No question that Thatcher left her mark, but Major had Clarke and Haseltine in his cabinet, and Clarke, at least, had a major role. And, until recently, Cameron couldn’t shut up about Disraeli.
Well, Mrs Thatcher was wont to quote St. Francis of Assisi. But nobody was fooled for very long.
You missed the word ‘rabid’.
According to this fivethirtyeight article, on a wide range of social issues, Scotland polls to the left of Great Britain (although not to the left of London). According to the polls, there’s far broader consensus for support of gay marriage, more benefits to immigrants, higher government spending and more redistribution of wealth.
Thatcherism was a radical form of Toryism contrived to counter the radical Socialism that was prevalent in the UK in the late 1970s that used powerful labour unions to confront governments of which they disapproved.
There are still casualties, with bruising memories of this encounter in UK politics, for whom Thatcherism equates with the destruction of the socialist/communist ambitions for the political future of the UK. Many of the same never really got over the fall of the Soviet Union.
Scottish independence is attractive to them because, in its efforts to win over Labour voters, cloaked itself in the positive communitarian elements of socialism and distances itself from Tory dominated England.
So branding the Tories as rabid neo-Conservatives in the Thatcher mold is a political tactic.
This is bunkum, just a cheap shot during an election.
The old Thatcherites are a minority and certainly under Cameron the Conservative social policy is socially liberal passing landmark laws supporting same sex marriage and improving the position of women in the establish Church of England.
With regards to economics, the pro-independence campaigners promise a socialist paradise with little evidence that they can generate the wealth to afford it. The warn about the UK government having designs on that sacred cow of UK politics, the NHS, proclaiming plans are afoot to privatise it and the only protection from this is independence.
This again is another cheap shot as Gordon Brown made clear.
Then they say the campaign against independence is overwhelmingly negative!
All of this is petty electioneering stuff and the Scots have been exposed to huge amounts of it over the past year.
Hopefully by now they will be informed enough to make a decision.
Thatcher did contribute to the Tory decline in Scotland but it was already on its way out. Much of the Tory strength in Scotland had been due to Unionism. Unionism as a political force crumbled sometime around the 1960’s.
Thats all very well while the Westminster central pot of tax money is paying for it. Scotland’s politics has become warped by Nationalism and the lack of clear distinction of where the money comes from to pay for all this. After a decade or two of Independence(and the likelihood of taxes going up) then these social attitudes in Scots will converge with the attitudes in England and Ireland imo.
So naturally you condemn London in the same way - more left wing, City centric, pro immigration, pro Europe, yet taking more per head of national expenditure than Scotland. Greedy ungrateful Londoners?
London isn’t about to go independent without a clear understanding of how to pay for bread and circuses. When Scotland doesn’t pump oil, its remaining industries are tourism and sheep. Scots want more wealth redistribution, but there isn’t a lot of wealth to redistribute. They aren’t sure what they are going to do for a currency, and Britain isn’t sure they want to tie the pound to Scotland any more than they want to tie themselves to the Euro.
No, London is an outlier in such things. Many of its social and political attitudes having to do with it being packed full of foreigners and immigrants.
And fish and arable farming and whisky and water and…
We are rather at the mercy of politics and nature when it comes to our fishing industry.
Lets just see how well the whisky industry keeps doing in Scotland. Right now its at a sweet spot. Huge taxes on whisky and increasing demand means the industry is a goldmine for the Government and big business . Due to changes in legislation a thousand or so whisky distilleries have opened in North America in the past few years. Every year more distilleries open in Europe, Japan and India. I suspect this is a golden period for the Scotch whisky business. As with such things the government looks at it the whisky industry as a cash cow rather than an industry that is subject to foreign competition. Well, Scotch whisky’s foreign competition is becoming a whole lot more competative.
Its a golden period that I think has already twilighted. Single malt Scotches had a good run as being “the drink” in the U.S. - but as you said, whiskey distilleries are opening in the U.S. Small batch bourbon is what now can’t be held in stock - and I can get Glenlivet for cheaper here than I can in Scotland. (And surprisingly, craft gin…).
Right now, the laws that changed U.S. whiskey distilling aren’t old enough for aging (hence craft gin and vodka, which you can bottle with a really short time period). But that’s a decade or so. Scotland is trying to form a country that needs to last longer than a single malt needs to age.
Thanks for the reply. The Scotch whisky industry is a bugbear of mine. Instead of taxing it we really ought to be selling the stuff dirt cheap in Scotland. Unfortunately it’s a convenient moneymaking machine for the State.
Do you know anything about the US legislation that allowed these craft distillers to open? I assume it was a Federal Law. Has it substatially impacted the Vodka and Gin market yet in the US?
Of these thousand or so distilleries I suspect some will produce mediocre whisky; some will produce good whisky; some will end up producing very good whisky. I assume the taxation on this whisky will be less than it is here. The international whisky market will be extremely interesting to watch in future.
Apologies if im going off topic. This subject is of interest to me.
I know its federal law - and I know its recent enough that no one has aged any whiskey - the craft whiskey’s being marketed are coming out of existing distilleries and being blended and rebranded (a lot of it out of an old Diageo plant in Kentucky apparently - my liquor industry experience was back when Diageo was Grand Met and I worked for their Corporate Finance and Tax group - that was long ago). But craft gins and vodkas are all the rage - and tequila seems to have had a moment in the sun. I even know of some craft rum. I have no idea if that is merely a perception thing - or if Absolut is actually losing market share to Titos and Aviation. Or if Scotch is losing market share to Titos and Aviation. I have a friend of a friend who has just released his first gin - he has whiskey casked up - but they won’t see it out of the barrel for a dozen years.
I do know that its hard now to get your hands on craft bourbon - even something like Blantons - which used to be easy to get - can be out of stock. And when I chat with the guys in the liquor store, the bourbon moves - the single malts aren’t. It isn’t a price thing - its a fad thing. Rye - of all things - is drunk by people for whom bourbon is too trendy. My husband and I think all this is hilarious. I was a Kentucky girl, and so have had a soft spot for bourbon since my 21st birthday - and he’s developed one as well - and our friends were Scotch or Irish whiskey drinkers who turned up their noses at the mere idea of “domestic” whiskey. Twenty years ago, people looked at us like we were nuts and good bourbon at a bar was Makers Mark.