 7:34 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

MauricioBariloche, Argentina
Argentina's murderous military government did Mr. Thatcher a political favor when they invaded the Malvinas/Falklands; and Mrs. Thatcher did Argentina a favor by giving these murderers the final push to end their time in power. We must, however, regret the many young lives that were lost on both sides.
April 8, 2013 at 7:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

whatever, NYNew York
The Falklands? What is that all about? The mouse that roared.
April 8, 2013 at 7:08 p.m.

Honest JohnDallas, TX
Just imagine how utterly divergent is a comparison between Lady Thatcher and Hillary, the darling of our liberal leftist elites. It's a breathtaking gap... The world should be, but of course isn't, very grateful that M. Thatcher took her turn at bat when the world (well western civilization anyway) needed it most - well until now again. Rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 7:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

C.A. MeyerNew Jersey
It takes no "courage" or "principles" to use power to champion the interests of the wealthy and already powerful, only contempt for the powerless.

To see her face again, on the Times website, made me feel nauseated
April 8, 2013 at 7:07 p.m.RECOMMENDED18

Brent WilkinsManhattan
I've never really liked her, which leads me to quote her contemporary, the great François Mitterand of what he once said of her: "La bouche de Marilyn, le regard de Caligula".... I agree with him!
April 8, 2013 at 7:07 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

Patricia SproferaEast Elmhurst, NY
Thank you, Baroness, for your steadfast character and ever-present strength. My condolences to your family, to your friends and to your colleagues.
April 8, 2013 at 7:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Burma15NC
On your coat of arms the motto is: "Cherish Freedom". 

In appreciation of your steadfast support of the USA I adopted that as my motto on my coat of arms.

Well done old girl, well and nobly done.
April 8, 2013 at 7:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

RavennaNY
My favorite quote of Margaret Thatcher's:

"I always cheer up immensely if they attack one personally, as it means they have not a single argument left."
April 8, 2013 at 7:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

jbok
Not really necessarily true, though, is it? 

A quote I found interesting was this: “No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions; he had money as well.”

That's the lesson she took from the parable by which Jesus illustrated the point that whoever we happen to be with is our neighbor, whom we should love. 

It was about money to her, and how good it is to have it, and how useless people are who don't. 

And that speaks volumes.
April 8, 2013 at 7:35 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

kanankCalifornia
Compared to the current crop of politicians, She definitely looks much larger than life and a cleaner and decent politician. And more than that she didn't write any stupid books like 'Lean In'.
April 8, 2013 at 7:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

rmb37Luxembourg
On a day when we lost a great leader, the media continues to focus on the women who lead websites as if they are transforming the world by creating better apps and better news sites for our idle time. Margaret Thatcher helped change the world for the better. I doubt she ever thought about the concept of 'Lean In', she just jumped in!. She lead by her conviction. Whatever you believe, shouldn't we expect our leaders today to have the same courage?
April 8, 2013 at 6:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

dan gilganYorkshire, England.
Many of us in the UK will not shed a tear. Most of her policies have proven to be disastrous for Britain in the long run. The deregulation of the financial sector ultimately led to the financial collapse. The selling of Britain's social housing, the privatisation of energy supply and railway's, the dismantling of our manufacturing industry, the escalation of the troubles in Northern Ireland, the support of Apartheid in SA.

This woman was cruel and heartless, happy to destroy the working class communities of Northern England, Scotland and Wales in her ideological crusade.
April 8, 2013 at 6:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED27

donald tuohychicago
To this day the world is still paying for greed is great Reaganism and Thatcherism.
April 8, 2013 at 6:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

Colin McKerlieSydney, Australia
It is deeply curious that this otherwise thorough essay completely omits the episode in Thatcher's life which so many people regard as providing the most telling evidence of her true character.

Thatcher's public friendship and defence of Augusto Pinochet, the brutal Chilean dictator who overthrew Chile's democraticly elected socialist government in 1973, generated a visceral disgust which nothing in her life can overcome.

The fact that she publicly praised Pinochet for introducing "democracy" to Chile while he was under house arrest in Britain, awaiting a possible trial for crimes against humanity in Spain, was a revolting and despicable perversion of history.

At the heart of Thatcher's personal philosophy was a readiness to inflict terrible harm on other people in pursuit of the selfish individualism she embodied. Her endorsement of Pinochet's reign of terror was simply the appex of this evil.

The debate about Thatcher's political legacy essentially reduces to the basic debate about whether the ends justify the means. Whatever it can be argued that Thatcher achieved she did so with methods which were extreme and unncecessary.

If you got rich thanks to Thatcher's politics, bully for you, but the people who have an attitude about Thatcher based on assessments of humanity rather than personal enrichment universally regard her as a blight on democracy and human dignity.
April 8, 2013 at 6:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED23

cny
you're going a bit too far by saying "Pinochet's reign of terror". Most chileans would disagree with that characterization. Even though we are well aware of the countless instances of military abuse under the junta's regime. But reign of terror? A bit too far
April 8, 2013 at 8:20 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

RickPortland, Oregon
I suspect the Chileans murdered by Augusto Pinochet would disagree with you, c.
April 9, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Ajs3London
A remarkable person but one who did more harm than good. She called herself a "conviction politician" That sounds better than it is when you consider that this is the mantle that Republicans in Congress and the Tea Party and its supporters like to think they wear. Yes, she changed Britain but in a clumsy, wilful manner without understanding or caring about the consequences of her actions. She seemed singularly without compassion for those that she hurt and dispossessed with her smash and burn "economic reforms" based on an all too scant understanding of finance and economics. Her legacy: Britain's vanished industrial base, an unregulated financial sector, the precursor of the financial calamity that enveloped the world in 2008, income and wealth disparity that has corroded British society, desolate communities up and down the country, lives ruined just because the lady was not for turning. I am sure there are many in Belgravia who are mourning BaronessThatcher today but there are many more in Brixton and Glasgow are popping champagne in street parties. That's our Maggie, then, a divider to the end!
April 8, 2013 at 6:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

JimNew York, NY
Conviction politician? Yes, she like Pinochet should have been convicted of crimes against humanity!
April 8, 2013 at 9:46 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

WTOregon
Her union busting removed a bulwark against the dominance and power of corporations, to the detriment of the working class. Her legacy, in the ever growing chasm between the rich and poor, lives on.
April 8, 2013 at 6:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED19

SamUK
I'm too young to honestly say i witnessed the destruction Thatcher brought to my community, but I do remember my grandfather, a miner for 25 years and not a man given to undue emotion, weeping in front of the television. Now I'm older i live amongst the wreckage she left behind; whole regions given over to long term unemployment and the inevitable social dysfunction it brings. More than that I have to tolerate the current crop of Tory aristocrats blaming the unemployed for not overcoming the poverty she threw them into; the market reforms she pioneered have imploded with greed and the people she kicked are getting kicked again. She hated the Irish and thought Nelson Mandela was a terrorist. What a charmer.

People praise her for her strong leadership, but she conducted herself like a psychopath, disregarding people to suit her own agenda. There is one corner of Britain where she will never be forgiven, and if I had a shovel I would bury her myself.
April 8, 2013 at 6:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED26

Michael WalshHartford CT
A great warrior on behalf of the ruling class and all those who identify with it; for them, she won many important victories. Fittingly, she died at the Ritz as a guest of the Barclay brothers, the bankers. The BBC says she could get "extra care" there; I wouldn't doubt it. She was not an authentically popular figure in Britain, despite claims to the contrary by her many hagiographers; at the high water mark, she had something like 40% of the popular vote. Certainly she reoriented British politics. But her policies were possible only because of the success of social democracy in the period from the 1940s to the 1970s. Neoliberalism too shall pass.
April 8, 2013 at 6:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

sandpiperUSA
First, Joseph Gregory has written an absolutely fascinating, informative, and balanced article. I believe Mrs Thatcher's career and memory are well served. Second, I believe Mrs. Thatcher set an example of a determined, plain spoken, and extremely capable woman and prime minister. Although my American opinion will count for little in Great Britain, in the years since her departure from government, I felt her successors lacked her strength, intelligence, dedication, and foresight, and opted instead to uphold party ideology. The progress of the British economy or lack of it since that time reflects those shortcomings. Unfortunately, however, we in the United States cannot hold up any in our current government who come close to matching her forthright manner and staunch belief in the power of individual effort as the keystone to a more stable and effective government. Such is the gradual decline in both our nations.
If, as many suggest, there is life after death, I have no doubt Mrs. Thatcher will take a strong hand in the running of it.
Lou Baker
April 8, 2013 at 6:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

NimbusOxford, MS
She was the last Titan. England and the world will enjoy no more great leaders in age suffocated by popular reason and dilettantish technocracy. May her legacy of ora et labora stand as an acropolis before voluptas.
April 8, 2013 at 6:36 p.m.

BabeoufIreland
In parts of London street parties to celebrate her death have already started. People who don't normally drink on a Monday night are making an exception tonight in an attempt to wash the final taste of the 'Thatcher Years' away. Its even possible that her actual funeral might spark one last (real) riot of joy.
April 8, 2013 at 6:35 p.m.RECOMMENDED15

Chris87654St. Louis, MO
Always sorry to hear about these people (that I've known since childhood) dying, but time moves on... Now that I'm older and they're calling Ms. Thatcher "conservative", I'm wondering how that fits in when Britain is pretty much socialized medicine, fairly high taxes (to support what individuals DON'T have to pay), and no guns. Also wondering, given these things (unless all that Ms. Thatcher set in motion got overturned), how our own Sarah Barracuda connected with her. Sarah would have no socialized anything (unless for Alaska), low taxes, and lotsa guns.

Anyway, sorry to hear of Ms. Thatcher's passing. I was in Britain once and loved it - coincidentally was cleaning up here yesterday and found two brand new packaged T-shirts I must have picked up there - one with a map of the Underground, and one with a big GB and the British flag.
April 8, 2013 at 6:34 p.m.

burgermouthuk
She stood by the Falklanders. I might disagree with a lot she did, but she knew democracy was worth fighting for. A point which seems to escape Argentina with its `they were ours in 1380 so give them back' nonsense
April 8, 2013 at 6:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

William FairmanColumbia, MO
Maggie and Ronnie began the downward slide of the middle class. Unleashing the market forces is another way to say a race to the bottom, with the privileged few at the top doing well.

As a successful small business person, I do not find the lure of unfettered capitalism to be a good thing. Private enterprise does some things very well and some things quite badly. It is not a panacea.
April 8, 2013 at 6:10 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

IndependentIndependenceville
For those of us who don't worship our rulers, can you tell me when the news cycle will change?. I will come back then.
April 8, 2013 at 6:10 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

maytlooCalgary, Alberta, Canada
Unfortunately our Conservative prime minister shares her real ack of compassion for those less fortunate. That wil be her legacy-one that leads me to not really mourn her passing. And her Darwinian 'survival of the fittest' is no example for the women of this world.
April 8, 2013 at 6:10 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

Marc KaganNew York
Another person who made the world very much worse for living in it. If she had lived 100 years earlier, she would have been working with Cecil Rhodes to create the precursors to apartheid. If she had lived 200 years earlier, she would have demanded a fiercier fight against the American Revolutionists. If she had lived 300 years ago, she would have executed Levellers.
April 8, 2013 at 6:09 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

Concerned ReaderBoston
Yes, the UK was clearly much better during the times of crippling strikes.
April 8, 2013 at 8:27 p.m.

Hernando Pareja LambogliaCartagena, Colombia
It was preposterous her giving shelter to former Chile dictator Augusto Pinochet, when authorities wanted him because his involment in the death of a French citizen. This showed her as a staunch right wing activist who was always ready to take measures that would worsen the situation of the down troden whom she overtrly dispised. As a grandoughter of a shoe maker she must have been more condescendent with the class she proceeded from. I realy find no reason to praise her. If she had paid more attention to her family probably she wouldn't have raised a spoiled child who was permanent cause of scandal. Her government had reached the lowest rates of popularity when the attempt that blew up the hotel where she was staying when all the mebers of her cabinet perished and she was one of the few survivors. This event bolstered her reputation that had gone to pots at the moment that very likely the Tories would had been defeted at the polls and she might have been ousted of office to the relief of many kept under her despotic regime.
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

GDBoston, MA
Anyone can foment change by playing up hatred and division. The masters of the game manage to do it while preserving civility, appealing to the greater good, offering alternatives to the political losers. These are the signs of great statesmanship.

Thatcher had none of these saving graces of leadership.

Any leader who reads from the Iron Lady's playbook may indeed effect change, but will be reviled with the kinds of invective we now see in social media. Would you rather be remembered as a Gandhi or as a Stalin?
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

Casual ObserverLos Angeles
Achieving the top job in a great nation is an accomplishment in and of itself is considered to be great. Mrs. Thatcher accomplished a lot in her life and whether one agrees or disagrees concerning the merits of the means or the outcomes of her endeavors, she will be remembered for many centuries as the first woman who severed as the Prime Minister of the U.K. 

She also became an icon for enthusiasts of free market capitalism along with Reagan, who have been heroes of conservatives who believe in a magical underpinning the real world economies which they can as easily give up as small children can give up the tooth fairy, the Easter bunny or Santa Claus.
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.

Casual ObserverLos Angeles
"...she will be remembered for many centuries as the first woman who served as the Prime Minister of the U.K..."
April 8, 2013 at 6:41 p.m.

NickBluffton
Authoritarian populism and trickle-down economics are not worthy of a tribute...
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED22

EmmaEngland
I am a great supporter of Margaret Thatcher, however what riles me the most, are the sanctimonious amongst us who feel they have sufficient evidence (despite most of them not having lived in the UK, neither during Thatcher's terms nor after her resignation) to make ill-judged assessments of both her character and her political decisions. What people don't seem to see is the fact that 'Maggie' got our country out of the seemingly bottomless pit constructed by the Labour party, and in order to do this sacrifices had to be made. Concerning her anti-gay policies, we surely have no right to judge her for her views? What is important, is that we view her years as PM as you would any historical 'reign' and judge it not by today's moral values, for they are significantly different and much further developed from those held by people when Thatcher was PM, but immerse ourselves into the commonly held views of those surrounding Margaret.

On a final note, to warm the hearts of those incessantly criticising Mrs. Thatcher : Almost all of her achievements were obliterated by Mr. Blair's atrocious Labour government policies which most Britons today see as the one reason why our country is currently languishing amidst this most hideous of financial disasters.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, and relish the freedom to express them, but for heaven's sake, a great woman has died today. No matter what your political views, respect this woman's death as you would any other.
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Casual ObserverLos Angeles
There were many things wrong with what the Labor Party's policies. That does not justify ignoring the harm from one's counter balancing policies because one has found some people who excuse it by saying it's the natural way of things, some contemporary version of 19th Century Social Darwinism. What is worse, these promoters of free markets were advocating something that had little to do with our modern world. Had they bothered to investigate exactly how the great industrial economies of the West were created and maintained, they would see that free markets were one of the impediments that were removed by various forms of monopolies and monopolistic practices that limited the freedom in the market place that exposed big endeavors to failure and ruin for investors. Too many competitors made margins too thin and too much risk keep investors from making the big investments.
April 8, 2013 at 7:07 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

BillCharlottesville
Today there are people who mourn her as well as people who mourn her legacy. My heartfelt condolences to both.
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Robes MendesBrazil
“A man`s right to work as he will, to spend what he earns, to own property, to have the State as servant and not as master—these are the British inheritance. They are the essence of a free country and on that freedom all our others freedoms depend.”
“We want free economy, not only because it guarantees our liberties, but because it is the best way of creating wealth.”( The Iron lady, John Campbell, Pinguin books, page 86)
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Leigh and SaraSouth of France
This is addressed to all American readers of the NYT and our US friends reading comments here.

Please ignore the rabid meanderings on here of last century UK socialists who hanker for the old days of living on state benefits. The kind of people who thought it was automatic to take weeks of industrial action if the biscuits were removed as a freebie in the works cafe, if their corporation was in trouble. 

What happened? Some of these corporations went bust, naturally. The country was in the control of the unions. I remember doing my school homework by candlelight in the mid-70s. There were power cuts because of industrial action by the power workers and miners and this lasted many weeks.

Now, the Brits are a strong and powerful ally of the US and we wouldn't be, if it hadn't have been for Baroness T. Workers still have rights today, but not ridiculous ones which were making business impossible.

I'm a man of the Thatcher generation. When I came of age in 1978, Britain was on the way out. I supported her from 1975 when she became leader of the Conservative Party, I campaigned for her in 1979 as 19-year old, embarrassingly once marching with a placard: "Put a woman on top for a change!"

[Editor, I understand the need for short postings but will you please allow a second half of this message? It is a major event after all.]

Leigh
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
I call straw man. I read no such "hankerings."
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

JMAPA
G-d bless the voice of reason from you and your wife, sir.
April 8, 2013 at 6:10 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

RickPortland, Oregon
I visited the UK in 1977. It was quite a different country from the dark, dismal wreck portrayed by Thatcherites. Of course, one can't speak authoritatively about a nation after one short visit, but in my experience, I do not recognize at all the failed state that Thatcherites relish describing. Nor, I suspect, do many Britons.
April 9, 2013 at 8:24 p.m.

AnneO.
It's interesting seeing what a difference there is in these comments. Canned condolences and reverence from those who probably never stepped foot in the UK during her administration, and critical and specific bullet points on why she was a failure from Brits. She seems more popular abroad than at home.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

gregjonestaiwan
Famously she once said that there was no society, only individuals, one wonders what it is like in one's final moments when one has embraced such a vision of atomized selfishness. I celebrate no ones death but this was a person who brought much pain into the world.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

DRSNew York, NY
In celebrating individualism she was dead on.
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

JMAPA
Nothing compared to the communist regimes against which she so ambivalently defended freedom.

And the pain she brought was simply the childish frustration of unionistas put in their rightful place. The productive class fondly remembers how she had them banging their hammers and sickles together in impotent rage.
April 8, 2013 at 6:10 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
Why couldn't the managers put the "unionistas" in their "rightful place"? They needed . . . wait for it . . . government assistance to do for them.

Tell me again who the welfare lovers are, J-Ma.
April 8, 2013 at 8:19 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

bobdub
Her best day was when she left politics. She done too many inhuman things. May she rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

Carolyn EgeliValley Lee, Md.
Verified
Every one should read Howard Zinn. He goes on page after page describing the clubbing, the beating and the out right murder of the union busting activities of this government in People's HIstory of the United States. Thatcher is of the same breed. I have no use for such denial of people's rights.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED17

A.G. AliasSt Louis, MO
True, Margaret Thatcher was a remarkable lady, a transformative prime minister of Britain!

However, she had a negative influence on British and world economy, as an 'ENABLER' to REAGANOMICS. It is also true that she had only a modest influence in reinforcing reaganomics, nevertheless, the negative impact on the less fortunate around the world, more on the Third World, has been formidable.

Another factor, the invasion of the Falklands, not too unlike the invasion of Grananda, after a humiliating retreat from Lebanon, by president Reagan was at best indecent.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

bala srinisaginaw mich
Margaret Thatcher was not only Conservative but very shrewed&VISIONARY in her firm alliance with USA when all of europe was opposing our NATO&PERSHING missile deployment she was first to agree to have them in their soil.She knew UK needed USA just like Winsto Churchill did during WWII.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.

Safwat ShawkyCairo Egypt
God bless her sole she was very good woman... .
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

SPOrange County, CA
“There is a tendency to forget that ‘liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty, as well as by the abuses of power.’ Without restraints imposed by the rule of law, liberty can consume itself….There can be no freedom without order. There can be no order without authority; and authority that is impotent or hesitant in the face of intimidation, crime, and violence, cannot endure. The rule of law is all that stands between civilization and barbarism, for, as Locke said, ‘where there is no law, there is no freedom.’ Most important, the purpose of law is not to diminish but to enlarge freedom....Britain and America continue to share these common commitments and it is upon them that the deep and abiding relationship between our two nations will be secured….As I have had occasion to say before, the reason our interests have so often coincided is not merely expediency but because we stand upon the same hallowed moral ground: an enduring belief in the sanctity of the individual, a commitment to democracy and representative government, common religious traditions, and an unfaltering dedication to the rule of law. And it has been by our willingness to defend those basic principles that America and Britain have served as a beacon to the world, lighting the way through the darkest days of this century.” (Margaret Thatcher, The James Bryce Lecture, “Reason and Religion: The Moral Foundations of Freedom,” September 24, 1996 (margaretthatcher.org).)
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.

SeanNew York, NY
Margaret Thatcher changed Britain, and helped changed the world, for the better. While painful to many, her stance against unions and privatization of the nationalized industries was for the better. The Nationalization frenzy of heavy industry post war created nothing but ineffiency and waste, and gave far too much political power to unions, while undercutting British industrial and economic productivity which was long in decline at that point. The coal strike merely proved that; in what should be a very easy decision--closing pits that are unprofitable while you are trying to move away from coal--a group of workers held a strike against the public interest. The break with the post war Keynesian consensus and mass privatization allowed the British economy a period of prosperity and growth hitherto unimagined, as part of a global liberalization that reminded the world the power of free men and markets, and helped bring hurtling down the iron curtain and the chains of authoritarianism in Europe and the world over.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

ApplecountyEngland
"In the last analysis...her stock in trade was division. By instinct, inclination and effect she was a polariser. She glorified both individualism and the nation state, but lacked much feeling for the communities and bonds that knit them together. When she spoke, as she often did, about "our people", she did not mean the people of Britain; she meant people who thought like her and shared her prejudices. She abhorred disorder, decadence and bad behaviour but she was the empress ruler of a process of social and cultural atomism that has fostered all of them, and still does." 

Quote from The Guardian Editorial (8th April, 2013).

Could not have put it better myself...and 'her people' now want to use my tax pounds to bury her.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

ed2001Kelso, WA
She changed Britain from the decent, fair-minded and hard-working society of her father, Alfred Roberts, into the greedy, rapacious society of her son, Mark.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

R.New York
Verified
Thatcher ushered the UK out of the dark ages of socialism, and the economy improved, albeit gradually.
April 8, 2013 at 5:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

jbok
Blessed are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.

This woman needs our prayers.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

doug pny
RIP
She did more good in a week than Obama has done in a lifetime. Sad to see the ignorance of those who see it otherwise. Facts don't lie.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

crack123Madrid
Margaret Thatcher: "The single currency will be fatal to the poorer countries because it´ll devastate their inefficient economies" - Europe Back To 19th Century. In regard to Growth Rates Long Conditions, Spain, Italy and France are as weak as they have been in over a century - http://www.miguelangeldiez.com/europe-economy
April 8, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

RXFXWORLDWanganui, New Zealand
To paraphrase Justice Frankfurter's comment on learning of the death of Justice Fred Vinson,"this proves the existence of God." David Cameron called her "lion hearted." That depends on whether it's the quality of hunting in packs associated with pride or simply waiting til someone's caught the prey, then snatching it from them by bullying.
I heard her false claim that Reagan brought down the Soviet Union, and ended the cold war (;part of right-wing myth-making) derided by Gorbachev who reminded her that he had something to do with it.
Thatcher demonstrated that while the British men who run things have been brought up to bully, they didn't know what to do with a female bully because of their own ;patronizing sexism.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

tarchinCarmel Valley, CA
Like her co-conservative, Reagan, she'll be bigger and better in death than in life. OTOH, she should be convicted for her lack of consensus building and empathy.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

cool handSt. Louis, MO
It has been absolutely predictable that the "media machines" in the USA have elected not to discuss Thatcher's "romance" with that butcher Pinochet!!!" Pathetic.
April 8, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

andycambridge
My 90-something mother said, 'Mrs T? yes, I remember her. She sang some good songs, didn't she?' So true.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Gerald VNew York
She was the single worst, most destructive politician from an Allied nation since the end of WWII. She set England back 100 years and helped point America to a course we must never completely follow.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

Jen in AstoriaAstoria, NY
I lived in London as a student in 88-89, and I find it distressing that many of her retrograde social policies are being whitewashed here.

I remember the White Paper fiasco, the YTS program (pretty much unpaid slavery for students), the salmonella outbreak that happened on her watch (I got a dose of it--not fun), the absolutely vicious anti-gay policies meant to keep the voices of gays and lesbians out of the public, and attempts to restrict access to condoms to younger people just when the AIDS epidemic was ramping up.

I wonder how many people are dead now because of these last two points especially? It's especially sad in the light of the progress we've made; her and St. Ronnie Regan look like the dinosaurs that they are in hindsight.
April 8, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.RECOMMENDED19

reno domenicoUkraine
glad both her and Reagan are gone...both contributed to the selfish me first society - not to mention ketchup as a vegetable for school children...
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

John N.Syracuse, New York
An obit of nine pages. Just out of curiosity what's the record?
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

IgnacBudapestNYT Pick
I have always found comparisons between Thatcher and Reagan misleading. Thatcher balanced the budget, deregulated the economy, reestablished respect for the rule of law, worked 14 hours a day and the only war she was involved in was a response to a foreign attack. Reagan blew up the federal deficit to unprecedented levels, launched several military interventions, committed treason (Iran–Contra) and even his own aides commented on his 3–hour–a–day work ethic. Whether you agree with her policies or not, Thatcher was the model of an effective libertarian. Reagan was a lazy, incompetent fool.
April 8, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

A.G. AliasSt Louis, MO
Reagan was a remarkably effective transformative leader. He was no fool. With advancing age and periodic surfacing his Alzheimer's, he may have dozed off in meetings. He meticulously kept a diary, and regularly communicated with a woman, as a relief from day-today stresses, a diversion, or whatever, but nothing scandalous.

But his success as a leader was so bad for the world, especially the THird World, as their governments with vested interests of policy-makers there gleefully copied reaganomics, of tax cuts and lifting barriers of importation of fancy consumer goods, which only they could afford to buy. Mrs. Thatcher was a modestly effective "enabler" to all this, which does not mean everything she did was negative.
April 8, 2013 at 6:11 p.m.

reubenrCornwallNYT Pick
Reforged is a good touch, but "in shackles" should have completed the phrase.
April 8, 2013 at 5:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Not FooledArizona USA
Her final years as PM (including the poll tax, which I paid as an American living in England) reveal the genius of our 22nd Amendment.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.

EFBaraschSac CityNYT Pick
The best thing about Margaret Thatcher is that she had a brain. Unlike most Conservatives, she was not stupid. 

Her greatest achievements I believe were in assuring Reagan, who was not as bright as she, that Gorbachev was the real deal and should be trusted and in going into the Falklands. Whether the Falklands are properly British or not is not as important as her defeating the Argentinian Generals which ended their rule of Argentina and was a good thing for all of Latin America.

She also was right in trying to keep Britain separate from the EU. Her analysis of that situation was accurate.

Where she ultimately failed was in solving the problem of the decline of the Industrial North in England which is still the Achilles Heel of British Right Wing Politics. Thatcherite conservative nostrums originally applied to the North are now failing all of Great Britain under David Cameron.

What Britain needs now is someone even smarter than Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Bob BrownVentura County, Calif.
Criminalize greed. Prosecute aggressively.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

cerUSA
Having grown up in Britain during the Thatcher years, I had a front-row seat to the violence she did to the country. Industries and ways of life decimated. Generations of men and women made permanently unemployed/unemployable. Not pretty.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

JMAPA
They were unemployable because they were unionistas who knew how to do nothing but bang their hammers and sickles and were too lazy to do anything else.

None of that was Lady Thatcher's fault.
April 8, 2013 at 8:26 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Concerned ReaderBoston
In countries such as China, India and Brazil, millions of people with far less money and opportunity become successful within one generation. The only thing stopping these Brits are themselves.
April 8, 2013 at 8:44 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

StephenLondon
Maggie Thatcher rescued my country from the union bullies, the strikes, the blackouts, the despair and general anarchy of the 1970's. If only we had real leadership like that now that Blair / Brown and their banker friends have destroyed the economy.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Robert LanzaTakoma Park Maryland
Lady Thatcher, when asked what she thought was her greatest achievement, replied "New Labor." In September 2014 people might ask whether Lady Thatcher's greatest [posthumous] achievement was the SNP and the dissolution of the United Kingdom.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

McArthurMaine
Having been born in Britain, I found many or her comments derisive and they split England into the haves and have nots. So like America. I have no sympathy for her.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

William BenjaminVancouver, B.C.NYT Pick
One has to separate what she did from her personality. In large part, she did what was necessary, which was to moderate the self-destructive aspects of the welfare state and allow private initiative to flourish. For all Britain's problems today, it would be in much worse shape had it not been for Thatcher. And the European states, East and West, that took her message seriously are the ones that are doing relatively well. In international affairs she was likewise a beacon of strength. And her wariness of Europe has proved prescient.

Her poll tax was a terrible move, but it's important to remember that she did not wreck public institutions in Britain: The BBC, National Health, the Universities. In fact, the subsequent Labour government pursued most of her domestic policies and did things that damaged higher education in ways she wouldn't have countenanced. 

What sank Thatcher was that she gave off an air of contempt for too many people, including close associates. If she disagreed with you, you lost her respect. In this way she was the opposite of Reagan, who knew how to be civil, even warm, to people who regarded him with condescension. This arrogance is fatal to a politician in a democracy, and it undid her in the end.
April 8, 2013 at 5:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

Leigh and SaraSouth of France
Good analysis William.

Unfortunately I feel your final para is correct.
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.

Ignatz FarquadNew York, NY
Like Reagan, another conservative crook, who sold off England to the highest bidder while stealing the few crumbs they threw to the poor.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

Richard AlbeeAuburn, Alabama
She was despised by millions of her fellow countrymen and deservedly so. If ever there was a bigoted reactionary she was one of them.
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

JMAPA
"Bigoted"?

Seriously, that word has become nothing more than something leftists say about people they don't like and know little of, right?

Can you provide any concrete, substantial, documented examples of her "bigotry"?
April 8, 2013 at 5:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

bignybugsnew york
JMA -- she referred to Nelson Mandela as a terrorist ...
April 9, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

Don AlfonsoBoston,MANYT Pick
During the Falklands crisis Thatcher declared that any Argentinian combat vessel within a zone of some two hundred miles around the island would be a target for British arms. After the zone was established, an ancient battleship under Argentine command, the General Belgrano, fled from the target zone. Unknown to the ship's commanders, it was shadowed by a British submarine, which, upon Thatcher's orders, sank the vessel with the loss of all aboard. The humiliation was the trigger that brought the demise of military rule in Argentina. There is no evidence that Thatcher, or anyone else, anticipated the political aftermath that resulted; thus to give her credit for the collapse of the junta is rather a large stretch. Any comparison of her modest achievements with that of Churchill are historically without substance. And, Reagan did not need Thatcher to understand that collaborating with Gorbachev was in the interests of both the Soviets and the US, as the treaty eliminating intermediate-range nuclear weapons was to show. That she looms large as an icon of modern conservatism merely testifies of how empty of ideas it is. As for example, her widely quoted statement that society does not exist only exhibited her failure to understand the fallacy of composition.
April 8, 2013 at 5:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

j. von hettlingenSwitzerland
Verified
Indeed, Margaret Thatcher and the late Princess Diana outshone Queen Elizabeth, when it came to publicity. They were the most photographed women in the world. Both became so inevitably famous, perhaps because they were so different and didn't see each other as rival.
April 8, 2013 at 4:43 p.m.

j. von hettlingenSwitzerland
Verified
Perhaps we will never see another "Margaret Thatcher" in Britain again. She was a heroine of circumstances. Politics are tougher today. There might be a civil war in Britain, were she prime minister.
April 9, 2013 at 6:47 a.m.

jhussey41Illinois
Thank goodness the NY Times readers continue to live up to their bizarre behavior toward the dead. Could we get by one death of a political opponent without the dyspepsia and agita? She is DEAD for goodness sake! Try a little compassion. If you can't say something nice upon someone's death, don't say anything. We are violating the unwritten rule which becomes a curse in our own death: "Never speak ill of the dead".
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

DRNew England
She was a part of history for better or worse. It's important to learn the lessons history teaches us and perhaps it's a good idea for all of us to think about our actions here on earth and what our legacies will be.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
There's no such thing as society. Therefore there are no unwritten rules, yes?
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

RuadhPortland, Maine
Thatcher wasn't nice, and she showed no compassion for anyone with whom she disagreed ideologically (or who happened to be poor or a union member or Irish or not a fanatical free-market proponent). Honesty about her record isn't "bizarre," it's simply being truthful.

Please read this excellent piece in The Guardian on this topic: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-de...
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

paul mathieusun city center, fla.NYT Pick
The brightest page of Thatcher's tenure was when she reversed "The Winter of their discontent" which the Labour administration seemed to be totally unable to cope with. She went against Scargill who insisted that "even if my men only dig rocks the State must keep the mines open. Thatcher's steadfastness won the day and won the British public. She also did a good job of reining some excesses from local authorities (Labour) She later went too far when she tried to introduce some form of a poll tax which was so unpopular that she lost the confidence of her party. She was right in evaluating Gorbachev as a "person we can deal with" but she didn't cover herself with glory in declaring that Mandela was a terrorist. We lived in Britain from 82 to 88 and we witnessed her ups and downs. A mixed bag but mostly positive.
April 8, 2013 at 5:04 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

El LuchoPittsburgh
I read history for fun.
I believe Winston Churchill to have been incredible important to Western Civilization. At a time when France and the rest of Europe were in a rush to get out of Hitler's way, and the US didn't want to get involved, he was the only one to stand firm.
Some of the comments here mention the big contributions of Thatcher, Reagan and even John Paul II.
IMHO, none of these people will be remembered as having had great historical significance. Their contributions only look great when looked at in a partisan way.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

JMAPA
An humble your opinion should be, obviously.

Could you point to a few leaders that, from your leftists perspective left us with genuine contributions?
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.

RSNew York
Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher saved the West. They reinvigorated their nations' economies and their militaries. They moved their nations away from a policy of taking money from people that worked and giving it to people that didn't. They made becoming rich a goal and not a crime. They both new that in an expanding economy the rich would get richer but the poor would get richer too. Unfortunately, it worked for 20 years but something is seriously broken now.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

rUS
Right. 

And gamma ray bursts were discovered by Justin Bieber.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED17

El LuchoPittsburgh
I am not sure what you are talking about.
Certainly the poor have been becoming poorer over the last 2 decades.
The "now" you mention did not happen overnight.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

akin caldiranlansing, michgan
The Iron Lady, was a great leader and a great lady, l wish my country has some body like her, may be Mrs. Clinton will see, but Margaret Thatcher's name will be next to W.Churchill,s for sure, he and President Reagan together made the western power, our world does not have people like this
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

SaverinoPalermo Park, MN
Nothing more than a mean-spirited thugette with an authoritarian streak.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

rachelLos Angeles, CA USA
God bless Maggie. I always admired the Iron Lady as the first REAL feminist and a true leader. She had strength, clarity, conviction, and smarts. She and Ronald Reagan were a great team and force to be reckoned with. We haven't had real leaders since. They strenghtened both our nations. And both nations have declined ever since we veered way off the path they put us on. God help us.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

ed gWarwick, NY
So wonderful to remember all the joy she brought to her country men and women.

Broke the miners' strike like her buddy did here with the air controllers.

It is so great to know that you broke the back of the middle class to defend the corporate interests and the extremely wealthy.

And to do so with a charming smile and wrapped in the false cloth of patriotism, religious hockus-pockus and freedom. 

And within just 30 years the whole shell game collapsed; the party was over and the bill conveniently slipped into the hands of the disadvantaged and dispossessed.

Aren't the British just so, well so........

But we have our share of just so's too.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

EddieLew
She was all head and no heart, not a fool like Reagan, but lacking any empathy for others.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

PMACParsippany
Margaret Thatcher was a woman to be proud of - I only wish we had someone in our government like her. She contributed good common sense to the British Government, and the people benefited from her leadership.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

wegsaxManhattan
Now that she and her beloved Ronnie are together again, they may share memories of the various disasters they wrought. Not that they'd understand any of it even lo! these many years on...
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

rUS
Friends with the mass-murderer Ronald Reagan. 

Quite a revolting pair.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

A.G.Los Angeles, CA
Two genuinely low-functioning, mediocre, full of symbolism, scarce of substance people: Reagan and Thatcher. They sure have done more damage than they could comprehend in one life time.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED23

JMAPA
Folks in the Soviet Union were pretty frightened of them.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

SalItaly
A good example to be followed by today's leaders.
But she could do well also thanks to the big powers her constitution gave to her.
I wished my constitution would grant the same powers to my PM !
At the end: the bigger the people of a nation, the bigger its constitution and its political leader.
RIP.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.

Sue FrankewiczShelburne Falls, MA
How easily the public and the press forget. When CNN brought on Henry Kissinger to comment on this event, I turned off my TV for the day.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

Casual ObserverLos Angeles
A mixed record but a leader who will be remembered. In so far as her economic policies they were directed fairly well but her intellect was confused with some fundamental mistaken notions, notions that afflicted U.S. policies, too. The medium range missile deployment was done without any understanding of the Soviets and almost caused WWIII.

The state owned basic industry notion she opposed was ill conceived. Successful businesses throughout history try to limit the constraints upon them so that they can avail themselves of opportunities to prosper. Keep it simple, stupid, has always been the goal of all businesspeople. Having to juggle the interests of society and the political interests that can affect governments means distracted and undecisive leadership for state owned businesses. But Friedman and Hyack were fools in the way they worshiped free markets, the industrial age was the proof that free markets were irrelevant to building great economies. The great capitalist endeavors like steel making and railroads were successful because they were narrowly focused, were able to constrain free markets and the destructive pressures they applied which tended to increase the risk of great losses for highly expensive industrial endeavors. Reorganizing the state owned businesses into private businesses with constraints imposed by government policies that balanced social needs with the advantages of private ownership was the wise path not followed.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

TBuckleyOhio
She was as poisonous to the UK as Reagan was to the US.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

Concerned ReaderBoston
They were both great for their country.
April 8, 2013 at 8:44 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

SeanmacNew York
Whether I agree with her or not, I truly admire her leadership. She led by conviction not by poll result or compromised consensus. An engendered species in today's Washington.

Compared to Obama who always tries to hide letting others do the fight, this English lady was much manlier. 

In addition, no one should categorize her too simply as heartless ideologue. Her conviction was rooted in her belief, which was backed up by a powerful intellectual mind.

Certainly, after eleven years in politics, it was impossible for anyone to leave a flawless records or perfect legacy. Thus, she had her share of missteps, mistakes, But in sum, she was an admirable leader in a historical proportion.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

DRNew England
Manly, as in responsible for the death of British soldiers?
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

GeewizCali
Ms. Thatcher was used as an instrument to relay social progress while being the symbol of "feminism"/ iron lady. Luckily, we didn't fall for this ruse in 2008 with Sarah Palin.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

a convardnew york
my pick for most influential post world war 2 western leader. She was a leader not a follower and I liked that. Take a stand and lead. some people want a representative I prefer those who lead over those who don't even those I vote against.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Maggie2Maine
Enough with the canonization of this harridan whose policies were brutal in the extreme. The next thing we will be hearing is that her apostles will be wanting to rename Tower Bridge and/or Heathrow after her.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

nomanCA
She and her pals Pinochet and Reagan, a pox on them.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED18

depressionbabyDelaware
How prophetic she was in her call for no more integration with Europe. Euros anybody?
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

HKGuyNYC
In 100 years, relatively few will remember her politics but everyone will remember she was a woman. 

In the end, that may prove to have been her greatest legacy.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.

MauiyankeeHaiku, HI
Dos X's is a legacy?
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

AnneO.
You might want to rethink that. Speak to any Brit, the opposite is actually true.
April 8, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

RjwHastings on Hudson, NY
She represented corporate interests and greed and turned her back on people and compassion. She despised working people, working class interests, and middle-class people and middle-class interests. Her only interest was in somehow wrangling back into power the old British aristocracy of the 18th century in a world where slavery and subjugation were no longer legal options. She was a horror and certainly not a feminist!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-dead---now-1818150
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

Abin SurUngara
I would have to say that like Ronald Regan, who I voted for twice, Margaret Thatcher was a charismatic figure. I will also grant that the scaling back of union power did Britain some good, but like Regan, many of the problems we now face can be traced to those policies. That includes the deficit, the militarism and austere approach to macroeconomics. But also, she facilitated the rise to power of Rupert Murdoch, who then, as he is doing know, brutally attacks unions as the source of all evil. That action alone has been the source of more death and destruction, not to mention ruined lives, than any positive action she took. The evil men do lives after them, the good oft interred in their bones. Women too.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

B.S.West Sacramento, CA
Margaret Thatcher was until today the greatest living reason why Americans should not be afraid of "strong" women such as Hillary Clinton. I can't imagine anyone telling a joke about The Iron Lady as many in this country have attempted to degrade the strong political women of this country. She will be missed.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.

the_jenneralOttawa
Agree with her politics or not you had to be impressed with her commitment to England and to the world at large. She was determined, opinionated and demonstrative. She led England through some very tough times and was a strong example for all young girls and women around the world. She will be remembered for a long long time.
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Dave CoullScotlandNYT Pick
We in SCOTLAND were not at all impressed with her commitment to England. As for being an example to "young girls and women", Maggie absolutely hated other women politicians. She loved to be surrounded by men, and regarded other women politicians as rivals. She sacked Edwina Currie from her government for precisely this reason. Maggie's administration had fewer women members than the one before her, or the one after her.
April 8, 2013 at 4:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED34

dpn1031Kyle, SD
A great leader passes. A strong woman who did tjhings her way and was not afraid to take on the establishment, who at the time happened to be the progressives. Her intellect and instincts were first rate and rare. History has born them out. We need more like her. I hope more come our way. I hope she rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

MichaelBoston
Paulie is way-off base with h/her commentary. When Margaret Thatcher became the PM the UK was spinning down and down totally out of control on its way to oblivion. The British people should be very thankful Mrs Thatcher came to power when she did and that she maintained her resolute "correction course" for the UK even when it was very unpopular to do what she did. Ultimately, the UK turned-around and became an amazing success---again.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

tyb stuck in calilos angeles, CA
So you approved of her taking milk out of the mouths of poor children?
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

JohnGods own County
She stopped kids parents giving them milk, how callous!
April 8, 2013 at 3:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

BrainsCA
A little dirty secret about Margaret Thatcher is that she opposed the release of Nelson Mandela, and opposed free and fair elections in the then apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia. If it was left to Ms. Thatcher apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia would be in existence today.

It was because of a personal threat by Queen Elizabeth II to criticize the Thatcher government in public that Thatcher agreed to the sanctions and blockade of South Africa and Rhodesia. 

Margaret Thatcher was not a decent person!
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED22

rushmore wallaceParis
She made Britain what it is today.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

jan sutteralameda ca
Let's see. They both went crazy, but we don't know just when?
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

JohnkBelmont CA
She will be missed. My deepest most sincere condolences to her family and friends. she was a strong and well respected woman. She is welcomed in to heaven today and having tea with Ronald Reagan. I'd love to see it.
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

P WilliamsLondon
Lady Thatcher was a conviction politician who was elected because she did what she said she would to do. So many socialists seem to forget that incovenience of democracy.

How many of today's career politicians have such strength? None - and that's why they'll be forgotten soon enough.

I had the privilege of meeting her a couple of years ago and I'm delighted I did.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

tlasisiNigeria
Lady Thatcher,
Of all the daughters of God born of men, you virtually surpassed them all. You showed the world what freedom, enterprise, and commitment really meant. Britain would have gone the way of the dinosaur; you singlehandedly rescued that nation, by sheer brilliance, intelligence, foresight, courage, and deep commitment to the protestant ethics. 

All those pretenders to leadership in Africa should have schooled under you. Then you would have had the opportunity to help them turn their paralyzed economies around. But alas, would they have the courage and the commitment required by this mission? This I doubt. To all but those with simple minds, you were a hero. We will forever miss you. Sleep well Lady Thatcher. You have touched many lives!
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

MauiyankeeHaiku, HI
You forgot walking on water and the loaves and fishes, the cure for cancer, and the earthshaking victory in Las Malvinas.
April 8, 2013 at 3:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

drumdaddyWoodstock, NY
Maggie "BP" Thatcher advanced well the agenda of the trans-generational Bush Cabal.
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Renosto from S. Paulo - BrazilBrazil
Although I am Brazilian I admired the "Iron Lady". She actually managed to impose their way of governing, despite being a woman and having entered politics at a time when it was very common for women to govern a country like England.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Sally L.North Shore, MA
She always seemed to me to be a power-hungry politician who had an agenda that cared little for the people but catered to her creature comforts. I was never impressed by her. She seemed more like a dragon queen.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

PBAZNYT Pick
Thatcher single-handedly destroyed the United Kingdom by her callous disregard for the welfare of its people. Her legacy is that the rich got phenomenally richer by grabbing valuable public assets and then running them into the ground, all with her approval. She led the way for London to become an economic free-fire zone where Russian oligarchs and Saudi potentates could conduct business without rules or oversight. She destroyed the trade unions and with their destruction any protections afforded to working people against unbridled exploitation from multinational corporations moving in for their portion of the free-market kill.

To compare her to Churchill is absurd. Churchill understood diplomacy and compromise. He understood he had the welfare of an entire nation to consider when dealing with Roosevelt and Stalin. Thatcher had no such concerns when dealing with Reagan and Gorbachev. She had a fellow free-market traveler with Reagan and both saw the old USSR as fat pickins for their friends in business.

The legacy of Thatcher is that the United Kingdom is facing relegation to the same division as Cyprus.
April 8, 2013 at 3:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED40

Dave CoullScotland
You forgot to mention that the reaction in Scotland to Maggie's very English bossiness gave a tremendous boost to the cause of independence for Scotland and therefore to quite literally breaking up the United Kingdom.
April 8, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

LarryThe Fifth Circle
I haven't read the comments yet (I will try); but I know that some will unfairly take the opportunity to criticize her legacy. For some 'Thatcher' is a word that, like 'Fox News,' 'Reagan,' or 'Republican' brings knee-jerk 100 percent negative connotations for some. I disagree. I cannot speak all that well to all of her domestic policies (although I did live in the UK right after the end of the tenure of the Tories under Thatcher and Major); but as an American, I can say that I felt much safer when the world was governed by Mr. Reagan, Lady Thatcher, and Canadian Prime Minister Mulroney. None of them was perfect; but compared to the politicians of today, they were titans. 

As I recall, Britain was not considered a world power, before she came into power and made Britain 'matter' again.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

boyceyuk
she put the economy first and let Britain decline socially. There was no balance. Americans looking in see how well Britain fared economically, but they overlook how bad thing were made by Thatcher for working classes and basically anyone who wasn't wealthy. 

When things were going badly, they were just swept under the carpet like unemployment. One thing that most aren't aware of how she toyed with letting the city of Liverpool go into "managed decline" after the riots caused by the divisions between the people and the brutal police force she created and also the The cover up of the Hillsborough disaster so that she could protect her police force.

But so long as the economy was good and Britain was efficient, what does that matter? Oh yeah and then that started to fail towards the end.

Many parties and celebrations are going to be held in the Uk. That's a fact.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED17

GarethNYC
A strong, decisive leader, but one I deeply disliked. Effective politically, but a small-minded arrogant snob.

There were a lot of bad leaders in the UK back then. She was only slightly more aware than the others.
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

Dave CoullScotland
Dying is a fact of life. It happens to us all. If Thatcher’s death led to a quiet family funeral, okay. But that’s not what’s going to happen. Her death WILL be as divisive as her life. 

She is to be given a ceremonial, military funeral of the kind not seen since that of Winston Churchill, sixty years ago. Now, Churchill had many critics, but, for two reasons, they kept quiet about his funeral: (1) his inspiring leadership of the wartime coalition government, and (2) the widely held belief that he’d accepted the need for welfare and health service provisions which were later attacked by the far more divisive Thatcher. So OF COURSE the decision to spend millions of pound of our money, in order to save Mark Thatcher the expense of his mother’s funeral, is bound to be extremely controversial.

The British government and its propaganda services such as the BBC are going to subject us all to Official Mourning. We are going to be subjected to The Whole of Britain Mourns. That is what The World is going to be told. So it’s important to say “No it bloody well doesn’t”. Here in Scotland, in particular, there will no mourning. Here in Scotland, it will be a case of Ding dong, the witch is dead!
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

Bill AppledorfBritish Columbia
Verified
Annette Funicello, who also died today, I will miss.
April 8, 2013 at 3:26 p.m.RECOMMENDED28

JohnD' Malpais
How can anyone seriously continue to lionize the conservative 'vision' of Great Britain and U.S. economics that Thatcher and Reagan set in motion when it was their administrations' free market policies which dismantled the protective financial safeguards of the 30's leaving us open to the fraudulent decay of unscrupulous "investment" bankers and their amoral apologist counterparts of global economics? These ideologues did more to destroy whatever good may have emerged from the ashes of WWII than almost any of their Western predecessors, short of Nixon and Kissinger. The Iron Maiden and the Great Conmunicator will forever live on in the tortured propaganda of history as a pair of inextricably linked helmsmen at the tiller of sinking ship bound for a watery grave on the shoals of classical conservative hubris.
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

wingatesan francisco
A politician with guts and a principals so rare, yes, you can argue policies, my guess more good than bad. Now, we have no politicians with either principals or guts just the likes of Clinton (both he and she ) Bush (father and son) Obama who knows just what he is since it changes from one day to the next.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

banzaiUSA
She had one thing in common with Reagan. They were both wrong

She had one thing in common with Chruchill. Come up with catch phrases to make yourself look like a statesma/woman. Facts be damned.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

historyguyPortola Valley, CA
Let's all remember one clear and hard fact about Lady Thatcher: she never received the majority of votes cast of the British electorate in any of her elections. What she did do was gain a majority in Britain for her Conservative Party in a three-way vote split and promptly follow policies supported by only a minority that rewarded those, like Rupert Murdock, who were to grow even richer while Britain grew daily more shabby. Need I mention the brutality toward Irish Nationalists that was covered up by Thatcher's team? Can anyone who visited Britain before Thatcher's governments took power and has recently visited Britain honestly say the nation now is in better shape? Another thing to remember: Thatcher taught our national conservatives, the Republicans, that a political party does not need to win a majority of votes to control the path of national policy (filibusters in the Senate and blatant gerrymandering in the House), so Thatcher's influence will live on and the United States may continue to be ruled by a faux democracy, as was Britain under Ms Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED21

TaureanQueens, NY
Excellent points, well-stated.
April 9, 2013 at 5:24 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

K HendersonNYC
Verified
Growing up in the 70's and 80's I had forgot how clear, stern, and opinionated politicians could be in those decades when Thatcher was PM. 

Now politicians -- including our POTUS -- do not say say much of anything that might offend anybody.

I cannot say I liked her conservative politics, but she was an iconoclast and memorably so.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

JC
The people commenting here appear to be universally ignorant of what allowed Thacher to remain in power and not be run out of town as a savage--which she surely was. Oil--the north sea, which UK "owns" part of, started producing huge quntities of oil in the 80s, creating huge wealth for the UK. This is what covered up her idiocy and allowed her to cut taxes etc.

She was a goon, an idiot, and probably a sociopath. Too bad there are so many dumb people who don't understand the fundamental economy (oil is energy. energy is wealth. growth in energy=growth in wealth). The production of the north sea oil saved her legacy, but don't be fooled, she was a horrible, horrible person.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED20

nomanCA
Perhaps her lack of empathy is seen as a sign of strength; unbending and cold, the Iron Lady; ask the Irish how they see her. And as when Reagan died, eulogized for deep antipathy to anything like communism or socialism, but both Thatcher and Reagan over-reached - Reagan's deregulation started the US on a bad course we haven't recovered from.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

FaheyWA
Verified
re In the photos of Prime Minister Thatcher during and after her tenure she always wore the double strand of pearls, that her husband had given her after the birth of their twins...These pearls were symbolic and as constant as was her philosophy about politics and life...enduring!
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

PJ PersianToronto, Canada
In 1980s people of Iran joked that she was called "My Great Teacher" by Mullahs and infamous Khomeni. 

People believed she had a main role to toppling Shah and bring mullahs in power to form a green belt (Anti Communist , Anti Socialist) around then Soviet, and to prevent another independent country in the region. (Like Chile in South America)

Was it a conspiratory theory or not, I remember her title when I was only 8 or 10.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

CarlosB12Toronto
Predictably, conservatives are chiming in with "America needs a Margaret Thatcher." No question that she was a far-right conservative, but would she have supported the Republican party's "government by obstruction"? I doubt it. She was nothing if not a doer. As for her policies, things are a lot different here from what they were in Britain when she took office. There was serious inflation; we have hardly any. Their industrial unions had grown too strong; here they are too weak to resist the steep trend toward oligarchy. They had an inefficient health care system; we have the most expensive system in the world and one of the least successful in maintaining the health of the citizenry. Thatcher had a 44-seat majority when she took office; Obama had majorities, too, but not enough to over-ride an opposition dedicated to defeating everything he tried to do. The only basis for "America needs a Margaret Thatcher" is the need for a president tough enough and determined enough to force her will on a dysfunctional congress. America might get one in 2016, only she will be center-left, not far-right.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

BJ SandiferTexas
P>M. Thatcher was an inspiration to all women and to men who found out that women are not afraid to step up to the plate and play the game.
RIP : You will be missed.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

AdrianneMassachusetts
She made the the Commons the House of the 1%.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

GarryCalifornia
"The bombing destroyed the living quarters of the Libyan leader, Col.Muammar el-Qaddafi, and killed one of his children. "

Didn't we find out after Qaddafi's death that his daughter was never killed and that this story was made up by the Libyans.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.

ThinkerNorthern California
No, Garry, we didn't find that out.
April 8, 2013 at 3:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Mark BachmannWestport, CTNYT Pick
Mrs. Thatcher was in my opinion of the great leaders of the last century. She lived during a transitional period which could have led to world war or economic collapse had a few crises broken in different ways. She was only one person, but she had a material influence is bending the arc of history in a benign direction, particularly in light of what was happening in the Soviet Union at the time. I think that her detractors sometimes blame her for somehow having created the very problems that her courage compelled her to confront. She, Gorbachev, Reagan and Mitterrand all deserve our gratitude for tough decisions made during a potentially explosive era.
April 8, 2013 at 2:46 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

MussarratDE
Margaret Thatcher, the “Iron Lady”...I'm going to truly miss you!
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.

Lever WangCupertino, CA
Without Margret Thatcher, UK's economy would be like Italy's, Spain's, Greece's today. 

She believed in the individual, in economic freedom and in limited government power, and had many followers in China and the developing world, e.g Zhao Ziyang, Hu Yaobang, and to a less degree, Deng Xiaoping. 

Without her, China's economy would be like Japan's today. 

God be with the Iron Lady in heaven.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

AnneO.
Convenient that they didn't consider individual freedom including speech, press or expression.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Thoreau101Earth's eye
She and Reagan were two of the greatest phonies in history. They adored the rich. Nothing else mattered.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED24

DRSNew York, NY
They adored the successful who deserve our praise. We as a nation should be reaching up and admiring and encouraging the best among us, not constantly being held down by the lowest common denominator.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

boyceyuk
For all american readers, make no mistake, there will be A LOT of parties and celebrating around the UK this week. The Irish hated her, the Scottish hated her, the welsh hated her, the majority of the working class and most of northern england hated her.

If it weren't for the Falklands and the division between all the other parties, she would not have lasted anywhere near 11 years.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED29

Paul TarrantUK
As a brit I take offence to your generalisation that she was hated by most the UK which was simply untrue.
Granted I didn't agree with her entire ideology but as you say look at the alternatives at the time and imagine what would have happened had labour been in power during the Falklands conflict.
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

TerryUK
I see no difference between killing and industry and letting it die. How do you think Renault and Fiat survive? Under-investment and corner-cutting is the name of our (UK) game and I'll wager 'graphene' goes the way of the linear motor (in Japan now as overhead rail), our atomic industry (we rely on France) and other technologies. If the world abolished currency and traded in goods and USEFUL services, the non-manufacturing nations would be in for a torrid time.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.

Max CorniseNew york
Coming out of 60s radical youth culture, I found her disdain for the poor absolutely odious. Although she firmed the economy, I know just as many English who revile her legacy as much as folks here are beginning to revile what Reaganomics led to in our own country. She really had an unbearable manner and lacked true compassion. Her solutions will not serve the good of their country in the end.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

C J FouSt. Louis
This cloying summary of Mrs. Thatcher’s life tries to shine a political career rightfully tarnished by history’s evenhanded weathering. Like all other creatures great and small, she deserves to RIP, although her tone-deaf reign accelerated the eligibility for impoverished others to do the same. She was Ronald Reagan on steroids, a double negative by any standard, and her life is a tribute to the British people’s ability to survive political maelstroms of unusual, misguided energy.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED17

Sandra Reid BoeGraham WA
My husband and I moved to London in 1984 and lived there for 5 years during the Thatcher years. To us it was fascinating to watch as Thatcher led Britain kicking and screaming down the path to economic recovery. So much of East London was still lying in rubble from the bombs of the Second War. During our time there, much of the East End was revitalized and reclaimed. My husband was an architectural student who earned his RIBA licensure by working on the light railway through the Docklands of the East End. I was working as a reporter for Dow Jones covered Capital Markets and saw the incredible explosion of the the financial futures market, the internationalization of European Government bond markets and the Eurobond market. It was an exciting time. And this was mostly due to Maggie Thatcher's determination and vision. Whatever the British people thought of her, she had a tremendously positive influence on that country's economic development.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

JohnGods own County
Rubble, East end, 1984?
Are you sure it was not 1954?
April 8, 2013 at 3:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

brendalanaCornwall, Britain
Britain - Margaret Thatcher: Extraordinary but heartless…. [2013-04-08 Peter Tatchell]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=432649586829505&set=a.153791...

Margaret Thatcher: Extraordinary but heartless. Her free market policies paved the way for banking deregulation & the current economic crisis. She legislated the UK’s first new anti-gay law in 100 years (Section 28), and hammered civil liberties and local government. 

“Margaret Thatcher was an extraordinary woman but she was extraordinary for mostly the wrong reasons. So many of her policies were wrong and heartless. Nevertheless, I don’t rejoice in her death. I commiserate, as I do with the death of any person. In contrast, she showed no empathy for the victims of her harsh, ruthless policy decisions,” said human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell. 

(SNIP)

“In 1988, the Thatcher government legislated Britain’s first new anti-gay law in 100 years: Section 28. At the 1987 Tory party conference she mocked people who defended the right to be gay, insinuating that there was no such right. During her rule, arrests and convictions for consenting same-sex behaviour rocketed, as did queer bashing violence and murder. Gay men were widely demonised and scapegoated for the AIDS pandemic and Thatcher did nothing to challenge this vilification. 

(SNIP)

By: Peter Tatchell


UNQUOTE...
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

ParksideDameSan Francisco, CA
Thatcher's reputation shows that you can indeed fool most of the people most of the time, despite your article about her disputed legacy. We are seeing the sanctification of Maggie similar to that of Ronnie. Yes, both did have enormous impact on their countries, but ultimately, they were like children let loose in a room full of toys they didn't understand.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

Dr. BobMiami Florida
I never could figure out whether she was enchanted by Reagan's twinkling eyes, or what we have come to know as the blank stare behind the twinkle.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

SophiaChicago
When oh when will we confront the mythology of Thatcher and Reagan? They caused so many catastrophes.

As far as having a Steely Will and Great Convictions, well, remember Yeats' poem "The Second Coming."
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED20

Commander CodyArkansas Ozarks
Historians will annoint her as Reagans backbone.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.

BoobaladooNY
A belligerent, oft despised class warrior who brutally lowered standards of living for the working class in Britain and further enriched the already wealthy through attacks on labor and the privatization of public property and services...

Oh, excuse me. I mean she was a "conservative who reforged Britain." Mmmm, that sounds nicer, yes.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED15

beethyCA
Verified
She didn't mince words. She made up her mind and acted, instead of seeing which way the wind blew. She led in the man's world. She was strong-minded, domineering, and fit the "Iron Lady'" image.

But it doesn't mean she was right or loved for the decisions she made during her 11 years in office. No one we know now came out of the office, unscathed and unchastened. And she had her share, much more than her fair share, for some of the right reasons.

For Maggie Thatcher, it often seemed to be her way or highway. A strong leader, with mixed legacy: she didn't leave you undecided or uncertain. She wasn't wishy-washy. Her opponents resented her with passion, her supporters didn't understand the opposition. 

The Thatcher era passed some time ago, and now the Iron Lady. The Brits though divided in their opinion about her may not see another Maggie on stage again for years.

Maggie Thatcher, RIP.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

SharkNew York, NY
"She had high standards, and she expected everyone to do their work"

If the one thing we took from this amazing woman, was that one idea, this world would change.

Do your job, be responsible for yourself. Lost concepts. This is the legacy we should keep from this most amazing lady. You will be missed my lady.
April 8, 2013 at 1:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

KathleenHarbor Springs, Michigan
Did Ms. Thatcher do her own laundry? Clean her house, wash her dishes? Or was that work delegated to the underclass?
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

jbok
Kathleen, her "work" was to live in comfort, surrounded by sycophants and the grateful rich, coming up with ways for them to get more at others' loss and justifying it bizarrely as "virtue". 

It's certain that not just anyone could do such "work" as she.
April 8, 2013 at 6:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

PogoWasRightMelbourne Florida
I would venture a premise that Margaret Thatcher laid the groundwork for Hillary Clinton to become our next President, if she chooses......
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.

bignybugsnew york
that's a pretty awful thing to say about Hilary ...
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

CleoNew Jersey
Of all the negative comments I have read here about Thatcher, that is the worse.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.

wegsaxManhattan
Now that Maggie meets her beloved Ronnie in the thereafter, they can discuss the disasters they wrought. Not that they'll understand any of it, even some thirty years on.
April 8, 2013 at 1:32 p.m.RECOMMENDED24

Steve BolgerNew York City.
The dead know no urgency.

The cumulative effect of head trauma to children over the course of history is incalculable.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Bruce TerrenceLos Angeles, CA
Your headline: Resolute Conservative Reforged Britain.
Please correct in the name of truth: headline should read:
Ruthless Conservative Ravaged Britain.
April 8, 2013 at 1:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED37

Jim WardSacramento
Britons ultimately don't seem able to take the easy path do they? No leader always gets it right though the best, like Margaret Thatcher, return to the task again and again to try. What was required to create possibilities for individual initiative to again enable individual success in a bankrupt socialist state was unknown. Thatcher found a way and saw it through like the bravest of surgeons. Incredibly, she set the world's course out of the cold war nightmare with her "knight" Ronald Reagan and the equally essential Merlin, Mikhail Gorbachev-- together freeing eastern Europe and banishing at last the darkest shadow of WWII. Could it actually have happened twice in the 20th. century that a remarkable Prime Minister saved Great Britain that Great Britain could save the world? Godspeed Maggie.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

MLHDelaware
Margaret Thantcher was a fine woman, but I with me she will always go down as the leader who did not stand up to appartied and supported South American right wing dictators.
April 8, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

RuadhPortland, Maine
So how was she "a fine woman" then?
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

BrianVancouver, CanadaNYT Pick
I'll give Thatcher credit for not being one of today's "grey" politicians who are afraid to say or do anything remotely contentious. That's as far as it goes for me and many people from the UK.

Lets be clear: she went way, way too far in many areas of policy and governance (in some ways bordering on abuse of power). She brought the country to it's knees because she so divided it that even today, she remains an incredibly controversial figure. She simply did not know the meaning of the word 'compromise' and she refused to back down on everything from the poll tax (property tax), busting the labour movement (it needed reform but not annihilation) through to selling off public assets (most sold off at bargain-basement prices) and the near-destruction of the UK's infrastructure.

There's very, very few people in the UK then, now or in years to come who won't be affected by her successive governments.
April 8, 2013 at 1:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED22

RohitNew York
"I think it's obvious what camp I dwell in."

Well, I for one am sick of camps. I prefer the whole truth, not truth according to one camp or another.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

cofficNew York
As I remember it, the country was a mess and getting messier. Yes, it took her a few years to change direction, but, it was coming back. 

Re compromise--when a pedophile says to give him both your children, you don't say, "No, I'll give you just one." You don't compromise.

Re the unions--their refusal to compromise brought the country to its knees, not Thatcher.

Re privatization--when a company is ineffective and losing money, you sell it for what you can get, count your blessings, and, hopefully, make wiser decisions in the future.

I certainly didn't like everything that she did, but, I had great respect for her and her near miraculous accomplishments for the good of her country in such a short time..
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Philip G. CraigMontclair, New JerseyNYT Pick
In defending the right of self determination of the British citizens of the Faukland Islands by confronting and defeating Argentina's military dictatorship, Margaret Thatcher demonstrated to the world that, while the British Empire of the first half of the 20th Century was no more, greatness remained in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Those who love democracy throughout the world, including the Argentines, owe her a debt of gratitude for her resoluteness in the face of armed aggression against a peaceful population leaving in a remote part of our planet. May Britain's current and future Prime Ministers have such depth of courage should Argentina attempt to press its disputed claim again with the force of arms.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

blgreenieNew Jersey
As an American who got news of Thatcher from the media here, I'm surprised and maybe better informed after reading comments here by British citizens with first hand knowledge of the Thatcher years and results. It wasn't pretty and tilted toward the wealthy and biggest businesses. Her bigger than life image, fed by the news media, goes on even today with the huge headlines in the Times. She was, after all, an elderly person who died after a stroke. Profound sadness understandably for members of her family but, for me, the headlines are fully out of proportion to the sense of loss.
April 8, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

JPOregon
Thatcher ought to be remembered for her disastrous policies, which left the UK in worse shape than it was in before she came to power. Indeed, the reverse Robin Hood polices enacted by Mrs. Thatcher and Mr. Reagan are largely still in place and increasingly battering the economies of both countries. I especially remember Thatcher for the Falkland Islands hatchet job. How embarrassing for Great Britain.
April 8, 2013 at 1:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED23

Paul TarrantUK
Speaking as a Briton a I am proud of our stance over the Falklands and do not feel the embarrassment of which you speak.

The shame would have been to do nothing and allow the people on the island to have their democratic rights trampled upon.
April 8, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
"which left the UK in worse shape than it was in before she came to power."

Statistics would show exactly the opposite....
April 8, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

HCAtlanta
No matter what is said about her - she was one tough old bird who was never afraid to go toe to toe.

I love the story about a divisive political dinner she attended and upon selecting beef the waiter asked her "and for the vegetables?" She replied "they'll have beef as well"
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

jbok
Yes, I keep reading how fearless she was.

Living in ease, with wealth aplenty and allies of wealth and power, she was "fearless" in her seeking to kill the notion of society.

Every woman who goes out and works a menial job to feed a child is braver than she was.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED20

B.Brooklyn
Jb, Thatcher was a child in cold-water flat. She had no advantages growing up -- except her brains and solid parenting.

If all poor kids could have her drive . . . .
April 8, 2013 at 7:07 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

jbok
B, her father owned two grocery stores and became mayor of the town where she lived. Cold water or not, they were likely to have been among the town's leading citizens. He was also a clergyman and alderman, and made sure of her education as well. 

But even had the romantic false tale of poverty been true, there's nothing that keeps a poor person who has gained wealth from despising others at all. In fact, having gained it, they may feel all the more entitled to despise those whom they have left behind. 

And then cozy up to the rich even more than one born to the manor. That seems to have been the case here, for few have done more for the rich and less for the poor than Thatcher, her legacy of contempt for the nonrich being particularly troubling, as was her idea that there is no "society", nor responsibililty to one's neighbors and community.
April 8, 2013 at 7:35 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

FosterSheffield, UKNYT Pick
She correctly asserted that Britain's umbilical links with the US are more enduring and vital than any association with Europe. She correctly demonstrated that there should be no limit to a woman's career in politics. But Thatcher exploited some nasty, visceral impulses in British society and left a schism that has yet to heal. If she did what was needed to be done, it is an enduring shame that she did it with such pitiless vengeance.
April 8, 2013 at 2:41 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

TMNYC
Get on board with the concepts of economic freedom and self reliance, or get left behind. I, for one, loved the Iron Lady.
April 8, 2013 at 1:28 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

jbok
Yes, your readiness for anyone not "on board" with your particular version of virtue (read money) to be "left behind" does suggest that you would love the comfortable afflictor of the afflicted Thatcher. How hard she was, it's so attractive. 

And for the old, sick, poor, or disabled, for those displaced by the use of slave labor abroad, for those who aren't on the "unearned money" dividend dole, you feel but satisfaction at their losses. As if you are the judge of virtue, as if money is virtue. IT IS NOT. Many times it is purely vice, purely an idol, purely a crime. 

But that mistake is not for me to correct in you, though I will try to defend the honest poor and the fallen from your kind. In time, you'll defend it to Someone, I think, much greater than I.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

Max CorniseNew york
Except those policies have failed miserably here, for Mittster's "unwashed 47%"—how can one be self reliant (what in God's name is economic freedom, as well?) if 47% of the jobs have been outsourced. A head of household had struggled to feed even a family of 4 on $50,000, with mortgage, food, clothing et al—then loses his job in a second—suddenly taking up residence in a desert tent community in Nevada with food stamps and plastic cartons for storage. That's Thatcherism/Reaganism true legacy.
April 8, 2013 at 2:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

CleoNew Jersey
Margaret Thatcher was the greatest democratically elected FEMALE leader in history. And one of the most conservative. Like President Reagan, her last years were sad. But also like him, she lived long enough to see the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall. She brought down the Argentine Junta (for which Argentina does not thank her), while at home she reduced taxes (drastically) and vastly increased home ownership. The negatives; she reduced support of the arts. Boo hoo.
April 8, 2013 at 1:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

FCNew York
You're rather ignorant of the full scope of her impact. Ask any Irish person about her legacy and prepare to be educated.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

PoseyNew York
I would have hoped that on the day of her death the NYT article would be more of a historic memory and less editorializing. NYT couldn't let an opportunity to get in a dig at a conservative go to waste, hence their headline.
Ruled With a Vision That Was Clear but Deeply Disputed

The disputes can all come tomorrow and the day after. Let today be all about her merits, about her life, about her talents, and sorrow over her death.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

bignybugsnew york
puh-lease ... the woman lived by politics, let her be judged by politics ...
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED15

JohnGods own County
You have to have lived in the UK in 1978 to understand Margaret Thatchers achievements. The main one was turning the UK from the 'sick man of europe' to a much more thrusting economy.
Many of us were considering emigrating, my family were off to Canada, mainly because of the way Labour had, once again, mismanaged the UK economy.
She was an excellent Project Manager and steered the UK away from the brink to a much more self dependent and sound future. She was single minded and understood the essence of our country and the threat to our way of life and culture from the left.

Some would say we need someone like her again, to stop the centre left ruining our culture, economy & country.

She is by a long way the best post war Prime Minister ..
April 8, 2013 at 2:26 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
North Sea oil had a lot more to do with that "self-dependent" future than anything the baroness cooked up.
April 8, 2013 at 6:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Frank LittleButte
She did nothing directly for women -- had none in her cabinet, left no legacy of female participation in UK politics. Considered Nelson Mandela a terrorist. Reversed the imperfect but constructive and vital domestic policies built up by Labor after the devastation of World War Two with inhumane consequences for workers but windfalls for the royalists and financiers and industrialists. May the Iron Lady rust in pieces.
April 8, 2013 at 1:27 p.m.RECOMMENDED19

HKGuyNYC
That's a little unfair. She battled entrenched sexism all her life. She believed that all women should have to take the long road the way she did, but her success undoubtedly paved the way for other female politicians in Western democracies.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

LuluNew York
I lived in London for almost six years during Thatcher's reign (1983-89) and loathed so much of what I saw. She and Reagan did so much to both of our nations in a very negative way. Other posters have hit the highlights. Let's just say that I did not mourn Reagan, and I do not mourn Maggie. This does not make me feel good, but I have to say the truth. They were not good for the health of this world.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED21

DRSNew York, NY
Yes, the world is better off strangled by heavy handed regulation and union thugs with uncompetitive demands. Brilliant.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

MJNorthern California
She overcame many obstacles in her own life life to get where she did, but she never saw the need for removing obstacles so they didn't exist for others.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

DRSNew York, NY
Why would that be her job? It's not the government's job to keep giving more free stuff away. People need to earn and sacrifice the old fashioned way.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

KathleenHarbor Springs, Michigan
DRS she was paid to lead, not destroy, that is why. I doubt that Ms. Thatcher sacrificed anything other than the life and hardwork of others for her own selfish behaviors.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

MJNorthern California
One of the tasks of a society is to help out those who are less fortunate for whatever reason. We do that personally or through organizations or through our government. As prime minister, it was her responsibility to do that via government.

Of course, Mrs. Thatcher is quoted as saying: "There is no such thing as society ..."
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

FCNew York
Ask the Irish about her 'legacy'. I'd bet you get some very different answers than all the blind worship so many seem prone to.
April 8, 2013 at 1:27 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

Paul TarrantUK
Margaret Thatcher did not overly interfere with Northern Ireland as she bigger issues to deal with. That didn't seem to matter when the IRA sought to blow up the Tory conference in Brighton. One of many atrocities committed (on both dides) during the troubles. 

It doesn't benefit to dwell given the progress that has been made since.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

CleoNew Jersey
My Grandma was Irish, and she thought very highly of Margaret Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Ralph P.New York
Much of what ails Britain today can be traced back to her administration. She broke unions, she deregulated banking, she sent Britons to their death in a war meant to rescue her poll numbers, and she avoided dealing with the AIDS crisis. 

We have a knack for rehabilitating the legacies of monsters.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

HKGuyNYCNYT Pick
I hated her politics, but it's grossly unfair to say she ignored AIDS. Although her anti-gay policies were hateful, unlike Reagan, she took AIDS seriously from the get-go. As a result, the epidemic caused far less havoc in the UK than here.
April 8, 2013 at 2:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Paul TarrantUK
The invasion of the Falklands was to divert attention in Argentina, not the UK. She took the correct action to right a wrong.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

CLCA
Let her funeral be funded and conducted by the private sector, not by the public taxpayers.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED20

Paul TarrantUK
As a British taxpayer I am happy that it is being publicly paid for.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

T. QuinnSpokane, WA
Together, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan ran the Mom and Pop Store that was Conservatism in the 1980s. Among the goods they sold were union busting, brinksmanship, saber-rattling, deregulation, privatization, plutocracy, the "haves" taking from the "have-nots", a blind eye to the AIDS epidemic, and frivolous wars on little islands.
They were both "great communicators", and even their critics agree that they were strong leaders. For better or worse, they both made their citizens feel patriotic and optimistic. But they both left big messes that their successors are still cleaning up today.
April 8, 2013 at 1:27 p.m.RECOMMENDED21

FaheyWA
Verified
Perhaps it is not seemly at the time of Thatcher's demise to note the lasting and devastating consequences of Thatcherism policies but at a time in the United States when politicians here today, of similar mind about cuts and Ayn Randian ideology, are touting similar strategies, we would do well to learn from her legacy and the consequences of austerity.

There are some things that can not be brought back once slashed and burned.

So in the end, though Margaret Thatcher was tough she was not correct.
April 8, 2013 at 1:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED9

HerbLondon
It's quite wrong, and very tendentious, to say that Thatcher " ...pulled her country back from 35 years of left-wing government". If you bother to look, you will see that in the 34 years from 1945 to 1979, the year she became Prime Minister, there have been almost exactly equal years of Conservative and labour governments (Labour: Attlee 1945 -51, Wilson 64-70 and 74-76, Callaghan 76-79; Conservative: Churchill 51-55, Eden 55-57, Macmillan 57-63, Douglas-Home 63-64, Heath 70-74.
April 8, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

KathleenHarbor Springs, Michigan
Paul, Denmark is the country that really has it together.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.

Washington HeightsNYC, NY
It was obvious to anyone reading her speeches that Margaret Thatcher knew the works of Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economics. She was singular in her understanding of the link between freedom and capitalism and her advocacy of those ideas and policies changed the world forever. A testimony to the power of an idea.
April 8, 2013 at 1:04 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

EinsteinAmerica
Verified
What a terrible legacy for humanity!

More like 'Shock Doctrine".
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

LFARichmond, Ca
Pretty biased obit. One should strive to present the best face of the subject in an obit, but this is out and out revanchism. If Thatcher "reversed 35 years of Left wing government," what is one to make of the Thirteen years of Tory rule from 1951-1964; that they capitulated to the (fact of the) Welfare State and the will of the people? No doubt.

And what of Edward Heath for that matter, was he just a "wet", as Thatcher would have it? The truth is that Thatcher was a somewhat unwitting architect of neo-liberalism and Britain, not to the mention the rest of us, are still paying for her knuckleheadedness. If it wasn't for the Falklands War her reign would have been considerably shorter, and much happier for all concerned.
April 8, 2013 at 12:59 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

PeterBoston
Thatcher ruined my country and it will probably never recover.
April 8, 2013 at 12:38 p.m.RECOMMENDED20

thinkb4talkpotomac, md
You are so wrong. England went down long before her term.
April 8, 2013 at 12:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Paul TarrantUK
From someone who has lived in Britain all my life I do not believe I live in a ruined country.
All is not perfect but show me a country where it is?
April 8, 2013 at 2:25 p.m.

Craig WhitneyBrooklyn, NYNYT Pick
I covered her resignation for The Times in 1990. A few months later, my wife and I attended a dinner where she and Dennis were present. Some carping criticism she had made of John Major, her Conservative successor, had been in the news, and after the dinner, I went up to her and said that as a journalist, I missed her.
"Well, I miss me, too!" she answered. She was truly a one-off.
April 8, 2013 at 1:03 p.m.RECOMMENDED16

KathleenHarbor Springs, Michigan
"Well, I miss me too!', a shallow statement regardless of who spoke the words.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

JimmyNYC, NY
Perhaps this isn't the time or place for a "liberals vs conservatives" debate.
RIP, Mrs. Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 12:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

bignybugsnew york
if not here, where?
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED10

MilesSilicon Valley
It is the ability to make tough, and unpopular decisions for the good of the people, that separates statesmen, from sniveling, populist politicians. 

The United Kingdom wouldn't be a much worse place today, had it not been for Margaret Thatcher's hard-line economic policies. And it is always a shame to hear the way most Brits are so oblivious to how much they owe her. 

The four years I spent in Scotland illuminated how strong the sense of entitlement in the UK really is. The nanny-state model which they have been increasingly adopting, is essentially a glorified form of the Serfdom that predominated Europe in the Middle Ages. 

Thank you Margaret Thatcher!!!
April 8, 2013 at 12:37 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

thinkb4talkpotomac, md
She had done a great service for her country by standing firmly with her believes. To some extent, she was not "smart" as many modern politicians consulting daily on facebook / twitter polls and adjusting their positions. 

I wish that I could have a chance to pay my tribute to her.
April 8, 2013 at 1:03 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

bignybugsnew york
standing firmly by bad ideas is not necessarily a good thing ...
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

mtravAsbury Park, NJ
Maybe she can have a drink with her friend ronnie raygun now. She was a human being so RIP.
April 8, 2013 at 12:56 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

EBWNew York City
I am greatly saddened by the death of Lady Thatcher. She has been a inspiration to me and to many strong and independent women around the world... As a Chinese student I lived in London during the Thatcher years in the 1980s. I was deeply moved by one of her speeches: "Its doesn't matter where you are, where you come from. If you can make a contribution to our society and if you can build up a future for yourself, if you can, jolly good luck to you."



My favorite line was when she said: "If a woman like Eva Peron, with no ideals, can get that far, think how far I can go with all the ideals that I have."



Margaret Thatcher was the greatest leading lady of all time! 

Farewell the "Iron Lady", your legacy will continue to inspir women for generations to come...
April 8, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

EinsteinAmerica
Verified
The world is better off without any more 'Margaret Thatcher's", male or female.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

Abu NudnikCanada
Towering, decisive, not Towering, divisive. Divisions exist before the entry of the giant onto the stage, they exist after the giant leaves that stage. The giant is not the cause. She was a giant.
April 8, 2013 at 1:02 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Zeljko SerdarZagreb,CroatiaNYT Pick
Baroness Margaret Thatcher will live in the hearts of multitudes of Croatian people and be remembered as an outstanding world leader who stood on the side of struggles against Communism, supported Croatian people’s right to self-determination, democracy and independence.
Rest in peace Baroness Margaret Thatcher and Thank you!
April 8, 2013 at 12:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED14

bignybugsnew york
yes, divided Yugoslavia has been a great success and something to be quite proud about ...
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

ThePaleFrogFranceNYT Pick
Lady Thatcher was the person who turned Britain from a European-third-world country, forever paralysed by strikes, impoverished and having lost all sense of dignity into a proud, rich, world-beacon country. I was proud to live in England in the early 1980s, when the effects of her policies were starting to be noticeable, and when my own country, under the "guidance" of president Mitterrand, was sinking into the second-rate local power it has been ever since. My heartfelt condolences to her children : millions of us feel orphaned today !
April 8, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED30

Concerned ReaderBoston
You speak the truth, but unfortunately so many readers here refused to see it.
April 8, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.

Ego NemoNot far from here
I note in this and other good obituaries of Mrs. Thatcher the small, but utterly most important bits show where her 'conservative' policies are not nearly as radical as what the leading Americans conservatives ended up doing in their country.

National health? She kept it.

Market freedom? She kept important, quite strong regulations in place.

Foreign policy? She didn't put the world in to 'us v. them,' but remained flexible.

Over an over again, subtly in these America-centric obituaries are plenty of morsels of evidence to support the view that Thatcher saw clear limits to her conservatism that her American ideological cousins long ago irrationally charged past.
April 8, 2013 at 1:01 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

CommentatorNew York, NY
She improved the lot of the poor. Critics actually recognized that, but protested the increasing inequality of wealth. Reagan improved the lot of the poor, too. Between 1983 and 1989 (The Reaganomic Era), poverty went down 33%. It went down 6% from the day he was elected in 1980.

Famously she proved Labor wanted more inequality at the EXPENSE of the poor in a debate in Parliament.
April 8, 2013 at 12:46 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

JIMWashington
Commentator, as you well know, your statement and statistics are absolutely FALSE. One primary difference between the uber conservative Margaret Thatcher and the embarrassing American Conservative Republican is that she shunned out and out lying as a vehicle for political communication.
April 8, 2013 at 2:09 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

bignybugsnew york
seems to be a dearth of poor people piling in to laud her here ...
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

jbok
"Supporters pointed to the drop in poverty by the end of his term to validate that the tax cuts did indeed trickle down to the poor; opponents noted that the rate quickly shot up even higher in the first year of his successor's term, implying that the full effect of Reagan's policies led to a net increase in poverty.'' - wiki

'Spending during Reagan's two terms (FY 1981–88) averaged 22.4% GDP, well above the 20.6% GDP average from 1971 to 2009. In addition, the public debt rose from 26% GDP in 1980 to 41% GDP by 1988. In dollar terms, the public debt rose from $712 billion in 1980 to $2,052 billion in 1988, a roughly three-fold increase.' - wiki

Arguable effect on poverty rate, and tripling the debt. Pensions stripped from a generation and the rise of contingent labor. The seeds of today's poverty in elders and workers were laid in then.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Jack NargundkarGermantown, MD
Before the western world got its Iron Lady in Margaret Thatcher (may her soul RIP), there was the original Iron Lady of the Middle East – Golda Meir (PM of Israel, 1969-74) and the Durga Devi of the subcontinent – Indira Gandhi (PM of India, 1966-77, 1980-84). They all got things done!

It’s been a couple of decades, since the world has had a dominant female head of state, so it might be our time. Are you listening, Hillary Clinton? After all it was Ms. Thatcher who said, “If you want something said, ask a man...if you want something done, ask a woman.” The U.S. is craving for something to get done!
April 8, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Ed RamseyBloomington, mn.
If only we had a president and members of Congress with 1/3 of her guts, vision and focus.
April 8, 2013 at 1:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

RuadhPortland, Maine
I think that half the people who are publishing gushy tributes here just like the thrill of typing "Baroness Thatcher" or "Lady Thatcher." The Downton Abbey Syndrome run amok.
April 8, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

KYJurisDoctorKY
R.I.P. .
April 8, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Ellen BalfourLong Island
I'm not an authority on Thatcher, but I invite anyone who is to post comments on Thatcher, the end of the Cold War and her relationship with Gorbachev.
April 8, 2013 at 1:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

SmithCalifornia
Americans and wealthy UK citizens revere Margaret Thatcher. For those ordinary UK citizens who lived through her terms, she was a callous leader who looked after her own party's supporters at the expense of everyday citizens. She decimated local industry in the North of England, which to this day has never recovered and remains the poorest area of England. So while you're all lauding her achievements, let's not forget you are looking at her through rose-tinted glasses and spare a thought for the people who live their lives in poverty because of her policies. For every citizen who is "pouring out their grief", there are ten who will quietly be remembering the horror she put most of the country through.
April 8, 2013 at 1:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED20

readerCalifornia
There are few politicians of consequence who could be so sure of herself and so wrong as Margaret Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.RECOMMENDED20

Gary GladmanUnited Kingdom
I certainly don't think we will ever see her like again. It is sad to hear of her passing even though I did not share her political views. She certainly won't be missed by the gay community in Britain for the introduction of Section 28. The Conservative Party will never recover the trust of the gay community in Britain because of it. The deregulation of the banking sector began with her policies, and we are going to be paying the price of that for many years to come. Manufacturing and shipbuilding was abandoned to short term financial profits and preference for service industries. History may not be kind to her legacy. I also consider she could have negotiated a settlement of the Falkland Islands instead of retaking it by force even before the Conflict started with the Argentinian invasion. It was a missed opportunity. Love her or hate her, she could not be ignored.
April 8, 2013 at 1:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

DanRochester, UKNYT Pick
Given that she was an elderly, ailing woman, I am surprised how much sadness and shock I feel at this news. Perhaps it is because for those of us who grew up during her premiership, she embodied what a prime minister should be. May she rest in peace and may we never forget her.
April 8, 2013 at 1:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED13

S B LewisLewis Family Farm, Essex, New York
Lady Thatcher stood for her beliefs, did her best. 

She was the best diagnostician, a good physician, but she was unable to alter the ethic in her own hospital. 

She dared to lead, her people lacked the needed courage to follow.

England today bears witness. What would this once great nation be now if subsequent leaders had the courage of The Iron Lady? 

We may never know.
April 8, 2013 at 12:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

jbok
Why the viruous rich would sit their dividend-puffed derrieres even more firmly upon the undeserving poor, sir, and Dickens would find it all ever so familiar.

(btw, it's "hear, hear")
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

MukanyaHarare
She called Nelson Mandela and the Zimbabwe's Patriotic Front terrorists whilst at the same time condoning Apartheid South Africa. As a black Southern African I have no fond memories of her. The stereotypical racist western leader
April 8, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED25

Dee AmbrosiniCarlsbad, CA
Well, in all fairness then, since Mrs. Thatcher "remade" Britain, she is responsible for what Britain is today. Right? Right.
April 8, 2013 at 12:31 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Larry HalpernNew Jersey
You gotta love the Times! Mrs. Thatcher gets labeled as "hardheaded" because she had firm core conservative beliefs. A politician with firm core liberal beliefs is labeled as "principled", never hardheaded. Let's look at those conservative beliefs "the belief that economic freedom and individual liberty are interdependent, that personal responsibility and hard work are the only ways to national prosperity, and that the free-market democracies must stand firm against aggression". We clearly don't have enough of that "hardheadedness" in today's leaders. If only we did!
April 8, 2013 at 12:19 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Ellen BalfourLong Island
It is said both Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan suffered from Dupuytren's Contracture, a fairly rare, sometimes genetic condition of the hand where a change in the nature of collagen in the palm causes a thickening that creates cords, making the fingers bend inward toward the palm. Isn't that a remarkable coincidence among these political allies? Both also degenerated into dementia.

12:25 p.m.
April 8, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

bignybugsnew york
i am convinced that Reagan at least had pretty visible symptoms of his dementia long before he was diagnosed ... but did it stop people from voting for him?
April 8, 2013 at 1:02 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

JoeYorkshire
Under the Thatcher regime, if you had nowt - you were nowt.
April 8, 2013 at 12:29 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Paul TarrantUK
If you had nowt, you had the opportunity to get it.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
If the British economy was in the dumps in 1979, it certainly wasn't because income tax rates were too low and the rich weren't paying their "fair share."

They top rate of income tax was an eye watering 83% and even the bottom rate was 33%. There were no Romneys paying 12% tax.

Thatcher, correctly in my view, understood that these income tax rates were too high and that they were damaging the economy.

It gives some important perspective - unbelieveable to think that to get the Republicans to go from a top rate of 35% to 39.6% on incomes over $400,000 (8 times the national family income) was like pulling teeth.
April 8, 2013 at 12:19 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

robertgeary9Portland, Oregon
As a native Californian (DOB: 1935), I linked The Iron Lady with Reagan, an anti-intellectual, second-rate movie actor, as well as being a slick demagogue.

He did his utmost to castrate our state's universities. 

In stark contrast to R., T. earned a Degree from Oxford in chemistry; she was a single female employed as a chemical researcher before marrying a factory owner. 

Various items during her days in power:

Somehow, she succeeded in justifying Briton's victory in the Falklands War. 

Perhaps the main question about her legacy is: "Did she do more harm than good?"

Admirably, she reversed herself by placing sanctions against Apartheid in S.Africa. Hence, she could be convinced to change when she was in error.

History alone may accurately judge her idolatry of a free market, as well as her faulty appraisal of the common Briton of her day. If half of my earnings were taxed, as was the case of my Brit counterpart, I would definitely demand that the government be a humane one, not simply a tool of the upper classes.
April 8, 2013 at 12:34 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

JakeWisconsin
De mortius nil nisi bonum, but this euology (rather than obituary) gratuitously injects highly partisan (and highly dubious) political opinion. Its reading of the economic and social climate through and before Thatcher's tenure is essentially nonsensical propaganda.
April 8, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

bignybugsnew york
why should there not be lots of political opinion: she was a politician. Not a scientist, not a doctor, not a farmer. all she was was a politician ... so we are perfectly entitled to evaluate her through a political prism ...
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

JakeWisconsin
bignybugs: The commentators are welcome to whatever political opinions they want to express, but the article itself should be reasonably objective. It can search for and emphasize good things to say about the deceased, but they need to be actually true. This article is highly subjective and filled with falsehoods.
April 9, 2013 at 7:52 p.m.

TaureanQueens, NY
All in all, a dreadful piece of work was accomplished, both socially and morally.
April 8, 2013 at 12:18 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

Bob SterryCanby, Oregon
“Thatcher the Milk Snatcher” ran a new headline when “That Woman” (my Mother’s words) decided to stop the daily delivery of the one third pint milk bottles free to every school in England. Her ghastly braying voice and bullying tactics were everything my family hated. If Ian Richardson had worn a skirt in ‘House of Cards’ it would have been accurate. No, she did not commit murder, but she did condemn many communities to die and deepened a gulf between the North and South of my old country. And like all demagogues her own party finally tired of the continual strain of defending her. 

I can remember almost driving off the road in Boston in 1990 when I heard on a taped course how the speaker admired “little Maggie Thatcher” because she had worked her way up to the top from so humble beginnings. My stomach turned. It represented the weird reverence Americans seemed to have, I could only assume out of ignorance, for this woman who did not grow up in poverty or anything like it but had a relatively comfortable middle class childhood. 

My favorite quote about her comes from the movie, “Brassed Off” when the leader of a competition winning brass band from a dying northern town refuses to accept the prize cup and instead delivers a scathing attack on the politics of the day as it affected his working brothers and their families. At one point he pauses for breath and says, “…and Margaret Thatcher still lives!”
April 8, 2013 at 12:34 p.m.RECOMMENDED19

Ellen BalfourLong Island
You are hilarious!
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

ColinFrance
Margaret Thatcher was a dreadful person.
I am English, 67 years old and saw at first hand the effects of the Thatcher years. She was the only Prime Minister in recent history who chose not only to defeat a Trade Union (National Union of Mineworkers) but to destroy the industry that employed its memebers. She set UK Police Officers against striking mineworkers and did not have the wit to out-manoeuvre a minor ideologue of Arthur Skargills calibre.
Margaret Thatcher squandered the fruits of North Sea oil and Gas and presided over the decimation of the remnants of UK manufacturing, thereby critically unbalancing our economy. We still live with the effects of her woeful economic ignorance.
I was raised to look after my neighbour; Thatcher derided this outlook as simplistic nostalgia. She thought deregulating the Stock Market a good idea and we got the likes of James Archer who, in common with his father, would not reognise truth if he walked into it.
I am no Tory and have little time for them, but I was ashamed to see Thatcher treat a completely decent man like Geoffrey Howe with such utter public contempt. Have a look at his resignation speech if you can spare the time; it is a classic of its type and an example of Parliamentarians at their best. If you do have a look, glance over Howe's left shoulder at a sniggering Jonathan Aitkin who thought Margaret so unworldly she believed Sinai was the plural of sinus. Now, what happened to Jonathan I wonder?
April 8, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.RECOMMENDED22

Concerned ReaderBoston
If the UK had industrial companies producing quality products that the world wanted at a reasonable price, it would have thrived.

UK industry died, as it should have, because the quality was awful, and the prices were not competitive.
April 8, 2013 at 9:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

dan gilganYorkshire, England.
A cruel and single minded ideologue. She forced her (largley discredited) policies through regardless of the human cost. Destroyed British manufacturing industry, created the housing crisis that haunts the UK to this day, ruined the rail network and energy supply through privatisation, oppressed the poor, marginalised the gay community. A hate figure to many people throughout the land.
April 8, 2013 at 12:17 p.m.RECOMMENDED24

PunithCalifornia
Her ideology and legacy should be buried with her.
April 8, 2013 at 12:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED29

BeUK
I respect this woman, I'm sad for her !!
April 8, 2013 at 12:26 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Nai Mei YaoNew Jersey
I was in my teens and twenties when Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister, and being across the pond, only knew here reputation as the Iron Lady and a tough conservative like Ronald Reagan. From reading articles discussing her life and policies, it seems that people either revered her or hated her for her policies that fostered the demise of the labor unions as a potent force and which encouraged greater free market economy in England. For those who decried dismantling the power of the labor unions and England's current state, I wonder how England would have turned out if labor unions were allowed to keep their power and the state was still taxing at such a high rate? While I feel that there should be some government intervention in the form of services the state gives to the needy, complete socialism will never work. It is a failed theory that has been tested many times in the last century. Your country may run on socialism, but the rest of the world works on capitalism and free market economy and the only way to compete is to be able to meet other nations and trading partners on their terms. I sense that Mrs. Thatcher's policies were just right in the beginning, and were what Britain needed to stand up again, but that by the end of three terms, it seemed that her views had become obsolete and were more of a hinderance than a help. Maybe in 100 years we'll be able to see just how effective she really was. In any case, she was a great lady and may she rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 12:17 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

laura174Toronto
Americans loved Margaret Thatcher, just like they love Downton Abby and One Direction. The people who endured her feel differently. I'm sure her family is sad she's gone, especially since her children who made careers out of being her kiddies. Elvis Costello expressed my feelings on the Iron Lady's death years ago.
April 8, 2013 at 12:32 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

MilesSilicon Valley
If those people didn't endure her, they would have instead endured the bankruptcy of their country, and its obsolescence as a major world power.
April 8, 2013 at 12:46 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Paul TarrantUK
As a British citizen you should not be so quick to speak on behalf of 'those who had to ensure her'. She left the country in better condition than she found it.
April 8, 2013 at 2:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

laura174Toronto
@Paul Tarrant

I am a British citizen and I speak on behalf of myself and the millions of people whose lives were negatively affected by that dreadful woman.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

Christopher GadsdenCornwall, UK
As someone who was selling British products abroad, Britain was a laughing stock in the late 70's with everything we made compared to British Leyland, the very worst cars made by the most powerful unions, managed by cowering incompetents. The respect she gained for Britain and the defeat of the unions transformed the world's view of this country. People were hurt, as they unfairly are in any war, and Thatcher vs the unions was certainly a war, and the good guys won, thank goodness.
April 8, 2013 at 12:21 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
And what of the "covering incompetents" in management? How were they broken?
April 8, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

C.Z.X.East Coast
Early in Mrs. Thatcher's tenure, I began hiring English girls to help me with my children in another nearby country, on au pair terms. I had hundreds of applications every year from young women desperate to find work and it was a piece of cake to find my pearl. By the mid-nineties, after the Thatcher reforms, impossible! New prosperity in the UK had brought jobs for young people and only the least-qualified still struggled. A miracle! God bless her.
April 8, 2013 at 12:16 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Thoughtful WomanOregon
Let them eat cake?

Margaret Thatcher saved English girls from having to work as an au pair in a foreign land?

Long live Margaret Thatcher!
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

mikenny
Comments and journalists from the left keep referring to the 'gap between rich and poor' under thatcher but ignore the fact that there was record-breaking immigration. So what do you expect when you let in millions of poor immigrants? Same in our country.
April 8, 2013 at 12:32 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

Vincent AmatoNew York City
The changes that we all, lazily, label and ascribe to Reagan and Thatcher's counter-revolution merely refers to the two rather lackluster individuals chosen to spearhead a move to save a gravely faltering capitalism by tapping into the populace's darkest impulses and allowing a Potemkin village of a healthy economic system to be put in place. We are now living through round two or three of the same phenomenon.
April 8, 2013 at 12:21 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

jbok
Yep, it's blame and shame, divide and conquer, all the time with these people.
April 8, 2013 at 12:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

lknew york, NY
Interesting, extremely interesting observation.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

HKGuyNYC
While I detest her policies, the one adjective I would never attribute to Thatcher is "lackluster"!
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

JimTennesseeNYT Pick
My family and I lived in England from 1982 to '87, during the height of Margaret Thatcher's powers. At the time, I didn't realize what an extraordinary person she was or what extraordinary times those were. We lived in the north, where unemployment was most severe and the coal-mining industry felt the full force of Thatcherism. Seeing the effects of those policies up close, I was no fan of hers. But Britain was in a mess in so many ways, and the nation needed someone as tough and single-minded as she was to turn things around, and she was right about many things. But she seems like some Greek tragic figure: the same traits that made her so strong metastasized into something like hubris. She did not know when, or maybe how, to stop, which finally was her political undoing. Still, Margaret Thatcher was a remarkable person. No doubt she transformed Britain--in some ways for the worse, but on balance more for the better, I now think.
April 8, 2013 at 12:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED33

SteveKy.
I understand that she was convinced the unions had to be restrained.
As with Churchill, her party turned on her as soon as she had gotten Britain through tough trials.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.

Honest JohnDallas, TX
Very thoughtful post.
April 8, 2013 at 7:33 p.m.

BarbaraSan Antonio TX
I remember Thatcher as the cause of increased wage disparity, a champion for unregulated economic activity that had a negative economic impact on the prople and that is still very much felt today. Thatcher and Regan and their trickle down economic theory contributed to a culture of greed and promoted individuals over community. She was also another zealot for war; not a trait to be admired.
April 8, 2013 at 12:32 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

Doug TerryMaryland, DC Metro area
I know it is more or less the accepted thing to write something nice about someone on their passing. I could not muster the self deception to do so in this case.

One thing I will always remember about her is that she worked very hard, along with other "conservatives", to lessen the sanctions on South Africa while Nelson Mandela was still in prison. Then, she argued that those sanctions should be lifted entirely. They are such "small bore" sanctions, she told the media. This is a bit like conservatives trying to reform Medicare in our country: they never wanted it in the first place, so how is it they should be put in charge of making it better?

I have never understood, also, this grand admiration for the "Iron Lady" mystique. Inflexibility and insistence that things must be only your way? This is a wonderful trait? Obama gets criticized, minute by minute, when he insists that anything he wants should be followed. I suppose Thatcher's great personal accomplishment was to make intransigence into an asset. 

Her opposition to unions in England, bloated, lazy and often corrupt, was not without merit. Just as management can easily turn toward corruption if left unchecked, unions with near absolute power never stop trying to get more for their members. Every force requires a counterbalancing force. This does not make her heroic. 

The best I can say about her is that she made a very strong impression on her times and she got her way in most things.

http://terryreport.com
April 8, 2013 at 12:21 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

DRSNew York, NY
Your comparison of Obama to Thatcher is telling. Obama gets criticized minute by minute and gets nothing done while Thatcher revolutionized her country. That's because Obama is a weak, feckless professor while Thatcher was a leader.
April 8, 2013 at 1:31 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

EinsteinAmerica
Verified
Margaret Thatcher claimed ' Consensus is the absence of leadership".

Excuse me, I thought "Lack of consensus is the absence of leadership".
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

jbok
Margaret Thatcher claimed ' Consensus is the absence of leadership".

You're right, Einstein, but then Thatcher was a bully who figured she could have her way. And since she was "brave" enough to always be on the side of money and power, she got it a lot.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

FaheyWA
Verified
By even the most critical of standards, Baroness Margaret Thatcher was a great leader and skilled politician. Her conservative policies brought stringent, toughness and nationalization that left its mark and not always favorable. 

However, in the big picture, Thatcher was a strong and competent leader who has left a no less than monumental legacy in the history of British politics. 

Our most sincere condolences to her family, colleagues and admirers here and in Britain.
April 8, 2013 at 12:13 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Prof.Jai Prakash Sharma,Jaipur, India
Verified
Margaret Thatcher could either be revered or hated, as there was little room for mixed feeling. Likewise, one liked her unique Thatcherite version of conservatism or disliked it, there was no room for compromise. With her death, a whole new era of Twentieth century British conservatism seems to have passed, though she was lucky to see another round of conservative revival through the worthy successor, David Cameron, the present incumbent heading Conservative party led coalition government in Britain, while she breathed her last. May her soul rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

TrousersUK
Every single UK newspaper site has been forced to close down its comment sections on this story.

That tells you all you need to know.
April 8, 2013 at 11:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED30

MatthewTewksbury, MA
And how many of those vile remarks came from "Open-minded, civilized progressives"?
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

OliverNY
With the exception of The Daily Mail. There was a flood of semi-illiterate comments championing Thatcher breathlessly, before they moved onto articles covering the latest celebrity cellulite shots.
April 8, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

j. von hettlingenSwitzerland
Verified
Since Margaret Thatcher stepped down in 1990, Britain hasn't seen another female prime minister. When will Britain see another "Margaret Thatcher" in Downing Street again? Probably not for a little while.
During her term in office many ordinary Brits could buy their council houses and snapp up shares in the newly privatised industries such as British Gas and BT. Yet by rejecting consensus politics, she made herself a divisive figure. Her policies and governing style led to rebellion inside her party and unrest on the streets. Some Brits blamed her for the loss of Hongkong as well. In her second visit to China in September 1982, after Britain's victory over the Falklands, her self-assertiveness didn't impress Deng Xiaoping at all.
April 8, 2013 at 11:44 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

English speculumUK
Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill, William Gladstone; we seem blessed to see a great leader twice in our lifetimes.

How long before we see the likes of such again? 

The UK is in need of it. 

RIP MHT.
April 8, 2013 at 12:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

TimNew York City
I was at university in the US when this "stupid woman" was elevated. I thought she would be a horror for the trades unions (my father was a teamster) and for the poor. It did not take a university student to realise Reagan-Thatcher trickle-down economics was a plan to make the rich richer, and further impoverish the poor. Labour partially restored the fortunes of the trades unions, and the policies of the present coalition government are, thankfully, more reaction to the conservative stupidity of the 1980s than paeon to them. May we bury all this nonsense, both in the UK and here in the US, with the speed and cosideration so richly deserved.
April 8, 2013 at 11:56 a.m.RECOMMENDED28

Paul TarrantUK
Personally, speaking as a working class brit I for one was glad the unions were broken. I watched Scargill force an illegal strike, the teachers walking out etc. Where would we have been had she not got into power?

I have worked hard for what I have but I am grateful for the opportunities my country has provided.
April 8, 2013 at 2:44 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

MIcahNYNYT Pick
I dunno how I feel and it really doesn't matter -- she left an indelible imprint on the world, which is more than any of us will ever do. All the odds were stacked high against her and they stayed stacked high until the end. For that reason, she was "tough" but no tougher than any good, effective leader of her time. For me though, the most influential Briton was the one who wrote that the love we take is equal to the love we make. And, in that regard, my heart breaks for the Lady. Her children magnetically unattracted to her, Dennis long gone, anyone talking about her saying the nastiest things one can say about another-- in the end, is that all there was for her? No one deserves that type of end. Nothing that she did means anything to me if she left the world so alone. I wonder how she felt about that.
April 8, 2013 at 11:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED12

Carolyn EgeliValley Lee, Md.
Verified
Really, we are all alone when we die.
April 8, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

jbok
My mother left an indelible imprint on the world. Not to make the poor poorer and the rich richer, but to help every person she could, without judgment and with mercy. 

That is a legacy, Micah.
April 8, 2013 at 7:07 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

simzapOrlando
Micah, Thatcher was an advocate of the wealthy at the expense of working people so she was hardly without backing or facing long odds. Her only legacy is her brazeness in attacking the poor which is something the Romney's of the world only have the courage to do in closed meetings with his wealthy likeminded backers. A lot of people who didn't struggle to earn a subsistance living have no empathy and she was one of these. Except she was a true believer who thought she had brought herself up from her own boostraps when in reality she never suffered want all the while looking down on those that did.
April 8, 2013 at 11:50 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Daniel GewertzSomerville MA
An early comment here asked the readers of the Times who are strongly critical of Thatcher: "She was elected three times. Do you not like democracy?" My answer, the minority view I'm sure, is that failed and woeful democracies, like Britain and the U.S. presently, are no more to be liked and trusted than any failed and corrupt system. Britain is the same country that saw fit to strongly honor and praise Tony Blair at the end of his reign, after the disaster of the Iraq War, a war that couldn't have occurred without his strong support of money and troops. British leaders, despite their pleasing manner of vigorous debate in the House of Commons, feel it is civilized and dignified to honor leaders no matter how divisive and destructive they have been in office. It's as bad as the canonization of Ronald Reagan here, or the inability for Senators here to tell a few hard truths about fellow Senators who should be in jail, not in office. The voters of a failed democracy are a big part of the problem, but when the democracy is run by money and propaganda as it is here, the causes of failure are too many to count. So, no, I'm no fan, of the cruel Lady or of failed democracies.
April 8, 2013 at 12:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

David GNew York
An amazing woman who knew how to stand for conservative principals. She will be well missed.
April 8, 2013 at 11:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

AnonBoston, Ma
If only she had devoted her considerable intellect to science!
April 8, 2013 at 11:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

DRSNew York, NY
Politics can have an even larger impact on the world than science. And she did.
April 8, 2013 at 12:34 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

RUC IRersChina
She is worthy of great respect from all over the world. Admire for her supreme charm.
April 8, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

srr510queens
Conservative radio swamis are already using Margaret Thatcher's death as another excuse to bash Barack Obama. They're sneering 'Why can't Obama be more like Margaret Thatcher?" Or "Barack Obama is no Maggie Thatcher."

What a disgrace.
April 8, 2013 at 11:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

RSTexas
"But her third term was riddled with setbacks. Dissension over monetary policy, taxes and Britain’s place in the European Community caused her government to give up hard-won gains against inflation and unemployment."

Great to see things have changed a great deal. 

Fact is Thatcher and Reagan set both their nations on the road to ruinous inequality. They sometimes pushed for the policy and they sometimes ended up with a policy that went far beyond even their greatest hopes. But their low tax loose regulation union smashing ways have given us our current paradise. 

May they rest in peace, as I respect civil leaders. But any nostalgia is simply for my childhood leaders and not any sorrow over their actual leadership or policies. 

By the way there is a new Iron Lady in town. And she calls the shots from Berlin.
April 8, 2013 at 11:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

HermajtomomiLondon UK
I stand by what I said. Was it sheer coincidence that prior to the Falklands War her ratings were plunging and following the war they soared? And surely "adjusting policies to goose opinion poll ratings" is what every government of every persuasion does? Of course, there is always the issue of whether they actually enact such policies.
April 8, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

ghwipearth
Thatcher used a propaganda machine to convince the world that she was not evil. She called Mandela a terrorist, authorized the killing of Irish Nationalists and peace campaigners, sanctioned the lies of the death of 96 Liverpool football supporters and took bribes from Murdoch.
A truly horrible woman, more divisive than any other UK politician. Move military personnel into the police force to suppress civil unrest, set up police groups to infiltrate and subvert peaceful protest, bribed Mid East politicians to take UK armaments, sold weapons to Iraq and Iran illegally. Sold off housing, health service, power industry, transport, water, natural gas, all of which are now at the top of the UK political agenda as needing urgent repair. Only the rich profited from her actions - millionaires became multi-milionaries, she blamed the poor for being poor and laid the foundations of it being a crime to be poor.
Women were worse off after her 11 years than before, she did nothing for them.
April 8, 2013 at 11:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED51

jbCanton, NY.
She did more damage to British manufacturing than the Luftwaffe. She employed the same kind of ideological inflexibility that we can see in Britain's current leadership today. And she'd feel right at home in the modern GOP.
April 8, 2013 at 11:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

rosaca
I hope that Obama is reading these comments. The Times says she was 'revered', but I'm hearing that folks have long memories on the supporters of the 1%, wars, austerizing the poorest..... The smiles and one-liner chuckles will be forgotten in 10 years and that's when the history books get written. Obama will be remembered as Neville Chamberlain to Boener's Third Reich, and no one will forget, worldwide, the drones and Gitmo. 

History's a funny thing. It's not true that only the victors get to write it. Thatcher was not 'revered' by the ones that matter - but she is remembered.....as a disaster.
April 8, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Alan DewarUK
Mrs Thatcher was a great leader of the people who own and control the British Isles. She set about restoring advantage to what she regarded as its proper place, a task continued subsequently by the Blair and Cameron governments. She worked extraordinarily well with the paranational agencies into whose power systems the UK fits.

No human being should pass unmourned and her family, friends and admirers deserve sympathy for their loss. She was vastly important; we are living her legacy.
April 8, 2013 at 11:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

jbok
Yes, and some are dying of it, and have on along. But never mind.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

vmanNew York, NY
We can use Maggie & Ron now!
April 8, 2013 at 11:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Robert SculptorLondon UK
Destructive, uncreative, the master of 'Cuts'.

She led a party whose catch phrase was 'To Cut'. Rather than act and think creatively hers was to rely upon short sightedness and tight fistedness. Not surprisingly she learnt these mean values from her late father. He was a renowned as a grocer for measuring out to the exact milligram a slice of cheese, meat, or whatever, during WW2 rationing here in the UK. Others in the same business were more generous and humane. It ended here in the UK in 1954, but he still kept at it. Mean.

Having lived through her reign as a student of art I can attest to experiencing her Government. She hated the arts and cut funding. Maintenance of schools, hospitals, libraries, public infrastructure was 'cut'. Throughout her tenure all schools received but a lick of paint. The litany of the Thatcher Years like the last world war still resonates with visible scars. Our major orbital road around London the M25 was built under her direction, penny pinching with the cheapest concrete road surface and minimum number of lanes. Thatcher baulked at top level advice to plan for future growth in car ownership. Result the M25 is synonymous as being the largest car park in Europe.

Where are we now? The Conservative administration element of the current coalition has made its business to lead in cutting rather than investing in growth, for the nation. The very Conservative MP's who voted on cutting student grants had free education.

I feel no sadness.
April 8, 2013 at 12:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

EBWNew York CityNYT Pick
I am greatly saddened by the death of Lady Thatcher. She has been a inspiration to me and to many strong and independent women aoroud the world... As a Chinese student I lived in London during the Thatcher years in the 1980s. I was deeply moved by one of her speeches: "Its doesn't matter where you are, where you come from. If you can make a cotribution to our society and if you can build up a future for yourself, if you can, jolly good luck to you."

My favorite line was when she said: "If a woman like Eva Peron, with no ideals, can get that far, think how far I can go with all the ideals that I have."

Margaret Thatcher was the greatest leading lady of all time! Farewell
April 8, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED42

bignybugsnew york
so she beat out Eva Peron in the ideals department -- quite an achievement. I can see why you admire her so much ...
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

forgivehistoryvermont
This is the woman who called Nelson Mandela a terrorist. Enough said.
April 8, 2013 at 11:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED35

LWMountain View, CA
To be fair, at one point he *was* a terrorist -- he actively embraced the use of violence against the government. What made him remarkable was that he eventually changed his mind when his personal treatment might instead have hardened that view.
April 8, 2013 at 12:16 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

forgivehistoryvermont
@ LW . . . 

According to that thinking, George Washington was a terrorist too. And, though I suppose GW was just so in the eyes of someone such as George III, your response to my comment does seem rather to miss the forest for the trees.
April 8, 2013 at 12:27 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

rosaca
As a note: Ronald Reagan said, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." But, yeah, I don't think he was thinking about Nelson Mandela......
April 8, 2013 at 12:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

RSNear Philly
My favorite Thatcher quote, to paraphrase, “The problem with Socialism is eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

A classic!
April 8, 2013 at 11:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED8
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

BemusedManhattan
The problem with capitalism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to steal.
April 8, 2013 at 12:20 p.m.RECOMMENDED25

WhythenCANYT Pick
The problem with privatization is that you eventually run out of infrastructure to sell.
April 8, 2013 at 5:39 p.m.RECOMMENDED11

Concerned ReaderBoston
J L S F,

Are you trying to be witty, or do you simply not understand?

Capitalism creates wealth where it did not previously exist. The government cannot do that.
April 8, 2013 at 9:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

mfordATL
I just returned from Ireland (Republic) where President Clinton has demigod status for helping to end the troubles. Why is it the "Left" is always left to clean up the messes of the "Right"?
April 8, 2013 at 12:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

MickeyNew York, NY
Nobody did more for so few at the expense of so many. So long "Iron Lady".
April 8, 2013 at 11:58 a.m.RECOMMENDED40

Joel GoldbergerChicago, IL
Unlike Labor PMs who proceeded her, she did not equivocate regarding to the Eastern Bloc, but was content to be Reagan's lapdog.
April 8, 2013 at 11:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

James F TraynorPunta Gorda
I didn't like Thatcher much, but there were some extreme loonies in the unions. And she did seem to have convinced Ronnie to 'do business with Gorbachev' much to the dismay of his right wing advisors. The thing I remember the most was the sight of her straining to look around a column, where the queen had put her, during the wedding of Charles and Diane. Apparently she had gone too far messing with the queen's people and the other iron lady let her know about it. Noblesse oblige. Funny.
April 8, 2013 at 11:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

TallshipperChester County PA
The title of Baron(ess) is ironically appropriate. It identifies her as a member of an aristocracy that has ruled England since King Alfred and William I, an aristocracy that has lived off the labors of the people while disdaining their rights and needs.
April 8, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED11

Hobo MoPittsburgh
From today's nyt's "Beneath the Kilt:" His new documentary, “The Spirit of ’45,” which opened in Britain in March, can be connected thematically to “The Angels’ Share.” It celebrates the 1945-51 Labour government’s creation of the welfare state and its nationalization policy, which created thousands of jobs. It also traces how Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government dismantled public ownership through privatization, leading to the highest unemployment since the 1930s.
April 8, 2013 at 11:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Marty O'TooleLos Angeles
She did what she thought was right, even when it was wrong.
April 8, 2013 at 11:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

Berkeley BeeSan Francisco, CA
At a time when Margaret and Ronnie issued a call for "freedom," they also opened the door wide to "Greed is Good," allowing and even encouraging a rapacious capitalism without many limits. Their clarion calls which sounded so sweet at the time led us down the pretty primrose path into the recent Great Recession.
April 8, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

RuskinBuffalo, NY
De mortuis nihil nisi bonum is something I believe in, but not on this occasion. I am of the opinion that her actions led to more harm than good, and that, along with Ronald Reagan, she started an era of materialism that will stunt the growth of the human spirit around the world.
April 8, 2013 at 11:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

PaulChicago
I voted for Lady Thatcher in 1979 as an 18 year old growing up in a Britain run by radical trade unions, after a winter of no heat or electricity, and twenty years of economic and political decline.

Her impact - love her or hate her - has been profound in Great Britain and around the world. Her free market polices and focus on controlling our own destiny are here to stay
April 8, 2013 at 11:39 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

PeteCTNYT Pick
At this historic moment, it is fitting to honor a strong, principled leader with an iron will, one who increased the measure of human dignity and freedom in the world, one who made an indelible mark on the 20th century.

I refer, of course, to Nelson Mandela.
April 8, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED268

kathy500aCt
don't forget his wife Winnie who we celebrated also in schools all over the world
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.

nemeclBig Bear, CA
Wow, 8 online pages. No way I can read all that. I do not even remember whether I originally liked her or not.

What I remember were huge signs in Buenos Aires about Islas Malvinas, also known as Falklands. 

Her victory there got rid indirectly of the murderous Argentinean generals without the need to invade Argentina proper. From my point of view, that was her greatest accomplishment although a side effect of her popular retaking of Falklands, still 'disputed islands' in freezing South Atlantic.

It was truly heroic on her part: she almost lost her best friend and soul mate Reagan who did not care about Argentinean generals but had to acknowledge the existence of South America.
April 8, 2013 at 11:26 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

steve hunterseattle
I didn't care for the woman.
April 8, 2013 at 11:39 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

Chandrashekhar PatelColumbia SC
End of an Era. I will always remember as the one who gave everything to make the crazy world a safe place for our children and grandchildren to inhabit. RIP Lady Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 11:34 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

KathyLondon UK
I am British and I am of the utmost belief that Thatcher's legacy is on of decimation of wholse swathe communities, manufacturing base, misappropriation of the North Sea Oil Revenue; mass unemployment, yuppies and most of all Greed. 

Foreigners may like the image the PR have painted of Thatcher, but in time her true image one which I briefly highlighted above will surplant the glossy one.
April 8, 2013 at 11:26 a.m.RECOMMENDED28

rosaca
I remember the ditty that went around England: "Maggie Thatcher, the lunch-milk snatcher" when she lobbied to have free lunch milk dropped for the poorest children.

That was about the same time that Ronald Reagan was lobbying to have 'ketchup' catagorized as a 'vegetable' in poor children's lunches.

Ah, they were quite a pair, those two........the original Austerizers.
April 8, 2013 at 11:39 a.m.RECOMMENDED24

Chris ParkinsonPreston, England, UK
My mother hated her with a vengeance - mainly because of the Poll Tax - and was delighted when she resigned as Prime Minister. She called me to tell me so. I was living in Canada and so I was a long-distance spectator during her 'reign'. She got the Falklands right (and got re-elected as a result). She got most of the rest - the industrial base, Europe - wrong. She was way too divisive.
April 8, 2013 at 11:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

BobnoirSilicon Valley
Her comment,

“In my lifetime, all the problems have come from mainland Europe, and all the solutions have come from the English-speaking nations across the world,” 

speaks volumes of arrogance, hypocrisy, and zenophobia that has kept nations apart for years. The "British only" solution isn't.
April 8, 2013 at 11:25 a.m.RECOMMENDED14

VXUS
at least the Times didn't start the article with "she made a mean beef stroganoff", but instead acknowledged the impact that a woman had on changing the world she lived in.
April 8, 2013 at 11:39 a.m.

lindaUK
God bless her soul. She needs it.
April 8, 2013 at 11:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

JoanneNEurope
I read this with incredulity: "Despite the sectarian violence, Northern Ireland was not high on her agenda. Mrs. Thatcher saw the troubles there as intractable and her policies as simply preserving the status quo."
THIS is all you have to say about Thatcher and Northern Ireland? Does "Bobby Sands" not ring a bell?
April 8, 2013 at 11:25 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

SteamTimesFlorida
Freight-loads of people here appear to be expressing the sentiment that she was unsympathetic to the circumstances of the poor and disenfranchised. 

My tea leaves convey that if Margaret Thatcher where not elected, and current policies at the time were allowed to play out, the poor and disenfranchised would eventually have become utterly destitute; ...
...however, there would have been more apologizing for letting that happen.
April 8, 2013 at 11:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

GeorgeLos Angeles
May she rest in peace but Thatcher put into place economic policies that would eventually damage England as did Ronald Reagan's economic trickle down economics. They both had their wars, Thatcher the Falklands and Reagan Grenada, they were of no significance. The net financial results of these so called world leader are now revealing their damage giving world the new purveyors of greed, unfettered Banking, Wall Street manipulations and creation of financial instruments that would come to haunt us. After these two left office the warnings came, savings and loan crisis, silicon valley collapse, housing bubble collapse, Banking collapse and Wall Street greed and yet we ignored these warnings as did those before the Great Depression and we nearly tanked into a depression.
April 8, 2013 at 11:37 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

elisaTaiwan
R.I.P.
you are always an IRON hero in my mind, my regard idol..
" There is something else which one feels, That is a sense of this country's destiny: the countries of history and experience which ensure that, when principle s have to defended, when good has to be upheld and when evil has to be overcome, Britain will take up arms..... "
April 8, 2013 at 11:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

KaraNJNYT Pick
For me, Reagan, Thatcher and Gorbachev are the political trifecta of my childhood. I think history will remember the three of them, and their impact on the Cold War, in a very special way. I certainly do. Margaret Thatcher was in so many ways a contradiction - an anti-feminist who became the absolute model for women in power - and an inspiration to a generation of young women whom she most likely would have never wanted to be. I think her legacy will in many ways be greater than her actual premiership. In any case, she is a woman and a politician to be revered and remembered. RIP.
April 8, 2013 at 11:24 a.m.RECOMMENDED36

ChartaetosAthens Greece
Her friendship with the Monster of Chili's dictatorship Augusto Pinochet let us know very well what neo-liberalism and thatcherism was and what is looking for just now
April 8, 2013 at 11:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED11

mancurocRochester, NY
Verified
NYT Pick
Thatcher will be remembered as Robin Hood in reverse.
April 8, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED155

wingatesan francisco
Really, I kind of doubt that.
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Reader In Wash, DCWashington, DC
Only by the ignorant.
April 8, 2013 at 9:11 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Malcolm TaylorFrance
I lived in Britain through the Thatcher year's and have nothing but loathing for her and her policies. At least half of Britain will be celebrating today without sorrow. She destroyed much about Britain that was good while she cosied up to Dear Ronnie and vested interests. I could go on but I'll leave it here.
April 8, 2013 at 11:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED42

DennisSomerset NJ
Her terms were harsh but I lived in Britain before she came to power and the place was in chaos. It was a La La land that the left was running it into the ground. It was a daily lottery as to who was on strike that day.
British manufacturing was being destroyed by inept management and crazy unions long before Thatcher came to power. Anyone who wants a laugh should look up the history of the Linwood car plant near Glasgow. Hundreds of millions of pounds per year shoveled into a car factory that made cars no one wanted to buy.
As for the coal mining communities , a good friend came from one in Scotland, they were finished. They were socially tight knit communities but what do you do with coal no one wants or could afford. Virtually every mine was a marginal operation and everyone who worked there knew it. I find it amusing all the good NYT liberals are promoting burning more coal for social cohesion. Perhaps they'd like to go on Windmill for Humanity in West Virginia.
There is a lot about Thatcher that was undesirable but anyone who lived there at the time can tell you that the course Britain was on a floundering ship headed to the reef.
She kept it off the rocks which was more than most could have done.
April 8, 2013 at 11:12 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

JGNew York, NY
Nobody gets everything right all the time. Maggie Thatcher was no exception. However, she was the right person for the job when Britain very badly needed a kick in the pants. RIP.
April 8, 2013 at 11:09 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

MaureenLong Island
It was not "Britain" that got the "kick in the pants" -- it was the poor and lower middle class Brits that got the "kick in the pants"!
April 8, 2013 at 11:22 a.m.RECOMMENDED19

CMLPullman, WA
Maggie Thatcher the Milk Snatcher. That's how I'll remember you.
April 8, 2013 at 11:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

bormespkBrookline, MA
Just as we remember Reagan, who considered ketchup a vegetable...well, at least if you're a poor kid.
April 8, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

hadarmenNYC
Margaret Thatcher must be remembered in two distinct category. 

1- Capitalism establishment post war era 1970-2008
2- Political ideology establishment. 1979-1990.

1- Thatcher and her kind reigned almost the last quarter of 20th century with a notorious attitude backed with political ideology success. However what is established as a capitalism today is collapsed like USSR. It brought down western world prosperity with it. If there were any success for ordinary people , today everything vanished. So unfortunately Thatcher and her kind favored capitalism didn't last long. 

2- Pure political ideology, USSR a cold war rival was beaten to ground, not communism. Why not communism, because China prospered and took over so Chinese communism which even doesn't fit Marx philosophy succeeded. USSR was not all about Communism, there was a rivalry, nationalism , other side-ism was beaten. That should be acknowledged as a political success. 

Meanwhile, let's don't forget who died from horrific disease of Bovine spongiform encephalopathy will never forget Iron lady for her negligence in this issue. 

All in all 1980's was very fast revolving days, characters around the table were colorful, dedicated, have will power. 

Today we have Merkel, Cameron, Hollande and unknown Italians around the table and when we compare them to their predecessors at 1980's, new guys are at best can be labeled as "utterly incompetent"
April 8, 2013 at 11:12 a.m.

MickBoston
You'll never go wrong concocting political, social, and economic, rationalizations for giving the rich and powerful what they want.
April 8, 2013 at 11:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

jbok
Don't forget the "moral" aspects of her (and the rightwing's) crusade: the virtuous rich and the wicked poor, here in the world where deserts are accorded righteously. 

An outrage.
April 8, 2013 at 7:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

KeikoNY
Her legacy will live on for many generations to come. Rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 11:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

JDManhtattan
I lived in Britain during MT's first term -- she was a brilliant politician, brilliant leader. She literally saved Britain. The country was already divided -- that was not her doing. She lead from the front, not like so many leaders today.
April 8, 2013 at 11:11 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

JHere
She destroyed Britain's manufacturing sector and turned the nation into a service economy.

Sure, she'll be missed - by the 1%.
April 8, 2013 at 11:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED30

josie8MA
Mrs. Thatcher, excuse me, Barroness Thatcher, merits first place in the World-wide Order of Snobs.
April 8, 2013 at 11:22 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

David BartlettKeweenaw Bay, MI
I was raised with the philosophy that if you cannot say something good about the recently departed, then don't say anything at all. And even if you harbor unpleasant thoughts on the deceased, there are still diplomatic-----if not kind----ways to express them.

A human being named Margaret Thatcher has left this earth. She has made the journey we will all one day make. Like you, there will never ever be another person like her. 

So, unless she personally made your life a living hell, why can't we just celebrate that very uniqueness which separates us as individuals yet binds us together in one-ness. It is not just one Margaret Thatcher we say goodbye to, but a part of ourselves.
April 8, 2013 at 11:11 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

KathyLondon UK
I object to your thread. I can and will post what I know of Thatcher and will refuse to suger coat it, because she has died. She was once the PM of my Country and like every leader who passes away; we post comments good or bad that reflects what people think of her.

Margaret Thatcher was reviled by many in the UK, simply because of the policies she zealously pursued to the detriment of the lives of the many. 

We the many lived through her policies and will comment accordingly. 

As the saying goes, the seed that man sows lives after them. Thatcher's seeds were bad hence the comments she is receiving from the members of the public.

Forget the tributes coming from the Public figures, they can lie for all they want; but we in Britain knew what Thatcher's legacy really was and is, and it will not be good one.

I wish the Epitaph at her final resting place reads "She who did not believe in Society lies here".
April 8, 2013 at 11:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED23

David RossBarcelona
An evil, divisive woman. An earlier version of Karl Rove, whose strategy was to garner the support of the 40% or so who agreed with her by using dog whistle tactics on immigration & painting her opponents as unpatriotic. She was the template for the Right of today minus the religious obsession.

Unfortunately for the UK, the near 60% who opposed her were divided into two parties in England and three in Scotland and Wales. This was what provided her electoral success. She never obtained more than 44% of the vote but acted as if she had 100%.

She ruled in the interests of the south and south east. She left a trail of industrial destruction in the Midlands, North-West, North-east of England, Scotland and Wales unmatched since the Luftwaffe as entire industries like coal mining, steelmaking, shipbuilding were wiped from the map. 

Virtually all Britain's problems today can be traced back to her. The casino capitalism which she encouraged. The isolation in Europe which she basked in as some kind of relic of empire. Even the benefits issue as she encouraged the take up of benefit for incapacity as it kept two million off the official unemployment figures. Even so, unemployment was at a post-war high for all of her eleven years in power. 

There were race riots - almost unheard of before she became Prime Minister. She used the police to beat up striking miners. I for one will not mourn.
April 8, 2013 at 11:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED36

Ray CastroCincinnati, OH
This is Mrs. Castro:

Good timing: I finished watching House of Cards, 1991, starring the late Ian Richardson. I recommend it. Most especially the scene where he, the PM, shot his old dog, putting it out of its misery while commenting that the National Health might take a lesson......
April 8, 2013 at 11:22 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Betsy HerringEdmond, OK
Neither Thatcher nor Reagan are any kind of role models or heroes to me. Reagan spent most of his term in a fuzzy muddled state of mind from Alzheimers doing what he was told. I was in London last year and wandered all over but saw no evidence in kudoes for the woman. That speaks tons.
April 8, 2013 at 11:11 a.m.RECOMMENDED12

GeorgePennsylvania
Elvis Costello summed up many peoples feelings about Thatcher in his song "Tramp the Dirt Down".
April 8, 2013 at 11:07 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

BrianNew York
As an Irish American, I have to admit to a certain grim satisfaction at the news of Margaret Thatcher’s death. Her treatment of the IRA hunger strikers, whom she let starve to death, coupled with her thinly disguised contempt for all things Irish, was simply reprehensible and helped to perpetuate rather than resolve the troubles in Northern Ireland during her administration. As for so much else of what she did while in office, she was a daughter of the middle class who so desperately wanted acceptance by the British upper class that she sold out most of her citizens to get it. So what if she became “Lady” Thatcher: she was no lady, since she seemed to possess around as much empathy and human fellow feeling as a brick.
April 8, 2013 at 11:13 a.m.RECOMMENDED57

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
Greengrocers in Lincolnshire before WW2 were "middle class"???...try again.
April 8, 2013 at 11:43 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

JakeWisconsin
Ronnie Lane: If her father had been merely a clerk in a grocery store, than she might have been below middle class, but the article says he OWNED the grocery store and simultaneously worked as a professional politician and preacher. That suggests to me the store was merely one of his capitalist holdings.
April 8, 2013 at 12:45 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

Alan FlacksNew York, N.Y.
A grand dame--I liked her, but not her politics. Were I a British subject, I'd be a member of the Labour party. Thatcher's revenge: John Major.
April 8, 2013 at 11:11 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

DiogenesBelmont, MANYT Pick
Britain's unions over-reached and Thatcher deserves credit for reining them in. But she went too far and hurt many people, especially England's poor. She was not, as some have said, "the greatest prime minister of the post-war period." By far, that was Clement Attlee and the idealistic Labor Government of 1945-1951, which introduced national health insurance and many other beneficial programs.
April 8, 2013 at 11:07 a.m.RECOMMENDED82

Michael FYonkers, NY
Which by the time of Thatcher were bankrupting the country. If it wasn't for her Britain would be worse off than Greece.
April 8, 2013 at 11:48 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

SteveKy.
Don't forget that Attlee spent so much creating the liberal State that he required emergency cash from America. He got people to the doctor for the first time, in many cases, but he could have tried working through marketplace approaches.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

MaureenLong Island
She took from the poor. She gave to the rich. She made sure the education and opportunities she enjoyed would not be available to other working class English.
April 8, 2013 at 11:13 a.m.RECOMMENDED41

John0123Denver
Given Thatcher's harshly unforgiving tone towards her political opponents, I hope UK leaders resist any runaway Reaganesque "Legacy Project" renamings of everything in sight. She doesn't deserve them any more than many of her overlooked contemporaries.
April 8, 2013 at 11:11 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

Ray GordonBel Air,Md.
Margaret Thatcher should have been charged with war crimes that she committed against Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland. She ordered the execution of Catholic lawyer Pat Finucane in 1989 because he was too successful in getting IRA members acquited from prosecutions. England has admitted that it was involved in his execution but has refused to engage a public inquiry because Thatcher would have been found guilty. She accused the IRA of being terrorists when, in fact, it was she who was the real terrorist.England needs to get its murdering soldiers out of Northern Ireland.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

Mr Teddy BearEngland
I deeply divisive Prime Minister who will not be mourned by the British Trade Union Movement. In the late Nineteen Seventies Britain was being destroyed by rampant inflation, a lingering class system and bungling, lazy management. 

Her greatest achievement was defeating the scourge of 18 percent inflation; at the cost of destroying the industrial manufacturing base, creating poverty and allowing state school's to crumble

The Falklands war by chance was her electoral saviour, if the Argentians had only just waited awhile there would have been no Antarctic Patrol Ship and no aircraft carriers and hence no possibility of retaking the Islands without air cover.

She was responsible for the financial Big Bang in the City Of London [deregulation] that sowed the seed's leading to the present gobal financial crisis. 'The future lies in the service sector' was the mantra of her administration.

She was never Head Of State, a remark able political figure certainly. The comparison to Winston Churchill is pretty silly.

She will be mourned by some, but not by the Trade Union Movement, or those who suffered under her harsh monetarist policies.
April 8, 2013 at 11:24 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

pateleysan diego
Revered by some. Reviled by many more.
April 8, 2013 at 11:13 a.m.RECOMMENDED20

Claude600USVI
By going so hard after the unions, to some extent, she is partly to blame for the great loss of very good manufacturing jobs in the UK. As someone who was born in the UK, I can tell you that during my lifetime, Great Britain was a leader in many areas of technology, until it essentially lost its manufacturing sector. Now, a great many jobs there are in the service sector, and there is a decline in the pride of having British made products. Do not just take my word for it. The recent large scale riots in Great Britain demonstrate that the younger generation are not pleased with the outcomes of Thatcherism.
April 8, 2013 at 11:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Dave CoullScotland
Thatcher was lucky. Compared to all prime ministers of the United Kingdom before her, and all prime ministers of the UK after her, she was lucky. She came to power just when North Sea Oil was becoming a major source of income for the government. Oh, there had been a wee bit of income from it under James Callaghan, but it was just getting on stream then. Unlike all previous PMs of the UK, Thatcher had an enormous windfall dropping into her lap just as she took office. This enormous windfall, which no previous prime minister had, and no prime minister after her would ever again have to the same extent, was squandered recklessly. A majority of Thatcher’s own cabinet were opposed to spending on Trident nuclear missiles, but she pressed ahead recklessly. While Barrow-in-Furness gained a few jobs, for most of the rest of British industry, Thatcher was a disaster. She rejoiced in the destruction of established industries, telling everybody the future was in Britain being a global provider of “financial services”. It was a mad project, bound to fail, and it HAS failed. Thatcher was lucky that the Thatcherite shift from producing things to “financial services” didn’t collapse until long after she’d left office. But the fact remains, the enormous windfall of North Sea oil which fell to her was squandered on Trident, on unemployment benefits, and on corrupt favours for her friends “in the city”. And Thatcher never at any time showed the slightest regret for her disgraceful actions.
April 8, 2013 at 11:24 a.m.RECOMMENDED12

DiscoTwin Cities
It's telling that the first paragraph mentions her "victory" in the Falklands War among her accomplishments. Is there anyone in the world but the far right who would want that on their resume?

The Falklands War was nicely summed up thusly: "Two bald men fighting over a comb."
April 8, 2013 at 11:12 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

jbok
907 human beings dead in 74 days. Not just a joke. 

A victory for Madame Thatcher. Perhaps she will see them there.
April 8, 2013 at 11:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

Stephen SmithSan Diego
I'm afraid my thoughts of Maggie are of a misguided soul with a lot of resolve, who proved the adage, "The world will step aside for the man/woman who knows where he/she is going." She put England on a path to elitism just as did Reagan and today's right wing operatives.

What a bunch of blather to celebrate these two! Why? Because she was a woman and had a school marm way that couldn't be resisted? And Reagan, because he was so familiar from TV and had a folksy charm? Results are what matters, and we got destructive and misdirected policies from both.
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

DanaTucson, AZ
First thing I did upon hearing the news was turn on Elvis Costello's "Tramp the Dirt Down."
April 8, 2013 at 10:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

DXENY
Margaret Thatcher - to understate it - evokes very strong opinions. She came to power at a cusp, when the old ways were inevitably giving way to the new. Britain after losing most of its colonies - and therefore its income was living way beyond its means. State enterprises were draining the economy and globalization and new technology were radically changing the world of business.

Some will argue that privatization and free enterprise were a curse on the UK. But indisputably the standard of living has gone up in the UK and the western countries who followed this route. On the flip side of course so has uncertainty. Thatcher, Reagan and others successfully transferred risk from the State to the people.

However Mrs. Thatcher had nuance. She understood that while free market had plenty of merits certain functions were best served differently. She resisted privatization of British Rail and the British postal service. After some initial missteps she increased education budgets and opened up opportunities for all citizens to higher education. 

She was farsighted to want some union with Europe but was wary of nation states effectively ceded their monetary and sovereign powers.

She formed effective partnerships be it with Reagan or with Gorbachev.

Her failures included her imperiousness and absolute conviction - which she acquired from hard study rather than focus groups - on what she thought was right. 

Truly one of the seminal leaders of the 20th century.
April 8, 2013 at 10:50 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

EllenWilliamsburg
Verified
All I remember is her being in lock-step with Reagan, and that is the beginning of the downfall of the middle class both here and in Britain. Her legacy? market over human values meh
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

FreaMelbourne
she was a neocon, super-conservative for whom the bottom-line seemed to matter more than humanity.
she saw things from the top down, had little clue how the "small" people lived.
an enduring example of poor leadership!!!
April 8, 2013 at 10:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

gjdagisNew YorkNYT Pick
Thank you Maggie. You were one of those great figures during those turbulent times who were instrumental in bringing freedom to Eastern Europe, including the land of my ancestors, Lithuania. We will never forget you for this.
April 8, 2013 at 10:49 a.m.RECOMMENDED47

Swans21Stamford, CT
Yeah, thanks, as she denied the people of Ireland their freedom ...
April 8, 2013 at 1:31 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Hobo MoPittsburgh
Austin Powers' legacy is all that comes to mind ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOxeH_OQpFw
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.

AdrianNew York, New York
It isinteresting to see the tributes from people who didn't have to live in her England. she brought the country closer to a second Civil War than anybody before or since. Probably the most divisive public figure in British history now and for a long time to come.
April 8, 2013 at 10:58 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Winemaster2GA
Reagan would be turning over in his grave !
April 8, 2013 at 10:48 a.m.

Dr Anurakshat GuptaNew Delhi
IMHO she delayed the inevitable demise of the British Empire by a few years at least. Did she sacrifice the lives of fellow Britons in doing so- sure. Better than sacrificing lives of enslaved people from other nations. Now or later- for good or bad- she will be remembered. That's more than what can be said of many today. RIP
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

vsgiriindia
Really World Loss Great Leader.There is no other leader like "MARGARET".Her committment towards "REEDOM ,LIBERTY" is really great.My deep condolesence to Margaret Death. Even though She is not Physically but She alive in the Hearts of People.
April 8, 2013 at 10:58 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

TomPennsylvania
I can't wait to read the tirades pour in from the left about this GREAT leader. She unshackled Great Britain from the slavery of government run socialized industry and policy unleashing an economic lion that was the envy of many in the world. She defended freedom, although I'm sure the radical left will call her a warmonger, and she cautioned Great Britain about the coming European Union...an experiment in socialism that is failing before our eyes. She believed in the power of the individual, and in the resourcefulness of the British people. Those that wanted to live loved her...those that wanted a life given to them by the government never understood what she was doing for them and future generations to come.
April 8, 2013 at 10:48 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

JHere
"She unshackled Great Britain from the slavery of government run socialized industry"

------------------------

Oh?

The 1% sure doesn't seem to mind the help it gets from government.

Take off the blinders already. She attacked the Falkland Islands, and you call her a defender of freedom?

What a thick, rich irony.
April 8, 2013 at 11:19 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

LWMountain View, CA
Every poll in the Falklands has shown overwhelming support among the residents for remaining part of the UK. The Argentines who opposed that were certainly not on the side of -their- freedom.
April 8, 2013 at 12:21 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Kim DavisNew York
" (W)ho pulled her country back from 35 years of socialism"--During the 35 years before Thatcher became Prime Minister, the Conservatives ruled the country for 13 years, 1955-1964 and 1970-1974.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

Roger HawcroftAustralia
Margaret Thatcher was a disaster for Britain and an appalling example of women in power - she brought no distinction to her gender and she is no loss to the World.

"She could stir almost physical hostility in normally rational people..." well it's fairly clear where Ronald Millar stood. The fact is that any "normally rational" person with even a modicum of intelligence and compassion could not feel anything but hostility to her.

She and Reagan helped to cement the sort of mindless tyranny and ascendance of elitist materialism which has come to characterise Britain and the US. The "blame the victim" mentality and disregard for those without accompanied by promotion of and accommodation of the wishes of those "with".

Her ignorant and xenophobic nationalism was a slur on the British people and the World, in the same way that the US's selective militarism and pursuit of illegal invasion and breaches of international covenants for its own ends has been and is a slur on its people.

That she managed to hang on to power by populist politics is not an indication of democracy at work but rather a demonstration of democracy perverted - just as it was in Australia by John Howard.

What we should learn from Thatcher's time in power is never to allow a similar situation again.

Certainly there will be no northerners grieving over her death.
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED15

DaveDWisconsin
I remember her cheesy little war against Argentina in order to retain one of the last bits of empire; The Malvinas. I remember her craven adherence to Reaganism, and his politics of hypocrisy. Tony Blair's her obvious descendant.
April 8, 2013 at 10:52 a.m.RECOMMENDED11

JustinLUK
DaveD The Falklands is a Sovereign piece of UK territory. Are you saying that the US wouldn't get involved if someone invaded Hawaii? Complete nonsense.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

DaveDWisconsin
What's the nearby country Hawaii belongs to then?
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

harrymichigan
Legacy? She had countrymen and people from Argentina killed over hydrocarbons and sheep. No amount of national pride can reverse what was done in the Falklands. The last throes of a fading empire and she epitomized it. Now it's our turn to fade,who will be our Iron Lady? W?
April 8, 2013 at 10:32 a.m.RECOMMENDED36

YmhosBaltimore, MD
I don't believe the sheep have been polled, but the people who live in the Falkland islands have always shown a strong aversion to Argentinian rule.
April 8, 2013 at 10:47 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

JustinLLondon
The Falklands is Sovereign UK territory. They invaded and the UK fought them back. If Hawaii or US Marshall islands were invaded the US would response in a similar way.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

DaveDWisconsin
What's the name of the other nation which claims the Hawaiian Islands Justin?
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

ShowMeMissouri
Thatcher went way too far in destruction of the labor movement.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

John M.Alexandria, VA
Margaret Thatcher, a friend of business and everyone who works for a business, an enemy of labor bosses but a friend of those who work.
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

graceNew Hampshire
She was a great for some of her politics
but her heart was cold and she didn't care that Belgrano ship was out of the war theatre she sunk it
This darken all her legacy
April 8, 2013 at 10:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

NJL48DubaiNYT Pick
For many in Britain she was and is a divisive figure. But for those Brits who have spent a lot of their lives working abroad as I have done, she was clearly an inspiration to people around the world, sometimes in the most surprising places. I remember being in a meeting in Baghdad in 2004 with a group of Iraqi politicians discussing some ideas for projecting a unified vision for the Iraqi people after the fall of the Saddam regime. One of them turned to me and said: “what Iraq needs now is a Maggie Thatcher”. I wonder how many of her adversaries in the UK realise how she motivated people around the world to believe that breaking the shackles of vested interests was not just desirable but actually realisable. That’s quite a legacy.
April 8, 2013 at 11:04 a.m.RECOMMENDED50

RSTexas
In other words you were meeting with a group of people bent on foisting a propaganda image of Iraq that wasn't true in any way, shape or form. No wonder they were inspired by Baroness Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 2:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

GarrettPA
Yes, she broke the shackles of vested interests to bind Britain with the shackles of moneyed vested interests.
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Rhea GoldmanSylmar, CA
You bet we here in the United States should pause and reflect on the death of Margaret Thatcher. With our poll taxes, our hard nosed policies about unions, our attempt to destroy a public education system, and our mean-spirited and vicious attitude toward the poor and toward dis-abled returning veterans, we are well along the way toward an IRON-ruling government that Margaret Thatcher would be proud of.
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

bmessinaNY
Maybe they should rename the Reagan National Airport for her. The both of them were "cut from the same cloth".

No praise for selfish, anti-middleclass politicians, no matter where they come from. Phooey!
April 8, 2013 at 10:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

DaveDWisconsin
Maybe Reagan will save a seat for her down where he resides now.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

TerenceCanada
Thatcher was a force of nature, a person who made life more interesting, though, in her case, no better. She called Mandela a terrorist; that is a succinct enough comment to contradict Obama's remark today that she was for freedom. Her economic policies, along with her buddy Reagan's, gave us the unfettered capitalism we have today. She could be ridiculous ('we are a grandmother'), sycophantic, ruthless, famously bellicose, and divisive. No one seems to comment that she had an extraordinary amount of luck that she co-opted to her advantage: the discovery of North Sea oil changed Britain, not Thatcher's policies, rescued it from near-bankruptcy in the 1970s. I hope we never see her like again.
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

Ellen BalfourLong Island
What David Lloyd George introduced during his tenure as Prime Minister of the UK from 1916 to 1922, laying the groundwork for the modern Welfare State, Margaret Thatcher sought to undo.

I suppose we need balance between liberal and conservative so that we don't go too far in either extreme. I will always, however, favor the liberals.

I do admire Margaret Thatcher's pluck, her tough mettle. And her speaking voice was charming to me.

10:32 a.m.
April 8, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.

rashmee.roshanlallWashington, D.C.NYT Pick
The point about Margaret Thatcher, the grocer’s daughter, free-marketeer and deeply divisive politician, was that she enjoyed being a woman and favoured attractive men in the same trade. (We should remember this in the light of the recent kerfuffle about President Obama and his praise of California attorney-general Kamala Harris’s looks and the stew about the New York Times's obit on rocket scientist Yvonne Brill’s beef stroganoff.)
As Britain’s first and only woman prime minister, Mrs Thatcher was not above using dress as a political weapon. She saw no reason to deny her femaleness. In fact, she used it – to great advantage. Mrs Thatcher was girl power before the Spice Girls. “Being powerful,” as she said, “is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren’t.”
She dramatized herself most clearly as the ‘Iron Lady’ on January 31, 1976, using words to create an image that politically correct women’s rights activists would denounce as sexist today: “I stand before you tonight in my Red Star chiffon evening gown, my face softly made up and my fair hair gently waved, the “Iron Lady” of the Western world,” she told a dinner ‘do’ in her Finchley constituency.
It was a half-mocking, half-gushing description that might have been straight out of Mills & Boon. She meant it though, becoming “the lady and the warrior”. She was Britain’s tough-love sweetheart and proof, if any were needed, is its complicated conflicted emotions about her even today.
April 8, 2013 at 10:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED24

EinsteinAmerica
Verified
Don't forget the damage caused by her mercenary son Mark Thatcher, better known as 'Scratcher' and his role in funding Simon Mann's 'African Coup'.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

Josh HillNew London
Verified
In all fairness to Thatcher, the UK was an economic mess when she took over, with unions constantly on strike demanding excessive wage increases that fueled inflation that in turn fueled demands for further excessive wage increases. Inflation was out of hand, taxation confiscatory, the economy too heavily socialized. Such was the resultant malaise that I found visiting the UK in those years a depressing experience.

Sadly, Thatcher went too far in the direction of laissez faire and along with Ronald Reagan, set the stage for the situation we find ourselves in today -- a vast economic meltdown caused by financial industry deregulation, and jobs and factories exported to third world countries that pay starvation wages.

But I say give Thatcher credit where credit is due. Liberalism, taken to excess, can be as counterproductive as conservatism.

Left to its own devices, capital maximizes profits and labor can no longer afford to buy the goods it produces, leading to sluggish growth or recession. Left to its own devices, labor grants itself ever greater packages of wages and benefits while reducing productivity, and again, production suffers. The most successful period in economic history was the progressive era, when the forces of labor and capital were in rough balance, with both groups benefiting equally from robust economic growth.

Thatcher did the hard, unpopular work of restoring balance, something her predecessors did not. And for that, she deserves great credit.
April 8, 2013 at 10:29 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

MickBoston
If you'd lived in a country with the wealth and social inequity that was GB in those days, you'd have gone on strike, too.
April 8, 2013 at 11:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

Josh HillNew London
Verified
Mick, strikes do little good when productivity is too low to sustain wage increases. When Thatcher took office, the economy of the UK was prostrate, thanks to money-losing state enterprises, unsustainable wages, and tax rates so high that they discouraged business activity. Under such circumstances, it's understandable that some workers seek to redistribute wealth, but at a certain point, that strategy becomes counterproductive, in that the real wages of workers fall.

In today's American economy, we have the opposite problem, in that productivity gains, shared during the progressive era between workers and capital, have since the Reagan years gone almost entirely to capital. Now, we need more government intervention to repair the damage done to the economy by Wall Street speculators, and we need to protect labor from competition from low wage countries. But the situation in the UK in the 1970's was entirely different.
April 8, 2013 at 10:52 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Ari WohlfeilerNew York
May we honor her legacy but re-commit ourselves to undoing her devastating attacks on working people around the world. 

April 8, 2013 at 10:16 a.m.RECOMMENDED30

Dwight McFeeToronto, Canada
Condolences to those who revered her. To most Thatcher was a disaster. But for the west she was a goddess of money redistribution, to the top.
Thatcher was less a conservative but rather in the American Libertarian mold: someone who wants police protection from his/her slaves!
April 8, 2013 at 10:12 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

RayChicagoNYT Pick
I am greatly saddened by the death of Lady Thatcher. I am British by birth, but I left my home country for overseas in 1974 for a better chance in life when the UK was in the thick of the woes of failed economic policies and the choking grip of the unions was on the throat of the prime minister of the time, Edward Heath (Mrs. Thatcher’s predecessor). 

That grip steadily increased its strength such that by 1979, the leaders of the Trades Union Congress could simply telephone the prime minister of the day, James Callaghan (Labour), at any time and tell him that they were coming over to 10 Downing Street for a chat. In essence, they were going there to dictate policy to him, so powerful had they become.

Mrs. Thatcher with great determination shattered that stranglehold and was able to remove a major impediment to economic revival in the UK. Of course, she was fortunate that Paul Volcker and the Fed tamed inflation in the US, and the UK enjoyed the benefits of this. But without the removal of the excessive influence and power of the unions, it is unlikely that the economic recovery would have been as strong.

Therefore, among the many positive lessons she taught is this: never allow any branch of government to lose it ability to act independently because of allegiances to “special interests”.
April 8, 2013 at 10:26 a.m.RECOMMENDED70

MickBoston
Yes, thank goodness neither the US nor the UK's governments are entangled in alliances with "special interests." 

Puh-lease.
April 8, 2013 at 11:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

S B LewisLewis Family Farm, Essex, New York
Here! Here!

Bravo!
April 8, 2013 at 11:48 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

pateleysan diego
Ray mate. I think a stiff G and T is in order.
April 8, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.

Eugene GorrinUnion, NJNYT Pick
I'll give Margaret Thatcher credit for being a strong, decisive leader who stood by her convictions and principles - very much like Ronald Reagan (even though I disagree with their policies and ideology). 

At the same time she lacked empathy and, while a visionary in some areas such as the Soviet leadership, she was very myopic in others, particularly the effect of her economic policies on the working families of her own nation. 

I still give Sir Winston Churchill the nod over Lady Thatcher as Britain's most influential PM of the 20th century.
April 8, 2013 at 10:16 a.m.RECOMMENDED56
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

Something elseSomewhere else
She had plenty of empathy. But the Labour Party didn't want empathy, anyway. They wanted handouts.
April 8, 2013 at 11:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

georgeyoCitrus Heights, CA
At least you've ranked them one-two.
April 8, 2013 at 8:26 p.m.

John RennieSurrey, England
He wasn't. For your information he in three elections did not obtain more votes than Labour. Harold MacMillan is never given enough credit by
his fellow tories - he did bring home the goods.
April 9, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.

BJLStockbridge, MA
Winter 1985. Foreign study for a year. Blowing off class at University College London to go to (I think) "50 Years of German Expressionism" at the Royal Academy of
Art on Piccadilly. A Tuesday or some dead time. Rain of course. Not
many of us there that day. Then I began to notice a lot of security.
Guys in suits telling people to go to different rooms, etc. I was
annoyed and surly; the typical art history student in black. I was
looking at some bleak landscape painting when this annoying woman
walked up and started talking to me. Ugh! I barely glanced at her and
walked away. Total snub. But as I walked off, I happened to notice it
was none other than the Iron Lady herself, Margaret Thatcher. At least
my Liberal fellow students were delighted that I didn't give her the
time of day. May she rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 10:11 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Andy HummNew York, NY
The tributes to Margaret Thatcher emphasize her commitment to "freedom" and "liberty"--except, of course, for gay people. She was the author in 1988 of the infamous anti-gay Section 28 which stated that a local authority "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship." It took until 2003 to get rid of it and the curse it put on gay people in Britain. And I don't imagine my brothers and sisters in the trade union movement will be mourning much today either...
April 8, 2013 at 10:25 a.m.RECOMMENDED38

J L S FMaia, Portugal
The tributes to Margaret Thatcher emphasize her commitment to "freedom" and "liberty"--except, of course, for anyone who is not a millionaire.
April 8, 2013 at 11:16 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

Something elseSomewhere else
Maybe. Though I doubt she was the author. If you are going to excoriate people for holding views now considered anti-gay, then you might as well exclude any politician of any party whose career ended before 2000.
April 8, 2013 at 11:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

Jim ConlonSouthampton, New York
With all due respect, all I can say is "Out, Out, Out."
Perhaps St. Peter may remember that one.
April 8, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

withalllondon uk
Margaret Thatcher was more beloved by Americans than the British because she shared with the US a materialist philosophy which British society had moved away from towards the latter end of the 19th century as a result of Enlightenment thinking: hence her obsession with returning to `Victorian values'. When in office she quickly set about putting back the clock of British social evolution 100 years by getting rid of the public service ethic and replacing it with `fat cats;' privatising public utilities; neglecting industry; removing public grants to Universities for pure research -resulting in a brain drain much of it to America; as Heath's Education Minister she had previously begun the spiral of deterioration in education standards from which we still suffer by closing several hundred of the excellent Grammar schools and replacing them with the present Comprehensive schools, etc. 

Thatcher was the least popular Prime Minister in recorded history up to the Falklands Factor but despatching the Task Force to retake the islands hugely raised her popularity assuring her party of a further two terms of office: not then understood was her secret negotiations with the Argentine junta at the time had largely resulted in the Argentine invasion by giving Galtieri cause to believe Britain wouldn't fight for the islands. Given the perspective of time the British nation now have the measure of Thatcher and it is probably fair to say she is far less revered than despised today.
April 8, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED50

GarrettPANYT Pick
Let the hagiography begin. As it did with the Reagan, the mainstream media's coverage of Thatcher will gloss over the truth in favor of personal stories of her courage, sticking to her principles, and strong leadership. Churchill similes will abound.

Caveat lector! I grew up in Ireland in the 1980s, next door to Thatcher's Britain. Let me assure the NYT readership that the reality was somewhat more sordid. The social and economic upheaval generated by Thatcher's unwavering adherence to hard-right policies was appalling to behold. She broke unions, ruined the NHS, pushed to privatize British Rail (which has since made train travel in the UK a nightmare), and introduced a poll tax to cut the poor out of the franchise. She allowed ten IRA prisoners to starve themselves to death -- one of them an elected MP -- while publicly proclaiming she would never negotiate with terrorists. As she did so, her government was engaged in secret negotiations with the IRA to end the crisis. She insisted on a squalid little war in the Falklands, even ignoring her friend Reagan, to help her get re-elected in 1983. She supported and visited Chilean fascist dictator Augusto Pinochet while he was in captivity in the UK in 1998-2000 and publicly lobbied on his behalf. She declared "There is no such thing as society." She could never contemplate being wrong.

And all this was done in the tone of a matronly lecture, as if she were straining her patience to engage toddlers, that grated on the nerves.
April 8, 2013 at 10:20 a.m.RECOMMENDED595
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

Robert FSeattle
Sir, you come dangerously close to telling the truth here. Your response shows the difference between clear-eyed critical thinking and the fairy tale fantasies of an "Iron Lady" entertained by those who never tire of bragging about how tough-minded they are.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

JohnGods own County
If you want to see a typical biased piece do not waste any time, read this one fro Garrett.
- Breaking the tyrannical unions was required and decent people were pleading for these undemocratic people to be reigned in.
- The NHS is still there and the envy of the world, even the USA we are told?
- The railways have more passengers than ever before.
- The poll tax was opposed because she asked people to make a contribution to the services they received. The left went barmy, because they are used to spending OTHER peoples money (Recognise it?)

- The Uk citizens in the Falklands are very pleased we repatriated them from unwanted oppression.
- She majored on the family, the cornerstone of society.
The best peace time Prime Minister
April 8, 2013 at 2:24 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

smart foxCanada
Thank you

Can't be put in more sincere and convincing words
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

RobertRotterdam
I'm reading a lot of "bad" comments, but wonder if she was so "bad" how was she elected 3 times? Don't the readers like democracy?
April 8, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.RECOMMENDED10
READ ALL 9 REPLIES

Andrea ENY
Verified
No one is elected in a vacuum. People conveniently forget the conditions that existed when she came into office. 

Besides, it's now quite fashionable for her and Reagan to be viewed with disdain.
April 8, 2013 at 11:52 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

bmessinaNY
Andrea E, "quite fashionable for her and Reagan to be viewed with disdain". I have been viewing them "with disdain" when as a young father i lived the negative effects on my family from Saint Reagan and empathized with those, in Britain who were similarly effected by her policies.
April 8, 2013 at 12:38 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

bignybugsnew york
the same way 'we' elected reagan and bush(es) multiple times. unfortunately, in the modern world, the wealthy have the (very costly) microphone and most working class people are so busy just trying to survive that they don't have the time or energy to research public affairs as much as would be necessary to actually get a balanced factual view of the world ..
April 8, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

papajoeRome
She and RR changed the world---looking at what the conserevative parties of the UK and my country the US have ended up with---David Cameron and the younger Bush and Romney--is depressing.
April 8, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

Chuck WSan Antonio
My condolences to the Thatcher family and the people of Great Britain. In the Thatcher family's time of sorrow, I hope they will treasure her memory. I do wish that people who disagree with her politics would not comment on them in an obituary, I don't think Miss Manners would approve. Please wait unit an editorial is published, if there is one.
April 8, 2013 at 10:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED7
READ ALL 5 REPLIES

Swans21Stamford, CT
This is not an obituary, it is a news story, so the comments are more than fair. Maybe she shouldn’t have been such a monster in life, then people would not be as critical of her in death.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

RuadhPortland, Maine
Chuck W - Her life was about her politics. While her family may "treasure her memory," untold numbers of people revile her and her continuing legacy. Sentimentality has no place in evaluating the life and death of Margaret Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 11:16 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

VoltaireEast of Seoul
Sorry, there's no such thing as society. Miss Manners is not invited here. Foul is fair; fair, foul.
April 8, 2013 at 11:19 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

blazonSouthern Ohio
the Baroness, so many years
well, do we cry or are there cheers
Lady's not for turning
sink that ship, it's burning
let's curry xenophobic fears.
April 8, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

Harry The DogLos Angeles
The Margaret Thatcher I suffered destroyed entire regions of Britiain while focusing the wealth and 'freedom' in and around The City. She - along with Reagan - planted the seeds of all that has gone wrong in the financial sector. The mobilizing of the fleet to 'The Flaklands' was a piece of absurdist theatre. Moreover, we now know that she did not want the Berlin Wall to fall because she feared the unemployed from the East. In short, I thought everything about her, from her phony invented accent to her hypocritical hectoring, was callow and mean. She utterly lacked compassion and ripped the heart from the country. I am only sorry she is dead because I had hoped to say these things to her face.
April 8, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED68

DuncanUK
She was merely the figurehead of an establishment who because of the demise of the previous Conservative government at the hands of the miners had a score to settle with the unions. In settling that score she destroyed manufacturing in the UK & delivered our economy into the hands of the financial institutions with their insatiable greed that has lead us to the precipice of disaster where we find ourselves now..
She will be missed only by the ignorant, uncaring or selfish among the UK population, and those too far away to make any worthwhile judgement.
April 8, 2013 at 10:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED55

MickBoston
Somewhat, exactly, like her American counterpart.
April 8, 2013 at 10:47 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

Something elseSomewhere else
Perhaps. But I don't think the miners were a great help to Callaghan either.
April 8, 2013 at 11:19 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Steven RossNew York, N.Y.
There is no doubt: Thatcher changed Britain more than any leader changed any country in Europe after World War II. It is a remarkable accomplishment. Those who came to know Britain in the 1970s, such as myself, would never have imagined there was, beneath this sleepy county in what seemed terminal decline in fact a very aggressive nation, more like the world Dickens knew. She somehow knew her country better than her critics thought. An extremist, sure. And she made many mistakes. But the state of Britain today, the state of both Labor AND Conservative parties, shows she remade this country and its politics forever, and that much of Britain continues to recognized itself in her picture of it. .
April 8, 2013 at 10:13 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

Free marketsEurope
Appears that the commies and Argentinean propaganda machines are out in force again. Baroness Thatcher defeated an evil military junta that used to drop innocent Argentines from DC10 aircraft over the Pacific/Atlantic coast . Argentina, like typical south American conquistadores, ignores the wishes of the local Falkland Islanders to remain British. And why wouldn't they want to maintain links with Britain, a nation, unlike argentina, that doesn't default on international monetary loans and doesn't steal assets, as in the case of the misappropriation of Repsol YPF. Stolen from Spain like a COMMON street mugger. The real witch is Cristina Kurchner. A second rate, banana republic version of Imelda Marcos. 

Baroness Thatcher imbued all hard working, non-socialists with a spirit of drive and determination. The champagne socialists, who cyclically bankrupt Britain, make a sport out of blaming everybody else for their economic ineptitude . RIP
April 8, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

BartoloCentral Virginia
"A friend of business, an enemy of labor" should be her epitaph.
April 8, 2013 at 10:31 a.m.RECOMMENDED61

JoergWinterthur, Switzerland
She gave Britain back its pride!
April 8, 2013 at 10:17 a.m.RECOMMENDED15

JMVirginia,Va
She gave Britain back some pride-while planting the seeds of its actual weakening economy and social structure. She worked tirelessly to further the agenda of a narrow group of special interests while destroying elements of British society. A ruthless, vindictive piece of work. Now let all the praises be heard.
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

tyb stuck in calilos angeles, CA
Thatcher will be remembered by the poor as the person who felt milk was not necessary for children; the rich will no doubt sob and moan, since she did so much for their class. And to the rest, she will be known as the lady Meryl Streep played to get an Oscar...
April 8, 2013 at 10:12 a.m.RECOMMENDED35

onlyin america
I lived in London for almost two years while Mrs. Thatcher was in office and what I remember most was thinking that terrorism cannot be stopped (the IRA was very active at the time) and that I went to the doctor and the dentist free of charge although I was a poor struggling American student with no health insurance. I was a given, even by the Conservatives, that everyone had a right to health care.
April 8, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

civilitycolorado
Why is there no mention of her policies and relationship with Northern Ireland?
April 8, 2013 at 10:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

BlueMooseBinghamton NY
Thatcher, like her American parallel Reagan, did irreparable harm to her country. History will not treat either of them kindly.
April 8, 2013 at 10:30 a.m.RECOMMENDED193
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

CraigBoston
History has spoken on Reagan and spoken kindly.
April 8, 2013 at 11:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

JakeWisconsin
John M. and Craig: You may be confusing history with Republican partisan propaganda.
April 8, 2013 at 12:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

jbok
Craig and John think that history is over, the final judgments in, and surprise! Their opinions are right for all time!

And that is the arrogance and ignorance of the right, a fitting tribute to a hard rich woman who shared those qualities and that absurd certainty that marks them.
April 8, 2013 at 1:31 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Simon AtebaLagos, Nigeria
I was born in 1979, the same year Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister of Britain. By the time she left office eleven and half years later, I was just about to clock 12. But many years after, many people, even here in Africa, still remembered her as a strong, tough and charismatic woman. Many Africans really cared less and little about her financial and economic achievements in Britain. What people remembered the most here was the image of a great woman able to lead a major we3stern nation with strength and dignity, and sometimes surpassing men around her. It was only today after her passing was announced that a British friend of mine wished her a good time in hell. And I asked why? He then explained what the New York Times also explained, the other side of her. The tough policies that hit the poor the hardest and widened the gap between broke and rich in Britain, the suffering of millions of poor Britons. So, I am a bit confused as to what to say with these two conflicting images. Well, may her soul go where it deserve to be.
April 8, 2013 at 10:17 a.m.RECOMMENDED10
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

FreaMelbourne
Simon,
as an African, too, i understand what you say. i was born about the same time, and saw those images.
today i understand that we usually just see the images, especially in Africa and the rest of the "developing" world.
we are as brainwashed as everybody else in the world, including the west.
but the thing is that unlike especially folks in the west, in Africa most of us are just clueless against such a bombardment of images and myth.
so, we often lack the capacity to view these things critically, we lack the education, the language, not to mention the understanding of western culture and their history.
the truth, from what i've seen, is that she was quite heartless. she was the usual actress and show, but beyond that, she was all about "trickle down" nonsense.
unfortunately, in Africa, many of us often lack the preparation to see this demagogues for what they really are.
she was an unfortunate leader.
but, she will be missed and we don't and never wished her ill
insufferable though her world-view and policies were!
April 8, 2013 at 10:46 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

Doug TerryMaryland, DC Metro area
This is more or less the standard program of people who call themselves conservatives. Help the rich maintain their position and tell the poor to get used to theirs. What is surprising is that so many people who are not rich support the program advanced by people like Thatcher. I suppose one reason is that they believe there is a class of people who are fundamentally better than they are and they take comfort in occupying their lower status without having to challenge the conditions under which they live. Come to think of it, doesn't this describe the class structure in England fairly well? If only poor people here would be so wise.
April 8, 2013 at 10:47 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

TomPennsylvania
Pay no attention to this newspaper and the tirades from the left. She was a great leader. What shape would Britain been in had she not reversed the course of 35 years of destructive socialism. Without her leadership Britain would be an irrelevant country today.
April 8, 2013 at 11:48 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

PeterLake Elmo, MN
Elvis Costello said it best in his song "Tramp the Dirt Down." I recommend it to anyone wanting to appropriately remember Mrs. Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 10:12 a.m.RECOMMENDED30

Emily TrotterGeorgia
Lady Margaret Thatcher was to England what Ronald Reagan was to America.....We shall all miss her influence.....
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

mojitaSan Francisco
Exactly - a disaster...
April 8, 2013 at 10:12 a.m.RECOMMENDED41

bignybugsnew york
no we won't -- either one of them --
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

RW RoarkOKC, OK
RE: Her policies revitalized British business, spurred industrial growth and swelled the middle class.

Oh please. Another instance of the NY Times catering to the right--made even more obvious by the comments so far tagged as NYTimes picks.

This was a PM who was in a fact a big spender in during the Heath years (70 - 74),
saw double digit inflation both at the beginning and end of her premiership, caused tremendous socio-economic suffering with her daffy money supply manipulations as a way to fight economic stagnation and increased unemployment by nearly three fold in the procees, from 1 M to 3 M, when the former was a part of her campaign slogan of Britain was no longer working. Growth rates under Thatcher were inferior to they were under the awful 1970s:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/nov/25/gdp-uk-1948-growth-e...

RWR
OKC, OK
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED14

Bobby MacUKNYT Pick
Like many right-wing politicians, Thatcher is more revered in the United States than in her homeland. The same goes for Tony Blair. Both pursued a neo-liberal agenda that, while jettisoning some useless baggage, did enormous damage to the economic and social fabric of the United Kingdom. For his part, Blair had a certain charm. Thatcher couldn't even manage that.
April 8, 2013 at 10:01 a.m.RECOMMENDED178

Richard LuettgenNew Jersey
Verified
Perhaps it's truer of the English-speaking peoples than of anyone else: we often value least the most priceless gems that we see every day.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

SAKNew Jersey
What damage? Britain was hugely damaged country when she came
to power. It was called "sick man" of Europe- high inflation, rising
unemployment, low productivity, loan from IMF, strikes, etc.
If those policies continued Britain will be a third world country today.
she saved Britain. That is her biggest and most important contribution.
Poll tax and opposition to Europe are trivial issues.
she was a leader of conviction standing for beliefs and not following
the poll. Can you say that of any leader of the last 25 years?
April 8, 2013 at 11:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

NancyNew England
King George the Third would have been very proud of her. She fought for the British tax havens - Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Channel Islands, Isle of Man, BVI - and convinced President Reagan that the dozen or so states that had adopted worldwide combined reporting needed to back off. Worldwide combined reporting (aka unitary taxation) included profits shifted to subsidiaries in foreign tax havens in a state's pre-apportionment tax base. If worldwide combined reporting had been adopted by every state, the status of her tax havens would have faded away and she knew it! Instead, the majority of states have now adopted water's edge combined reporting which excludes the US profits shifted to foreign tax havens. This is despite the US Supreme Court's approval of worldwide combined reporting per their Barclays Bank and Colgate-Palmolive decisions in 1994 (the vote was 7-2 and 9-0, respectively in favor of the state of California).

These United States fought Britain over taxation without representation. Margaret got representation without taxation. Billions of US profits have been shifted to British tax havens. We won the war for independence...or did we?
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED22

pmbrooklyn
Thatcher didn't care about the average Briton. Both she and Reagan failed their countries. Privatization has proven to be an absolute failure in both the UK and the US.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED45

GeorgeMichigan
Perhaps Byron's lines about another "hard" Tory PM, Wellington, are appropriate:

"If you have acted once a generous part,
The world, not the world's masters, will decide,
And I shall be delighted to learn who,
Save you and yours, have gained by Waterloo?"
April 8, 2013 at 9:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

CMHSedona, Arizona
I can't think of anyone other than Reagan I despised more in the 1980s. And I still do. They were people who rose to power on abstractions (so-called principles) without any sense of the millions of faces they were stomping on. And that's not even considering Falklands.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED62

bignybugsnew york
but on the plus side, their reprehensible politics did give us The Clash, U2 and many other amazing bands ...
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.

joanBrooklyn, NY
Her contributions to a survival of the fittest ideology is hardly to be admired. Her belief in individual freedom certainly did not extend to Mandela and black South Africans.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED30

Swans21Stamford, CT
Nor the Irish, whom she clearly despised ...
April 8, 2013 at 10:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED15

hadarmenNYC
Hey don't blame the lady, does anybody remember the 1980's. USSR collapsed, mad cow soared. Vulture capitalism become standard of free market.

We live those times and it was exciting.

R.I.P
April 8, 2013 at 9:58 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

jbok
I remember. Reagan and Thatcher. So much suffering delivered so very certainly by those who would never weep a tear.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

j.r.lorain
j.b. and the suffering many americans are enduring now is far greater than the 80's. personally, i'd love to return to those days of decent employment and individual freedom. Currently, one has to be careful of everything they say and do for fear of government repression.
April 8, 2013 at 10:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

jbok
True, j.r., but it was in those days that a generation's pensions were taken en masse, a blow for which we are about to see the damage. It was then that a plethora of jobs were cut to part-time, temping became the norm, and the new bully-boss era was ushered in and rooted. Most of all, the hatred of government, its destruction by those elected to run it, began its shredding of the life you and I long for now. 

It was in those days that today was born and fostered. This is only the flowering of the seeds of Reagan and Thatcher, a dark, sorrowful, and yes, frightening path indeed.
April 8, 2013 at 11:48 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

Uziel NogueiraFlorianopolis - SC - Brasil
Margaret Thatcher has shown woman president of a powerful country capable of sending young men to battle as easily as man.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

blazonSouthern Ohio
opinions differ doncha know
the Iron Lady's set to go
she and Ronnie both
doppelgangers loth
the Union bashers, all for show.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

layshDurham, NC
This e-petition is short and sweet, but unfortunately closed for signatures. I understand her funeral will be privatized:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/18914
April 8, 2013 at 9:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

David HughesColorado Springs
A Margaret Thatcher Republican, male or female, is what America needs right now - starting with a dismantling of the Obama Socialism path we are on just as Britain was going downhill until she rescued it.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

FreaMelbourne
Obama socialism, really?
the stock market has hit records, the big banks were bailed out, big business has never done better.
and that is socialism?
is it one of radio stations you are listening to, or is it one of those "churches?"
or, like the proverbial ostrich, do you have your head in the sand??
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

VJRNorth America
She was iconic, not doubt.

If you lived through them, when you reflect on the 1980s, you think about MTV, big hair, early PCs, and Reagan and Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

bignybugsnew york
and then you weep ...
April 8, 2013 at 11:50 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

TomNew Orleans, LA
I think the Falklands War got short shrift in your account. Her stance in that conflict shows that she was not just ready to bloody her opponents' noses figuratively, but to spill blood and spend treasure to defend a principle rather than negotiate or compromise.
April 8, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

ChandraR. P.Cleveland, Ohio
I do not agree with many of her policies, but admire her courage to stand by her conviction. Great Leader!
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

JKMWashington, DC
Hey, at least the Times managed to get through this obit without commenting on the deceased's ability to whip up a mean beef stroganoff.
April 8, 2013 at 10:04 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

PeteCT
. . . she was too busy whipping up meanness.
April 8, 2013 at 10:47 a.m.RECOMMENDED17

PetsoundsMichigan
I feel much more grief today at the death of the brilliant writer Ruth Prawer Jhabvala than at that of a politician who once called Reagan "brilliant" (I don't think even Nancy Reagan ever stretched the truth that far), cozied up to dictators, started a ridiculous war only to pump up her own image (a lesson learned by Bush), and did all she could to destroy the middle class in her country.
April 8, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.RECOMMENDED61

GEBloomington, IN
The most divisive British politician of the twentieth-century. A friend of Pinochet. A woman who called Nelson Mandela a "terrorist." A dreadful woman.
April 8, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED84

Charles MichenerCleveland, OH
As a grocer's daughter, she understood the value of high turnover. I bought a house in London during the mid 80s and it seemed as though the whole city was for sale. Along with Reagan, Thatcher ushered in the reckless speculative mentality, the selfish, money-rules culture, that has done so much damage to the economic and political life of both the U.K. and the U.S.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED42

Richard LuettgenNew Jersey
Verified
The formal end of an era that actually ended in 1990, when she lost the party leadership and the prime ministership, and to a new leadership for whom she harbored scant respect. The world will long remember not so much this date when we lost a truly formidable human being, but the impact she had on our world, which was impressive indeed. Even more than Indira Gandhi, she merited the title of greatest woman of the 20th Century.

Margaret Hilda Baroness Thatcher: Resciescat in Pace. We've missed your ungentle but profound wisdom and strength for many years; and now we'll miss the rest of you, as well.
April 8, 2013 at 10:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

mdgalbraithmilwaukee, wi
Though I often have disagreed with Mr. Luettgen, and Lady Thatcher as well, both deserve enormous respect for their integrity, dignity, and, indeed, their style. Movingly written, Mr. Luettgen, though my scant liturgical Latin said it was Requiescat in Pacem, I am eagerly open to correction on that fact.
April 8, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Kevin RothsteinJarama Valley
Verified
Eleanor Roosevelt.
April 8, 2013 at 11:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

Richard LuettgenNew Jersey
Verified
To Kevin:

Mrs. Roosevelt wasn't anywhere near as impactful as Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi, but belongs toward the top in a much more populous second-tier of highly notable women of the 20th Century, which might include Elizabeth II, Ayn Rand, Marie Curie, Margaret Sanger -- and, yes, our very own Hillster. And the Hillster might just possibly yet be more important to the 21st Century than she was to the 20th.

Everyone is entitled to his own view as a general matter, of course; but in my comments, I'll stick to mine.

To mdgalbraith:

The word "peace", like many other words in Latin, takes different "forms" depending on its use in a sentence. The direct object, "Pacem", is usually regarded as more appropriate in songs, while the prepositional object "pace" is almost universally regarded as more appropriate in obituaries and tombstones. "Pacem" is occasionally also used, but my usage is far and away the dominant one.

Must say, though, it's been a loooong time since someone has tempted me to wax pedantic on Latin grammar.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.

LadyCascadiaOregon
I can remember 1979 the year Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister of the UK. I was a a senior in high school then, and it was really a big deal even here in the USA that a woman was finally a head of state who wasn't just a figurehead. In those days it seemed as though women really COULD 'have it all' and from what I could see Baroness Thatcher came pretty doggone close. She had a devoted husband, two children, an interesting career and a full life. Even if one didn't agree with her politics (and I didn't always agree), it can't be argued that "Maggie" earned her place in history. RIP. May God make her memory eternal.
April 8, 2013 at 9:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED8
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

RuadhPortland, Maine
Oh, for god's sake. What does it matter if she was a female head of state and "had it all"??? She trashed the economy; engaged in union-busting; called Nelson Mandela a terrorist; let 10 Irish hunger strikers die, saying she'd never negotiate with them (while carrying on secret talks to resolve the matter); went to war irrationally over the Falklands; bollixxed up the rail system with privatization ... Let's think content, not just form!!!!!
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

Swans21Stamford, CT
And Indira Gandhi as well ... thatcher was not such a big deal.

Note that her memory will be eternal, in the minds of those who were victimized by her policies.
April 8, 2013 at 11:07 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

JakeWisconsin
Golda Meir, sure, but we can go much further back than that and stay in England while we do. Elizabeth I was surely no figurehead.
April 9, 2013 at 7:52 p.m.

BobSpring, TexasNYT Pick
The right person at the right time. Just as Britain was about to go over the cliff with the unions running amok and the country approaching anarchy she steadied the ship of state and brought it back from the brink. She saved the country from a devastating socialist government who were taxing the country into oblivion and giving the unions everything they wanted. Sound familiar? Now we here in the USA need a "Maggie Thatcher" to right the ship of state and stop the 'socialists' from spending us into oblivion. Deja vu ? Who will be our "Iron Lady" ? I hope we find one soon.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED70
READ ALL 6 REPLIES

JasonSacramento
what the heck are you talking about? "Giving Unions everything they want"??? Unions are at their weakest point in years. Just because something was a good idea for Reagan doesn't mean it stays a good idea. In CA we've been struggling for many years. Finally we have a democratic super majority and low and behold things are getting better. Thatcher was wise to see that socialism had gone to far. I liked that about her. But you can also have the kind of oligarchy where corporations rule everything. The USA is far more at the mercy of corporate lobbyists than at the mercy of unions. BOTH have to be kept at bay.
April 8, 2013 at 1:30 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Edward MoranWashington, DC
As a life-long Democrat but also a life-long opponent of single party rule, I agree that the Republicans need a strong and vivid leader. Or at least one who's not a wooden-headed puppet.
April 8, 2013 at 2:09 p.m.

Joseph G. AnthonyLexington, KY
Sound familiar? Our unions are weak or non-existent--hence the increasing Walmartization of our economy. And we, liberals, can only dream of having the tax rates that existed under Thatcher and Reagan. However, I will not speak ill of the dead. Let the iron lady rust in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

William TaylorNampa, ID
Helped lead the conservative tide that finally sank the world economy in the Great Recession.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED23

StephenWindsor, Ontario, Canada
Verified
If there was anything positive to Margaret Thatcher it was that the Labour Party looked at itself and decided that it had to remake itself in order to win power. Thank you for that, Mrs. Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 10:02 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

srr510queens
The 1980's is truly over with the passing of Margaret Thatcher.

I bet there will now be a run on the movie Iron Lady from Netflix. After all Meryl Streep owes her Oscar to Margaret Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 9:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Antal DeutschWestmount, Que. Canada
Historians will have an interesting time in deciding who left the greater legacy, Churchill or Thatcher?
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

InterestedNew York, NY
This is silly. Churchill saved his country from destruction by the Nazis. Thatcher destroyed the UK labor movement and implemented a raft of dangerous legislation. Even if you think Thatcher's administration was necessary in order to change the British social and economic structure it's hard to compare that to saving the country when it was literally in danger of being lost.
April 8, 2013 at 10:01 a.m.RECOMMENDED52

bignybugsnew york
really? somehow I think they will figure that one out ...
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

ed2001Kelso, WA
"There is no such thing as society," she said in an interview to a lady's magazine in 1987. This encapulated her political philosophy and would be a befitting epitaph of one of the most divisive political figures of our times.
April 8, 2013 at 9:45 a.m.RECOMMENDED45

ColleenAlexandria, VANYT Pick
I lived in the UK during the Thatcher years and was dismayed, and often shocked, at the misery of British life. Thatcher and her cohorts rolled back the rights of all British "subjects": she instituted a crushing Poll Tax to limit democracy (tying the right to vote to paying the tax), made a bigger mess of the NHS than it was in the first place by trying to privatize it by stealthy methods and failing, and of course, waging war abroad, and refusing to deal with the human rights abuses of Irish Catholics. Oh, and let's not forget her decision to allow Mad Cows Disease to spread into the human population rather than spend the money to check it at the slaughter houses. Her legacy will not be forgotten....or unfelt for decades to come.
April 8, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED502
READ ALL 7 REPLIES

ThinkerNorthern California
"Oh, and let's not forget her decision to allow Mad Cows Disease to spread into the human population..."

I was in a London restaurant during the height of the "mad cow disease" scare about 10-15 years ago. I'd wanted to order a hamburger, but had decided it wouldn't be wise. But a waitress and another patron persuaded me that ordering a hamburger would be safe. I did (it was delicious), and I'm still here.

I'm not alone: Despite what your comment suggests, I don't believe any human being ever got sick, even slightly, from "mad cow disease."
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Honest JohnDallas, TX
Your name betrays your position as one that will always despise the English. It's very convenient to ignore the numerous atrocities committed in the name of the IRA and Irish Catholicism - filling the river at Dublin with "infidel" bodies and the hundreds of bombings. "... her decision to allow Mad Cows Disease to spread..." Hmmm.... maybe there was a trade off? maybe your "cure" might have been worse than the disease? ever even consider it??? Naw!! of course not.
April 8, 2013 at 7:16 p.m.

nealmontana
Thatcher and Reagan were two peas in a pod. And together they started the ruination of their middle classes, and blaming the poor for our problems. This damage lasted a decade. And after a decade of Clinton with his NAFTA and Glass-Steagal, we got Bush. That man's damage is so grave we may never fully recover. And now the radical right controls our House. And half the states are fully controlled by the same people. I see no good ending to this. If only.......JFK and Robert, King, others hadn't been killed, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush hadn't stole the White House with treasonous methods, the Bush Wars,....so much more. But life is full of what ifs.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.

FrankBatlimore
i saw a picture of her with Reagan. These were the two greatest leaders of the last 40 years for many reasons (include Gorbachev and Pope John Paul II). And they were CONSERVATIVE. No Democrat of that era or now can hold a light to them....current crop of Republicans either.
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

rosaca
Jimmy Carter.
April 8, 2013 at 1:04 p.m.RECOMMENDED6

Todd MacDonaldTorontoNYT Pick
It seems to me that many comments are stretching credibility when they link Prime Minister Thatcher's policies and actions to the present in some sort of "A caused B" simplicity. She was the peacetime Churchill - tenacious and implacable. She generated a mix of positive and negative changes in the British economy and political culture. She was larger than life. On one point there can be no debate - she was a political figure of consequence that dwarfed the political pygmies of her day with her will, her intellect and her "take no prisoners" agenda.
April 8, 2013 at 9:44 a.m.RECOMMENDED95

JeddMcHeadAtlanta, GA
I was going to write a comment of my own but you've said all I could say, and beautifully put. RIP, Margaret.
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

S B LewisLewis Family Farm, Essex, New York
Here! Here!
April 8, 2013 at 11:21 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

BenAustin
Thatcher inspired a lot of angry music that became a part of the sound track of my youth.
April 8, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED36

bignybugsnew york
ah -- a silver lining to the dark cloud under which many of us spent our early years ...
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

JakeWisconsin
"Sound track of my youth"? What a revolting idea. By the way, I think your "angry" likely characterizes the lyrics, not the music. I've never heard any music I would call "angry".
April 9, 2013 at 7:59 p.m.

BostonBrahminBabeShawnee, KS
My earliest political heroine. Rest in Peace.
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

MichaelChicago
Thatcher's leadership successes in helping bring down Soviet communism, restarting a stalled economy and resurrecting English national pride are tempered by her having actively promoted institutionalized homophobia, greed and indifference to the plights of others. 

Future leaders will learn much from her examples, and hopefully improve on the final results.
April 8, 2013 at 9:43 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

ardelionConnecticut
@historylesson:
I'm in deadly earnest. Together they destroyed the gulag and defended the principles of personal dignity and moral integrity, along with promoting a free society that does the same. I scan the horizon and see none afoot today to match them, sadly.
April 8, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

joanBrooklyn, NY
I'll bet Nelson Mandela might have a few words about how anxious she was to defend the principles of black people's personal dignity in south Africa.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED41

EricHuwUK
US readers of these comments may not appreciate that the UK electoral process allows a political party to win huge overall victories in terms of parliamentary seats even though less that 50% of the people voted for that party. This is true of all of Thatcher's victories and Tony Blair's. In fact Britain hasn't been governed by a party that won over 50% of the popular vote for decades.
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED12

chrisnorton66Santa Barbara, CaliforniaNYT Pick
As someone who grew up in Britain during the Thatcher years I will always be one of Thatcher's children. My world view was shaped by the divisions she created in the society she claimed not to believe in.
She seemed to rely upon her image of being strong as opposed to being right, so that when she was right (unions, tax reform) she looked like a real leader but when she was wrong she dug herself very deep holes (poll tax, the IRA).
How history judges her will undoubtedly depend who is asking the question. She was right on a lot of things but deeply flawed on others. She changed Britain by ripping it apart.
A great leader, maybe. An important one, undoubtedly.
April 8, 2013 at 9:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED88
READ ALL 5 REPLIES

SchigolchBernalillo, NM
She inherited a Marxist desert and turned in back into a country.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

S B LewisLewis Family Farm, Essex, New York
Yes, she was the doctor, the best diagnostician, but her diagnosis, though correct, met with resistance in her own hospital.
April 8, 2013 at 12:01 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

georgeyoCitrus Heights, CA
In other words, she was human.
April 8, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.

ContrarianEarth
Her “No! No! No!'’ is still echoed across the Channel today by another lady..
April 8, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Dixie SwansonHouston TX
The Iron Lady is gone. The Platinum One remains. Whether "playing" a Bond girl or coming out of the hospital looking better than ever, the Queen does her duties as head of state with grace and strength. 

Dixie Swanson
wwwl.dixieswanson.com
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

bignybugsnew york
and she does not cause much harm either ...
April 8, 2013 at 3:48 p.m.

Carolyn B.Glenham, NY
Was the election of an Argentinian to Pope what pushed this frail lady over the edge? Or did she even possess the mental faculties to appreciate the historical significance?
I don't expect sorrow or condolences from Buenos Aires or Derry.
April 8, 2013 at 9:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
Argentina's tin pot military dictatorship at the time made a miscalculation on Thatcher - and that was their mistake.
April 8, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Robert M. StantonPittsburgh, PA
I expect that both she and her good buddy Ronnie will fade into relative obscurity. Like H. H. Asquith and Woodrow Wilson they were leaders at an important time but ultimately none left a lasting legacy of achievement. Asquith and Wilson at least have the specter of a major war to hide their deficiencies in social and economic arenas. Thatcher and Regan have no major wars to hide behind. Rather their directing the economy to benefit the super rich has been a failure for the rest of us. Even there they did not do enough to be remembered as either thinkers or doers.
April 8, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED34

bignybugsnew york
Not so sure Nicaragua and El Salvador would quite agree about Reagan's lack of wars. He was up to his elbows in most of the nasty business in that part of the world for many years ...
April 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

AnneO.
Regarding Reagan having no major wars, that's not true. Under Reagan, the U.S. supported and participated in many horrifically violent conflicts in Central America, including overthrowing a democratically elected leader in the name of stamping out communism. El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Panama, If we're truly an open society, our history textbooks would give the same coverage to these events as to genocide, slavery, and civil rights movement.
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Robert M. StantonPittsburgh, PA
I am sure for Nicaragua, El Salvador and Grenada Reagan is remembered for his wars. Fortunately for us they did not have any real impact in the US.
April 8, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

gjames9142toronto, canada
The epitaph on her grave ? "There is no such thing as society."
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED31

rmb37Luxembourg
On a day when we lost a great world leader, the media continues to focus on the women who lead websites as if they are transforming the world by creating better apps and better news sites for our idle time. Margaret Thatcher helped change the world for the better. I doubt she ever thought about 'Lean In'. She just lead by her conviction.
April 8, 2013 at 9:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

Barry VaughnBirmingham, AL
I was a student in Britain from 1984 to 1987 and was inspired almost daily by Thatcher. When I arrived, the country was in the midst of a miners' strike led by the loathsome Arthur Scargill, a Marxist who apparently wanted to turn Britain into suburb of the USSR. I could not discern any justification for the strike, and thought Thatcher handled it brilliantly. It was so reassuring to watch the evening new and listen to her. Every sentence, every paragraph was perfectly thought out. Thatcher not only revitalized Britain; she helped give the whole Western world new confidence. May she rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 9:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED14

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
North Sea oil - which made Britain a net petroleum exporter in 1980 - gave Thatcher all the power she needed to break the National Union of Mineworkers. Does that make her a brilliant leader, or just a lucky one?
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

fredioEngland
This daughter of a working class shop keeper, she went on to destroy everything the British working class had achieved, equal rights , trade unions etc.
Dismantled the infrastructure , mining, shipbuilding, steel mills,. to name a few, she also sold off for a pittance the North Sea oil rights to her finantial masters depriving the British people of future secure and cheap fuel.
This evil woman will not be missed by the true workers.......just the Banskters.
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED240

mohwaldGeneva, Switzerland
Thatcher was a traitor to her allies and all values of the Western World:

http://www.atlantic-times.com/archive_detail.php?recordID=1934
April 8, 2013 at 9:46 a.m.RECOMMENDED12

WillLA, CA
No mention of her Cromwellian efforts in Northern Ireland, huh?
April 8, 2013 at 9:42 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Kevin RothsteinJarama Valley
Verified
Her famous quip about socialism said a lot about her character (or lack thereof).
April 8, 2013 at 9:54 a.m.RECOMMENDED14

RangerdoggyMPLS MN
Margaret Thatcher - One of the best leaders of the Britain. This lady had stature, legendary class, that well represented Britain. She created respect for her beloved country through out the world. A true leader that will go down in history as one of the greats.
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

GypsyNY
Odd how all the adoration for Thatcher comes from people not affected by her as a leader. I just don't see the same love from the English.
April 8, 2013 at 10:48 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

mungomunroMaine
" The problem with Thatcher and Reagan style vulture capitalism is that you eventually run out of suckers to fund your ponzi scheme's."
Just as US president Thomas Jefferson predicted.
April 8, 2013 at 9:46 a.m.RECOMMENDED70

GlenWashington DC
I hear she made a mean beef stroganoff.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

SchigolchBernalillo, NM
The savior of her country.
April 8, 2013 at 9:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

David BartlettKeweenaw Bay, MI
What I admired most about Margaret Thatcher was the love she had for her husband, Denis. Ironically, feminists at the time condemned Mrs. Thatcher for having the cliche' political marriage------devoted, adoring wife gazing up lovingly at politician husband during public appearances------only in reverse.

But she proved them wrong. She showed that it was possible to be a strong wife too, and not at the expense of a 'weak' husband. If her husband was gazing up lovingly at her, it was not out of cliche' stagecraft, but because he loved her. And what was wrong with that.

She was the archetypal feminist, and the feminists didn't even recognize it.
April 8, 2013 at 9:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

Richard ColmanOrinda, California
Margaret Thatcher was a philo-Semite (the opposite of an anti-Semite). She had five Jews in her cabinet, more than any other prime minister. She was the first British prime minister to visit Israel. Her parliamentary district, North Finchley (north of downtown London), had -- and perhaps still has -- a higher percentage of Jews of any other parliamentary district in Great Britain. Among her Jewish cabinet members were Malcolm Rifkind, Nigel Lawson (father of Nigella Lawson, the famous food writer), and Norman Lamont. Many of Mrs. Thatcher's economic ideas cam from such Jewish economists as Milton Friedman and Ludvig von Mises.

Richard Colman
Orinda, California
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

EinsteinAmerica
Verified
Milton Friedman and Ludvig von Mises are nothing to brag about.
April 8, 2013 at 11:43 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

withalllondon uk
The latter part of your comment explains the former: Thatcher's constituency was indeed North Finchley the London Borough which includes Golders Green the district with the largest population of Jews in London - it was thus in her own political interests to foster, as you've described, all things Jewish if she was not to lose her seat and political career: Thatcher was if nothing else a sufficiently astute politician to know on which side her bread was buttered.
April 8, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Ian MaitlandMinneapolis
So what?

And you have forgotten her intellectual mentor, Sir Keith Joseph.
April 8, 2013 at 9:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

Bagbabe53Vienna, VA
I was overseas from '78- to late '81, and visited the UK several times back then. I was also stationed at a NATO post when Baroness Thatcher came to power and listened to her first major speech on the BBC as she took over as PM. It was like listening to the feminine voice of God, and clearly the tone of a tough leader. It was a time when the UK had broken down as a country, with continual strikes, trash in the streets, regular power outages, etc. In '81, while in London, we stayed at an unfortunate hotel down on its heels in which many guests were unemployed. We thought they would hate the her. We were shocked when most of them said the draconian measures she'd instituted needed to be done because their country had fallen into chaos. Even though they were down, they were hopeful because their PM was fearless and willing to make the difficult decisions. I thought it was interesting that Katy Kay (NOT a conservative) of the BBC mentioned this morning that Thatcher had, however, broken down some of the class system in the UK by extending credit opportunities to small business owners, and expanding UK's then small middle class. Thatcher was a major actor in bringing down the Iron Curtain, and should be remembered for that as well. It's all incredible when you consider she began her life as a grocer's daughter studying chemistry at Oxford.
April 8, 2013 at 9:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

Heinrich ZwahlenBrooklyn
All in all Thatcher and Reagan had a very negative influence on the history of modern society creating more diivisivness by aggravating the gap between rich and poor.
Britain would be better off today if it had planned for a more social and manufacturing based economy like Germany, instead of making the country too dependend on services and finances.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED40

Htos1USA
I don't know,during Reagan,I got my degree,I paid for it(btw-with my money-up front),and by 2000,retired at 40,paying cash for home.The clintonoids and Reno(while on top of Eric Holder)didn't create that.
April 8, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

bormespkBrookline, MA
As one person said here...a Britain that has lost its manufacturing base is merely the old "nation of shopkeepers".
April 8, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

Arun ParyadathDoha, Qatar
Tramp the dirt down...
April 8, 2013 at 9:37 a.m.RECOMMENDED19

jeffrey.bowmanMissouri
I'm always fascinated by those that swim against the tide and she certainly did that to great effect. My prayers to her family upon her passing.
April 8, 2013 at 9:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

GTNJ
As a college student in 1980 the world did not look all that promising in the US and I spent a year in the UK ... and it was worse. You can't deny the reality of debt and protect inefficiencies and expect everything to work out --- someone has to pay for it. And no one ... unless forced ... Will!

People forget ... I'm 54 ,,,,,,,, Thatcher was a long time ago but the cycle continues .. history repeats itself. 

....... Look around in the 30 something crowd ,,,,,, the next Thatcher better be lurking someplace or we are all in trouble.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

candidateforwaxLos Angeles
Sarah Palin!
April 8, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Htos1USA
Roger that!
April 8, 2013 at 10:03 a.m.

Typical Ohio LiberalColumbus, Ohio
Elvis Costello can tramp the dirt down now.
April 8, 2013 at 9:37 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

SassanKDarianCalifornia
People can say a whole lot about Margaret Thatcher but no sensible person can deny her intelligence, whit, and influence. The fact is that she was Prime Minister for 11-years as a woman in the years of 1979-1990. She stood up to totalitarianism and was a force one did not want to reckon with. She was truly a transformative and vital leader of our time. Like her or hate her, the Iron Lady has her place cemented in the history books.
April 8, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

RickPortland, Oregon
So do any number of 20th century despots, What's your point?
April 9, 2013 at 9:29 p.m.

DaveDallas, TX US of A
One of the first and best Western politicians to try and divine the line between public wants and public needs. She was pivotal and timely. Unlikely we'll we her like pass this way again. Pity.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
Thatcher inherited a country on its knees in 1979 - and she turned it around.

Blair inherited a country in an economic boom in 1997 and spent it into oblivion.
April 8, 2013 at 9:36 a.m.RECOMMENDED17

fredioEngland
Sorry Ronnie......you don't live in the UK , I can tell you that's not true.
April 8, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
@fredio....I did live in the UK for the whole of Thatcher's tenure. Sorry to burst your bubble.
April 8, 2013 at 11:43 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

RMarcAlbany NY
This woman was a butcher in the Falkland war while trying hard to be as tough as any man!
Thatcher had her navy sink a ship that was in retreat killing many men.
April 8, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

SchigolchBernalillo, NM
The General Belgrano wasn't in retreat. It was en route to attack the British supply fleet east of the Falklands. That's why it was sunk.
April 8, 2013 at 10:11 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

jbok
Reallly, Schigolch, there's some controversy over that.

It does strain credulity that an Argentine navy light cruiser from before WWII was attacking a British fleet. Including the nuclear-powered submarine that killed it, along with about a thousand Argentine sailors. 

What a strange thing that apparent "suicide" would've been. It came 12 hours after a peace offer had been made to Thatcher and her government, although the government says that they never saw it.

A complicated situation, seems like, actually.
April 8, 2013 at 9:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

TGSeattle
Her medieval politics crushed the unions--like Uncle Ronnie in the US--leaving the 1% richer than ever and the rest of us living like serfs.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED43

SchigolchBernalillo, NM
The unions had already destroyed Britain. There was almost nothing left to save.
April 8, 2013 at 10:10 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

Andrea ENY
Verified
Unions weren't innocents. They were doing their own damage. She was tough enough and smart enough to deal with them.
April 8, 2013 at 11:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

HCFlorida
I agree with the comment above that she and Reagan undid the working classes, and the portrayal by Meryl Streep kind of downplayed that. Thatcher delivered the hatchet to the working class, used warped pride in Britainia to keep the Falklands, not really caring that she was making a useless war that killed many young Brits who did not live to anywhere near her years. She was a pumped up egotist who knew better than her male peers, and I suspect, as the first female PM of GB, she had a "get even" attitude behind many of her policies. 

Had she ruled as Queen, instead of King George III when we were declaring our independence from Taxation without Representation, and desired freedom to worship who we wished, I suspect that she would have sent many more of her young fighting men to put us down and crush our ability to separate ourselves from monarchic rule.

As a PM, she often acted as a harridan, and got her way by bloating the pride of being an English-speaking woman. British rule in India and elsewhere was brutal, but effective. Now they are just another democracy struggling to continue being one. The US of today has a lot in common with the UK of today.
April 8, 2013 at 9:36 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

darlenevmNY
Brava, Ms Thatcher! You were a strong, independent woman, who was an inspiration to women everywhere. May you rest in peace.
April 8, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

mungomunroMaine
Thacher increased UK unemployment to 3.3 million people while her bosses from the international banks applauded.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

HermajtomomiLondon UKNYT Pick
As someone who has always been left of centre and deeply resented what Thatcher did to British society, I can't pretend to be sad at her death as I disliked her and all she stood for intensely. Most of all I loathed her for sending a British task force to fight - and die - in the Falklands just to up her poll ratings. BUT I did once find myself defending her when my mother claimed that it was wrong for a woman to be prime minister. Also she did give Meryl Streep the opportunity to act her socks off with her convincing and sympathetic portrayal of The Iron Lady.
April 8, 2013 at 9:36 a.m.RECOMMENDED216
READ ALL 8 REPLIES

John W. CondonChicago
Herm, If democracy is any judge the public in the Falklands continue to overwhelmingly support the status quo. Why exactly are you the outlier? Is it just because she was not a liberal?
April 8, 2013 at 7:07 p.m.

georgeyoCitrus Heights, CA
I didn't think that such shallowness existed in London UK.
April 8, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.

DavidTDorset, UK
Maggie transformed British society seeing away Scargill, Kinnock and the Labour Unionists of Liverpool such as Hatton. Brits are still proud of the Falklands War and the Islanders are eternally grateful. She was simply the best!
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.

Jay SchiavoneNew Haven
Let us not forget that she dismissed Nelson Mandela and the ANC as "terrorists." The only commendable action she ever took was to decline a visit from Sarah Palin, but I doubt she was lucid enough to have made that decision herself.
April 8, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

Gypsyny
Odd, all these comments about how wonderful this woman was. She gutted the working class almost overnight in England. Northern England never recovered. I think the nicest comment I have heard from my English friends is, ding dong the witch it dead. The anger towards her runs deep.
Being strong doesn't mean your right. Interesting some of the figures in history we choose to give our adulation too. Many were people that caused pain, suffering and ruination.
April 8, 2013 at 9:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED51

GrandenClarksville, MD
Margaret Thatcher and Singapore's Lee Kwan Yew are clearly the greatest postwar leaders that the world has produced. If American presidents possessed 50% of her intelligence, the US would be in terrific shape.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

GypsyNY
Most Brits would laugh at this. She gutted Englands manufacturing industry overnight. She also caused the banking crisis, interest rates jumped 40%. Still want someone like her?
April 8, 2013 at 9:59 a.m.RECOMMENDED17

DaveDallas, TX US of A
#Gypsy, If by 'destroying', you mean she threw the do-nothing Labour bosses out of manufacturing, then yes, she destroyed manufacturing in the UK. It wasn't her who nationalized UK auto manufacturing and thus killed it off with centralised control, abysmal quality and zero innovation. She couldn't resuscitate the dead horse created by Labour, but no one could have. An object lesson in this is to look at the UK-built autos from 1950 to the present - the legacy of wrong-headed British Leyland management.
April 8, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
@Gypsy. 40% interest rates.??! Entirely false. When she came into power interest rates were at 14%. The highest they got were 17% between December 1979 and June 1980.
April 8, 2013 at 2:22 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

PaulWhite Plains
Prime Minister Thatcher and President Reagan brought prosperity and pride of country back to their respective nations. They were great patriots and had the courage of their convictions. Both are missed, and would be the perfect leaders to solve the economic and moral problems facing us today.
April 8, 2013 at 9:35 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

bungamanWaterbury VT
They were both heartless charlatans, who did more to start the decline and impoverishment of the middle class, than any other post war western "leaders." If your goal is to turn democracies into banana republics, they are your gold standard.
April 8, 2013 at 9:43 a.m.RECOMMENDED60

FunnyAboutMoneyPrivate
Gosh. A Great Recession whose effects we're still feeling is "prosperity and pride"? The misguided voodoo economics these folks subscribed to are exactly what led to the mess that has slammed the entire developed world.

If this is prosperity and pride, what do we call an economic disaster, a moribund middle class, and widespread unemployability?
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED24

Manuel EderVienna, AustriaNYT Pick
Most of the issues with the Financial Industry we face at the moment have their roots in her and Reagan's politics. At first wanted to say that I find it sad that she never had to see what damage she caused (she wasn't really a part of the reality anymore the last few years) but actually I think she wouldn't have cared. May what ever deity she believed in have mercy on her soul.
April 8, 2013 at 9:41 a.m.RECOMMENDED294

albertnyc
So you're saying the root cause of the EUs problems today are due to Thatcher and Reagan? Yes, they are the ones who forced Spain, Greece, France and Italy to live well beyond their means and rack up huge debt on gold plated social programs they couldn't afford. How do you say Chutzpah in Austria?
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

cofficNew York
Which of her policies caused damage? As I recall, she started to bring her country back. When she was gone, the country started failing again. She tried, she gave them a brief glimmer of hope, and then she left. Now look where they are. I respect their political system, and firmly believe that the people deserve what they vote for. Since she left, I have not been following her, but, I'm sure that it broke her heart, however, hopefully, she realized that she did all that she could to try to make Britain, again, a thriving, respected country, whose citizens deserved the dignity of taking care of themselves. She helped in so many ways--privatizing many companies (she warned against privatizing rail transportation, but, it was privatized, and it was a disaster); defeating the invasion of the Falklands; foresaw the problems of a European 'union'; etc... Did she make some mistakes (in my mind)? Yes, but, I'm afraid that she was the last hope for her beloved country, and it is doomed to continue sliding into something unrecognizable.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.

DAGNYC
Manuel, I think the current issues in the financial industry have more to do with money printing, huge debt and the idea that everyone should own a home whether they can afford it or not. None has anything to do with Margaret Thatcher. Perhaps you'd like to blame Greece, Cyprus, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Iceland, France... on her too.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Bruce BelknapAnsbach, Germany
One of my lasting memories of Margaret Thatcher, is when she
thanked her good friend Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in 1999 for bringing democracy to Chile. Pinochet: who had the lawfully elected President of Chile, Salvador Allende killed, and who was directly responsible for the murder of 4,000 of Chile's citizens; Chileans who had the poor judgement to disagree with the destruction of their own democracy.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED75

bormespkBrookline, MA
Very ugly "friendship" indeed
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

Louis HoweSpringfield, Il
The confluence of rapacious capitalism with ephemeral individual freedom is Thatcher’s legacy, and a heavy burden to be borne by the working class.
April 8, 2013 at 9:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED105

MoserLondon
Extraordinary to publish an obituary of Thatcher that makes no mention of the Falklands War
April 8, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.RECOMMENDED37

paoloadelioItaly
I'd like to write on her grave: "Hundreds of pointless deaths in Las Malvinas rest on my conscience".
April 8, 2013 at 9:22 a.m.RECOMMENDED45

SchigolchBernalillo, NM
You think they should have just surrendered?
April 8, 2013 at 10:17 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

BronxboyedNY Area
Why don't you pin the fault where it really belongs? The junta that invaded the Falklands in the first place?
April 8, 2013 at 10:47 a.m.RECOMMENDED7

historylessonNorwalk, CT
Mrs. Thatcher didn't exactly remake Britain -- she began the work of slowly destroying it, as did her friend and our president, Reagan, begin the work of destroying our democracy.

It never fails to astonish me that these two are so lionized. For what? Carrying on about free market capitalism and rugged individualism? Destroying the working class by busting unions and the hard won protections unionization gave workers? Creating the path to oligarchy instead of democracy? What is there to praise about two people who were broken records on two subjects: hatred of communism, and the joys of unregulated capitalism?

Even their "wars" are comparable. I mean, really, The Falklands and Grenada? Please.

The utter mess the world is in now can be traced back to them and their capitalist obsessions. They started us down this path that rejected every single lesson learned since the end of WWI. 

Thank you, Mrs. Thatcher. And you, too, Ronnie.
April 8, 2013 at 9:33 a.m.RECOMMENDED374

ThinkerNorthern California
"Even their "wars" are comparable. I mean, really, The Falklands and Grenada? Please."

Know what's even sillier than those two wars? Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Shall we judge our female leaders by how they voted on those two wars?
April 8, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.

DVancouver
AMEN! Couldn't have said it better.
April 8, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

RickPortland, Oregon
"Shall we judge our female leaders by how they voted on those two wars?"

Yes.
April 9, 2013 at 9:29 p.m.

Alan RootAmherst, MA
Margaret Thatcher may have never been a fully-functioning person. She died long ago and it was fitting that her physical end was punctuated by her slow decline into the silencing of alzheimers disease followed by a stroke. Until she was rejected by her own so-called conservative party, she always seemed to be lacking humaness within her pretendings to be human. I suspect that most Brits would not vote for a repeat performance!
April 8, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.RECOMMENDED14

Mladen AndrijasevicBeer Sheva, Israel
"Don't go wobbly on me regarding Iran now, Bibi."
April 8, 2013 at 9:22 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

Prof.Jai Prakash Sharma,Jaipur, India
Verified
Such was the persona and charm of this iron lady of steely resolve that while alive she never allowed any vacuum to arise in Britain's' public life, and now in death, she leaves behind a big void difficult to fill. With her firm conservative convictions, and clarity of political vision, the way she presided over the political and economic fortunes of Britain for over a decade was truly remarkable. It was not for nothing that the whole saga of her public life and actions was sought to be encapsulated under Thatcherism, her own school of thought. May God bless her peace in death.
April 8, 2013 at 9:32 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

VoltaireEast of Seoul
You don't have to wish her RIP. She was incarcerated in her repellant solitude through her later years. After all was said and done, and after all the sound and fury, that's where she put herself in. All's well that ends well.
April 8, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

S B LewisLewis Family Farm, Essex, New York
Margaret Thatcher was unique. Her quotations are priceless. 

Her advice is timeless. 

For kicks, try the one about habit leading to character, then reflect on her view of socialism. Give thought to her view of being liked. 

Find a single politician today that can approach her majesty. 

Define enabling. Proceed on course. 

Maggie Thatcher loved Ronald Reagan, it seems. 

Opposites attract. 

See Dwight David Eisenhower and Harry S Truman. I'd guess she would have respected and loved each of them.
April 8, 2013 at 9:22 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

ardelionConnecticutNYT Pick
Since Churchill, three people have done more than any others to keep alive the principles, values, and dignity of Western civilization: Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and John Paul II. While I grieve the Baroness' passing, I hail the great good she has done us all.
April 8, 2013 at 9:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED96
READ ALL 14 REPLIES

ChrisMexico
Titles of nobility have no place in a society that respects the equal dignity of all. Thatcher was a wicked woman. She embraced Augusto Pinochet, Latin America's most murderous dictator and proclaimed him a democrat. Her former subjects are presently dancing in the street. That should say something about the ''good" that she did.
April 8, 2013 at 8:45 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

ChrisArizona
Which values do you speak of? Genocide, arrogance, imperialism?
April 8, 2013 at 10:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

David S.San Diego, CA
Wow. A bully, an actor, and a man who lives in a gold palace telling others how to live their lives. 

A reporter once asked Gandhi what he thought of Western civilization. He said, "I think it would be a great idea."
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Privacy GuyHidden
Smarter and braver than Reagan, she gave England and the world a dose of the right medicine for the times. Too bad it was all taken too far in the years after her departure from power. They should name something in the Falklands after her.
April 8, 2013 at 9:26 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

Josh HillNew London
Verified
Sure, but who *wasn't* smarter than Reagan?
April 8, 2013 at 10:04 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

DSMontreal
I just feel that the movie that was made about her was the height of cruelty and insensitivity -- it seemed as a result of that movie and the way it shamelessly harped on her old age (hey, we all get old, leave her alone!) she was already dead and her real death anticlimactic. So unfair to her, I hope she never saw it; anyway, she apparently suffered from dementia (also driven home to us in the movie) but her family had to see this, humiliating,, appalling and sickening in its intrusiveness -- is nothing sacred anymore?
April 8, 2013 at 9:21 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

charlieMcLean
Among her many accomplishments was her government made it illegal to discuss being gay in schools and colleges? It tried to legally intimidate all gay groups from even existing?
April 8, 2013 at 9:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED29

JLLondonNYT Pick
She saved Britain's economy but her legacy is so divisive because in the process, the gap between rich and poor became (and continues to be) so extreme in Britain. Her point of view about Europe though is something a lot of people agree with.

I didn't respect all of her policies but one thing I will say for Thatcher: she knew how to lead. No dithering, no faltering and she had a sometimes terrifying steely resolve. She was one of the last politicians you could look at and know exactly what she stood for. I can't imagine any other politician, even during this recession who would make a statement like "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money". She spoke her mind and did what she promised to do when she was elected- I respect that and very few politicians do the same.
April 8, 2013 at 9:24 a.m.RECOMMENDED146
READ ALL 12 REPLIES

OldEngineerSE Michigan
Your thesis seems to be that differences between rich and poor are bad per se. The logical end of this reasoning is that all must be made poor to prevent the sin of wealth. Thatcher didn't buy the argument, and I do not either.
I'd rather see all in improved circumstances than to impoverish everyone in the name of "fairness".
April 8, 2013 at 11:00 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

StephanieMaryland
Margaret Thatcher did not create or increase the extreme gap between rich and poor in Britain. That gap has existed for centuries. If anything there is more class mobility now.
April 9, 2013 at 1:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Sam M.Sag Harbor, NY
The gap between rich and poor in Britain (and the US) continues to widen because we have ever fewer achieves and an ever increasing nanny-state.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

BryanSingapore
She shall be forever respected as one of the greatest lady i have ever known
April 8, 2013 at 9:19 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

Vickie H.TN
The world has lost a great lady.
April 8, 2013 at 9:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Bob of NewtonMassachusetts
Who? When? Where?
April 8, 2013 at 2:09 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

withalllondon uk
Do tell - have I missed something?
April 8, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

Clive GHull, England
She certainly changed the course of history in the UK. Single handedly, she;
destroyed the mining industry (remember Orgreave),
all but destroyed British manufacturing,
laid the foundations of the banking crisis by deregulating them,
encouraged an extremely selfish attitude which persists today,
sent many soldiers to their deaths herself and by establishing the 'special relationship' boxed Blair into Iraq,
paid for this by selling back to people who already owned them the public utilities- resulting in windfall receipts used to reduce taxes on income to an unprecedented 20% (which successive governments are reluctant to face up to),
resorted to a typical female trick when it all came home to roost- she cried.
Ahhhhh.
I wonder what kind of epitaph would be appropriate?
April 8, 2013 at 9:24 a.m.RECOMMENDED161

Cold LiberalMinnesota
An epitaph? Perhaps "Princess of the 1%"?
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

Bryan BarrettMalvern, Pa.
Verified
Your opinion could have been written by Clement Attlee. She rescued the UK from Socialism for a least a period of time and broke the power of the out of control Unions. She restored the power and the prestige of Great Britain and pride in being British. The Labour Party had to move to the right under Tony Blair to return to power.

She actually rescued British manufacturing then headed for oblivion since it had, under Union pressure become uncompetitive worldwide.

That you would feel the way you do is sad; that British subjects party in the street on her death is shameful; she was the best Prime Minister since Winston Churchill.
April 8, 2013 at 10:50 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

PhlegyasNew Hampshire
Revered by whom? 

The 1% maybe, and certainly Rupert Murdoch and his gang of merry men (and women) at the now defunct tabloid.

This reverse Robin Hood should be forgotten as quickly as possible. Ask the 99% if you have any question.
April 8, 2013 at 9:19 a.m.RECOMMENDED224

DRSNew York, NY
Letting people keep their own money is not reverse Robin Hood - it's justice.
April 8, 2013 at 9:36 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

RW RoarkOKC, OK
To DRS,

Nice to know that Wall street and the City of London and their fraudulent ways (e.g., Great Recession, LIBOR, the London whale / Voldemort, etc.) are the embodiments of justice . . . .

RWR
OKC, OK
April 8, 2013 at 9:46 a.m.RECOMMENDED11

jbok
Lay off, guys. DRS believes that money is virtue, money is "personal responsibility" (never mind responsibility to others, he or she just means money to get what one wants without ever asking), money is all that is good and beautiful in the world.

And until DRS can stop worshipping it alone, there's no reasoning with him or her.
April 8, 2013 at 7:15 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

Thoughtful WomanOregon
The Falklands. Right up there with winning World War II in the imagination of the Conservative Party mythmakers.

Churchill she was not.

Beating up on a country way less powerful than you and sinking their one battleship? Playground bully sounds more like it.

Ideologues make a habit of finding and inflating a ferocious enemy in countries their constituents couldn't find on a map. (Where is Nicaragua, anyway?)

Absolutism in politics is the people's worst enemy.

We should all beware of slogan-spouters who hold the line for the sake of winning elections. Britain can thank the Iron Lady in large part for the loss of their great manufacturing tradition and the greed-fueled wreck of their financial sector, just as America should look to the Great Communicator and the Compassionate Conservative for the roots of our still-smoldering recession.

Sadly the Dogma Hounds of History have a way of rewriting things to create heroes where there are mostly just One Note Samba Singers of cant.
April 8, 2013 at 9:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED79

MKMNew York
Argentina attacked the Falklands....not Britain attacking Argentina. You are trying to hard to be right.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Josh HillNew London
Verified
How exactly was liberating the Falklands from an invader being a bully?

Strength itself is not a crime and in war, I mean the real shooting kind where the guy on the other side is trying to insert a bullet in your guts, there is no moral obligation to adopt your enemy's weakness.
April 8, 2013 at 10:03 a.m.RECOMMENDED8

Ugly and Fat gitBoulder,CO
My mom said you should not speak bad about recently deceased persons. I will take her advice.
April 8, 2013 at 9:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

MBMA
Lean in!
April 8, 2013 at 9:19 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

Yorkshire PuddingBoston Mass.
I grew up and until recently lived in the county of Yorkshire, a former industrial heartland that she has socially and economically wrecked with for generations to come. I would suggest that the Anglophiles on this comment board look a little beyond her posture and blustering at an international level and look at the fact that she held working class Britain, a massive segment of the population, as beneath contempt, peasants whose futures and livelihoods were irrelevant. Go to an former mining town, where once vibrant close knit communities are in advanced social decay. Then you might see what a wonderful leader she was. No tears from me sorry Maggie
April 8, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.RECOMMENDED161

SusanYorkshire, England
Oh please - it was the detestable Mr Scargill who damaged the UK mining industry beyond repair!!
April 8, 2013 at 11:06 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

B.Brooklyn
I've got to say that I'm torn as to Mrs. Thatcher's values. I favor a national health system, a retirement system that allows people to end their days in dignity, and the nationalization of some utilities which, broken up as they've been in recent decades, are far less efficient -- and more expensive -- than they once were.

But I also know that people do not react well when they're given something for nothing. I've seen here in Brooklyn what Section-8 housing has done to neighborhoods that were formerly solid working- and middle-class neighborhoods, as well as what welfare has done to generations of families. 

I'm in favor of unions, but unions shouldn't protect the jobs of people who won't work. Ever watched the slow-motion progress of any number of infrastructure jobs in New York City and wondered why?

Wrong Mrs. Thatcher was on many accounts, but not so wrong on others.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

JohnGods own County
I live there now & do not recognise any of this tosh.
The good people of Yorkshire would be up in arms to read this slander.
Axe to grind?
April 8, 2013 at 2:25 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

SpecialAgentANew York City
"There is no such thing as society!" Sure, and she did her very best to try to make sure of that, but most of us keep being decent human beings anyway. And so, bring in the psychiatrists and priests to explain these twin tragic characters, Thatcher and Reagan, both from the wrong side of the tracks, used by those who own our Anglo-American world to promote a class agenda that neither really had the capacity to really understand. But we are beginning to understand and the call of history - the call of a better future - is relentless. Frankly, their fall from the contrived pedestals that corporate media has placed them on is breathtaking to watch. This human rants with all due respect and condolences to her grieving family, for there is such a thing as society.
April 8, 2013 at 9:28 a.m.RECOMMENDED24

jbok
Well put, my friend.
April 8, 2013 at 9:12 p.m.

John T.Grand Rapids, Michigan
As I remember it, she was deposed not over opposition to European integration, but over her proposal to replace some property taxes with a head tax (so many pounds per person). This is the most regressive and unfair sort of tax there is. Even her own party understood that this idea was totally bonkers.
April 8, 2013 at 9:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED15

PaulieRahwayNYT Pick
She presided over the degradation of the United Kingdom into a second rate power by letting international corporate interests cannibalize the national industrial base. She also fell asleep at the helm of Commonwealth immigration policy leaving England with a permanently disaffected population. I hope we can change course from Reagan-Thatcherism before we ground out in a backwater like the UK's ship of state.
April 8, 2013 at 9:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED576
READ ALL 12 REPLIES

RalphNSLI
Umm...America is well on its way to being a backwater. Little of the country is even aware of a world beyond, let alone being engaged with it. The industrial base in Britain was in deep trouble before Thatcher, incidentally. She may not have improved things, but in terms of industry she didn't make them worse.
April 8, 2013 at 10:08 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Sam M.Sag Harbor, NY
So now blaming Bush for everything you want to include Thatcher/Reagan?!
Where does the buck stop?
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

DAGNYC
That's a revisionist version of history if I've ever heard one. The UK's decline started before WWII.
April 9, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

Colleen Kelly MellorRI and North Carolina
What a shame Margaret Thatcher and Hillary Clinton didn't reign simultaneously (1979+)...she as Prime Minister and Hillary as President of the US. Then, they both would have left a legacy and a far better world for others to build on. Margaret as Iron Lady did it alone, while we in the US still wrestle with whether a woman should be VP (and I decidedly don't mean Sarah Palin.) We've got a lot of catching up to do to be on the same level as Britain. They apparently just stick to weighing quality...not gender.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED2

RSNear Philly
My favorite Thatcher quote, to paraphrase, “The problem with Socialism is eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

A classic!
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Jay SchiavoneNew Haven
What a coincidence: that's the problem with capitalism.
April 8, 2013 at 9:44 a.m.RECOMMENDED28

Andrea ENY
Verified
At least she recognized the distinction between one's own money and other people's money. I think this line has blurred.
April 8, 2013 at 11:52 a.m.

jbok
True, Andrea. The banks and corporations do think that every bit of money in the world belongs to them. Our SSI should be theirs to play with in their "market"; they should profit by our educations; they should get rich on our health care dollars, on wars, on prisons--on everything there is. They bought the very airwaves for a sweet price from "our" representatives in DC, whom also they have bought. There's not a bit of money they don't have designs on, that's for sure.
April 8, 2013 at 7:16 p.m.RECOMMENDED7

Arun ParyadathDoha, Qatar
Margaret Thatcher - A titan in British politics, who was never afraid of controversy. Love her or loathe her, she shaped Great Britain country as few others did. Arun Paryadath.
April 8, 2013 at 9:17 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

katebcollinsdumont,nj
RIP dear Margaret and a great bravo for an inspirational life lived.....
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

VicMiddletown CT
Farewell!
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Ken HallLondon
Although I have no doubt that Margaret Thatchers political views were sincerely held. I cannot admire her she helped,to usher in a "greed is good" mentality which we are struggling to recover from. Also she was almost a complete philistine whose almost complete disregard for the arts and culture has also left a wounding legacy
April 8, 2013 at 9:17 a.m.RECOMMENDED109

Mike StrikeBoston
Margaret Thatcher will be remembered for her betrayal of her Majesty’s loyal subjects in Hong Kong by surrendering Hong Kong to China.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

EllenWilliamsburg
Verified
returning Hong Kong to China, not surrendering - the English were no friends of the Chinese, nor the Chinese residents of Hong Kong, because they brought their classism and racism and imposed it on them
April 8, 2013 at 11:16 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

AmyBrooklyn
Hillary Clinton - you're no Margaret Thatcher.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

SudhirNew York, NY
thank god for that
April 8, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.RECOMMENDED27

cb4Westminster MD
In 1945, the British people voted out Winston Churchill, the man who led them through the war, and elected Clement Attlee creating a socialist state that turned the UK into a nation of losers. Thatcher reversed that.
April 8, 2013 at 9:17 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

Dave MiltonTubac, AZ
Revered? I was in London in the late eighties and asked a London "Bobbie" for directions to 10 Downing Street, he told me that it was closed to the public for security reasons and "Who would want to see HER, anyway?"
She and Regan were a pair who changed both the UK and the USA but not for the better,
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED123

Tom DeganGoshen, NY
I just read that Margaret Thatcher was born on October 13, 1925 - the same day as Lenny Bruce....Lenny and Maggie. Who'd of thunk?

http://tomdegan.blogspot.com/2006/08/lenny-bruce-remembering-comic-geniu...

Tom Degan
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Jones2371Houston
Ms. Thatcher always reminded me of somoen who lived Goldwater's quote. "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” But the best one, that the oh-so-wise progressive fascists of today skimmed over in their history classes. "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher
April 8, 2013 at 9:17 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

RichReston, VA
The Churchill of our times.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

SteveSomerset, England
The Greatest British Leader of Modern Times. R.I.P. Maggie!
April 8, 2013 at 9:13 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

StephanieDCNYT Pick
She has been my idol ever since I was a little girl, and I always dreamed of meeting her. As a young conservative woman, I fear there are not many who encapsulate our philosophy and political ideology in the way she did. She broke so many barriers and was admired and respected for her brilliance, charisma, and political savvy. I will definitely miss her!
April 8, 2013 at 9:16 a.m.RECOMMENDED109
READ ALL 7 REPLIES

Calvert CliffsMaryland
Like Reagan, Thatcher had no notion what conservatism is. Both were market-opportunist radicals. The historical legacy of Burkean conservatism was unknown to them, but if it had been, they would have opposed it. Unsurprisingly, they bequeathed a legacy of young people who are profoundly confused about conservatism, and about politics generally. Sounds like you might be one of them.
April 8, 2013 at 7:36 p.m.RECOMMENDED5

RalphNSLI
If you are an American conservative it is doubtful you have a clue what she was about, what she believed in, or what she did. It is highly unlikely she would have agreed much with you. My family was closely connected with hers as my aunt was her agent. She didn't really agree much with American conservatism, alternately considering it weak and misguided and caught up with irrelevant social issues.
April 8, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

ChrisArizona
"I fear there are not many who encapsulate our philosophy and political ideology in the way she did."

We can be thankful for that.
April 8, 2013 at 10:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED3

ACWNew Jersey
De mortuis nil nisi bonum, I suppose. She was more intelligent than Reagan but part of the same movement toward rock-hard right-wing ideology. I can't mourn her death, but I do regret her career.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED24

TerryUK
Very strong and yes, she did destroy trade union power and brooked no cheek from communist upstarts but she also destroyed the UK manufacturing industry. Now we are, as Napoleon said, a nation of shopkeepers.
April 8, 2013 at 8:58 a.m.RECOMMENDED191

SteveSomerset, England
Destroyed the socialist dominated Nationalised Industries that were always on strike you mean, and had to live on Government hand-outs just to survive?

By 2000 the UK was 4 times richer than it was in 1979, says it all really, if you work you get rewarded, unlike socialism that only knows how to rot a nation from the inside out.
April 8, 2013 at 9:20 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

JohnGods own County
No, the industry did that to itself.
Remember British Leyland?
April 8, 2013 at 2:24 p.m.RECOMMENDED4

Scott Everson, RNLA
MT you rock! And people say Hillary is an inspirational woman?
April 8, 2013 at 9:16 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

bayboat65jersey shore
Can someone name a politician who ISNT "divisive?"
Obama is CERTAINLY devisive.
George Bush...ditto

Overused and meaningless adjective.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

Heloisa PaitNew York
Shimon Peres.
April 8, 2013 at 9:21 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

RSNear Philly
My favorite Thatcher quote. To paraphrase, “The problem is Socialism is eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

A classic!
April 8, 2013 at 8:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED37
READ ALL 8 REPLIES

GarrettPA
The problem with capitalism run amok is that you eventually run out of other people's money.
April 8, 2013 at 10:46 a.m.RECOMMENDED20

Tom MNew York, NY
The advantage of Socialism is that it helps create the conditions (infrastructure, education) that help generate more money (and grow the size of the pie). 

Germany and Scandinavia have socialist policies and last time I checked they haven't run out of money yet (in contrast, the US has).

Never confuse a funny sound bite with deep thoughts.
April 8, 2013 at 12:55 p.m.RECOMMENDED22

BoobaladooNY
The problem with capitalism is that, when the banks fail, the government pays their debts and expropriates everybody else's money.
April 8, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.RECOMMENDED12

RickibobbiMidwest
Yep, she helped usher in the winner take all school of class warfare, as always, a faithful, but pale shadow of what has transpired in the US.
April 8, 2013 at 9:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED87

brandinilondon
She may be gone, but her destructive spawn live in. The current bunch in Downing Street are wrecking the UKs already fragile economy, priviatising the NHS (at the behest of US insurance companies and HMOs which are licking their chops), and in their zeal for tearing down the welfare state have proposed benefit cuts that remove 48% of income from the UKs poorest 10%. I am sure she would approve of it all.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED160

PetitloupParis via the U.S.
I hope there will be massive resistance to the privatization of healthcare in Britain. Trust me, you do not want the barbarism of our laissez-faire American wealthcare.
April 8, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.RECOMMENDED8

BluntNY
It will take a long time to undo the damage this lady managed to inflict on Great Britain. Even more disasterous than the damage caused by the Reagan years in this country.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED125

MonacuItaly
Many stirring eulogies to Mrs. Thatcher will fill the air in the days ahead, citing her plucky resolve, steely political nerve and eventual betrayal by her own party's hacks. But what she ought to be remembered for -- along with her great friend Ronald Reagan -- is the mindless deregulation of the financial industry that led directly to today's global economic crisis.
April 8, 2013 at 9:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED296
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

John RankinWashington
That's right, Washington Heights - but from a veto-proof majority of Republicans in Congress. Did that fact slip your mind?
April 8, 2013 at 10:49 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

MonacuItaly
The subject, Washington Heights, is the passing of Mrs. Thatcher and relfection on what she wrought. The phrase Big Bang, used in reference to the sudden deregulation of financial markets, was coined to describe measures enacted by the United Kingdom government in 1986. Her co-conspirator, Ronald Reagan, was busily implementing similar polices across the pond. The Clinton-era, GOP-engineered (thank you J. Rankin) repeal of Glass Steagall was the icing on a decade-old cake.
April 8, 2013 at 11:19 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

RickPortland, Oregon
A Democratic President with core values would have stared Congress in the eye and vetoed Glass- Steagall, letting the blame for the legislation fall squarely on Republican shoulders if they over-rode the veto.

A Democratic President who was more concerned with triangulation would have signed Glass- Steagall so he could claim credit. 

Except I guess now he doesn't want the credit so much...
April 9, 2013 at 6:46 p.m.

EricScotland
The worst leader in living memory tag comes to mind.she brought the country to its knees,And she lit the flame of Scottish nationalism.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED39

MaureenLong Island
She also fostered Irish nationalism as well!
April 8, 2013 at 10:59 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

Jim RosenthalAnnapolis, MD
Not being right didn't stop her very often. She did not seem to care about what Britons wanted, but had her own ideas of what ought to be done. Resolve is less admirable when separated from the well-being of one's constituents. It constitutes obstinacy, in essence.
April 8, 2013 at 8:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED214

Larryat24Plymouth MA
I assume you would agree that the measure would be were the British better off after her 11 years? My memory is that before Thatcher, Britain was not functional: strikes, Luddites (not technically by 200 years, but you get the idea), rigid social classes, coal mines that had run out of coal kept open by union power.
April 8, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

Eric LowinPleasant Hill, CA
I am reminded of what transpired in Trafalgar Square around the base of the Nelson column immediately after it was announced that the Conservative Party had removed Thatcher from office. Over one hundred thousand gathered to dance and sing "Ding Dong the Witch Is Dead". Like Ronald Reagan, Thatcher was far worse in reality than her publicity. The impoverishment of the British working class is her memorial as it is Reagan's here.
April 8, 2013 at 8:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED484
READ ALL 4 REPLIES

Ronnie LaneBoston, MA
A Prime Minister who won three general elections in a row by a landslide - 1979, 1983 and 1987. She wasn't that unpopular!
April 8, 2013 at 9:36 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

GTNJ
Three wins by landslides? Unpopular? 

It is always easy to want to give more to people -- to protect ... it sounds great until the next generation can't pay for it.
April 8, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED3

S B LewisLewis Family Farm, Essex, New York
Foolishness never goes out of style.
April 8, 2013 at 11:21 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

Arthur B. TreadwayMadrid, Spain
It has been conventional wisdom now for several decades to consider Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagen as high-quality political leaders. And that is probably a sensible evaluation, mainly because of the atrociously incompetent other political leaders that we have been suffering for far too long.
April 8, 2013 at 8:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

Franklin SchenkFort Worth, Texas
If you run the economy into the ground you are not a high quality leader. I do not know about the British but I hope we never have another Ronald Reagan. Maybe as a movie actor but not as a president.
April 8, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.RECOMMENDED20

MarcusArkansas
High quality and high visbility are not the same thing. Raygun was the precursor of the worst America has ever produced. A face without a brain. A mouthpiece someone else used to get what they wanted. Reagan was a national disaster, second only to "W" Bush.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

pete the catNew york
The world has lost a great leader...she had strength, guts and brains, something that the current leaders of the free world lack...they could take a few lessons from her.
April 8, 2013 at 8:51 a.m.RECOMMENDED23

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
She also had oil. By 1980, thanks to North Sea production, Britain was a net exporter of petroleum. She was dealt a winning hand and made the most of it.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED6

TimWmsbg
A shout out to Saatchi and Saatchi who ran her publicity and ad campaigns
April 8, 2013 at 8:56 a.m.RECOMMENDED13

YoyoNY
The fact that she recognized her need for top notch PR to hide her warts (and worse) was part of her genius. That fact that she *needed* top notch PR was part of her tragedy.
April 8, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.RECOMMENDED10

Lonely PedantDFW, TX
"Labour Isn't Working": best political slogan ever.
April 8, 2013 at 12:56 p.m.RECOMMENDED2

HelenArdmore,PA
Lean back, not the " Iron Lady"! The baroness is an iconic figure, that will glow on in perpetuity.
April 8, 2013 at 8:56 a.m.RECOMMENDED4

Laurence ShafferJackson, Michigan
Margaret Thatcher is a splendid example of being very likeable but very wrong. May she rest in peace
April 8, 2013 at 8:52 a.m.RECOMMENDED99

lizseattle
Maybe likeable in certain circles, but certainly not all of them. And she sure managed to display quite an open "dislike" of anyone who opposed her, no?
April 8, 2013 at 7:05 p.m.RECOMMENDED1

ObserverNew York, NY
I personally didn't care for her politics or her ideology. But she was a tough lady who proved that she could hold the reins of power in Britain at the height of the Cold War. A truly fascinating individual.
April 8, 2013 at 8:52 a.m.RECOMMENDED16

BenPittsburgh
The article states that Mrs. Thatcher was "revered." Was she "revered" by the Labor Party?
April 8, 2013 at 8:52 a.m.RECOMMENDED41

MonacuItaly
Tony Blair loved her.
April 8, 2013 at 9:18 a.m.RECOMMENDED5

EtoileStockholm
Love her or loathe her - you couldn't ignore her.
April 8, 2013 at 8:57 a.m.RECOMMENDED9

L.L.N.VA
She is one of the greatest leaders in our time. May she rest in peace and in love from all of us! I wish we have one leader just like Lady Thatcher in the States!
April 8, 2013 at 8:52 a.m.RECOMMENDED18

Franklin SchenkFort Worth, Texas
That would be Hillary Clinton so your wish may come true.
April 8, 2013 at 9:25 a.m.RECOMMENDED1

MarcusArkansas
We had two. Reagon and Bush. Neither had her strength or ability. All three did their very best....for the rich.
April 8, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.RECOMMENDED18
  


路过

雷人

握手

鲜花

鸡蛋

评论 (0 个评论)

facelist

您需要登录后才可以评论 登录 | 注册

法律申明|用户条约|隐私声明|小黑屋|手机版|联系我们|www.kwcg.ca

GMT-5, 2024-5-18 09:04 , Processed in 0.048668 second(s), 17 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2021 Comsenz Inc.  

返回顶部