Peter Osborne, Saturday Essay, Daily Mail 26 April 2008, Margaret Thatcher versus chattering Establishment snobs, USDAW in Plymouth Guildhall opened my eyes to Union-fascism, my background.
08h40-BST Monday 28 April 2008-CE
Peter Osborne, in his Saturday Essay for Daily Mail 26 April, used a term that I have heard a lot but never used much if at all because I was never sure to whom, exactly, it applied. Here is a quotation from his piece about Margaret Thatcher:
“The chattering classes, trapped by narcissism and decadence, could hardly bear to acknowledge that she existed.”
I was faintly worried in case “chattering classes” might apply to ME albeit as a primitive and unworthy specimen. I do, after all, yap inconsequentially on this web-log. And I used to yap in Mensa SIG-zines where I was correctly identified as a quasi-religious ranter. And I so love myself. I have said many times that I wish I had been born one of two identical twins. And I expect that I am decadent in spirit, even if nothing happens in the body.
But then I realised that ‘chat’ is a TWO-way thing. My yapping is mostly a ONE-way, ruminating, masturbating, ego-tripping thing. So I will carry on using my favourite term ‘loony-Left Marxist-fascist’. Whilst I value certain portions of the fundamental socialist analysis I reject the loony and fascist solutions the self-perceived righteous ones proffer. My vote floats as years go by. This makes me perfect, politically. Psycho-sexually, I am a wreck.
To understand how much Margaret Thatcher achieved, Peter Osborne says, you need to have lived through the 1970s when both liberal and conservative ends of the political spectrum accepted that UK was hopelessly in decline:
“Margaret Thatcher refused to accept this fatalism. She knew Britain has been a great country and she was determined to make us great again. She did so practically single-handed. It was not just that the Labour Party disagreed. So did the British Establishment -the Civil Service, the Foreign Office, the publishing houses and the universities all despised and ridiculed her passion and her belief…”
“The snobs who shaped fashionable opinion ridiculed a woman whom they saw as a ghastly, common, provincial upstart. They hated her with extra venom because the bedrock of her support lay with the lower middle classes -always the most despised section of British society.”
You ought to go to the Daily Mail site and find the piece by Peter Osborne on Margaret Thatcher. Whilst I was undecided back then about her exact privatisation approach (and now regret much of the results) I always praised her Argentina curb and her Unions correction. I was the single Pro-Sunday-Trading voice in an USDAW meeting of 500 in Plymouth Guildhall, mid-1960s. The platform declared their Anti declaration unanimous. I woke up.
My background can be said to be lower middle class. There was shop ownership, clerking, small-farm ownership, Scottish nobility (gangster) land-owning roots, fishing-boat ownership roots, labouring, domestic service, marriage of cousins, and progency of laird-servant probably by rape. Us lot are hated by the unskilled-working-class for allegedly claiming to be superior (we ARE superior, but it is a lie that we mention it, it just shows).
The upper class (gangsters) hate ALL the middle class as nouveau riche. They fear being exposed as the inheriting thickies that they mostly are. The upper middle class see the lower middle class as the would-be risers up the scale of income. I think the chattering classes are the people of little ability to innovate. They fear change because they are never able to cope, and those who have flexible, pragmatic, adaptive ability zoom past them.
FIN 10h26
