Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
How were the 1980's politically?
ForYourEyesOnly
In the untained cradle of the heavens
A bit bored, so I decided to make a political thread. In retrospect, how were the 80's as a political decade? A lot of long-lasting leaders (or at least, longer-lasting than their predecessors) came to power in or right before the 80's, with the UK's Margaret Thatcher and the US's Ronald Reagan being the most famous examples. Mikhail Gorbachev, Deng Xiaoping, Pope John Paul II and Helmut Kohl were also highly respected world leaders. Here in Australia, Bob Hawke became Prime Minister in '83 (two months after I was born) and became one of our most widely-respected leaders.
So what do we think about these people, or the events they were involved in? You can discuss your country's politics specifically, or international politics. You might even want to discuss another country's politics.
So what do we think about these people, or the events they were involved in? You can discuss your country's politics specifically, or international politics. You might even want to discuss another country's politics.
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Who did you vote for in '80 and '84?
What did you think of H.W. Bush and Thatcher?
Well, you seem to hate Conservatives, so I don't imagine you would've liked Thatcher either, especially given her relationship with Reagan.
Huh. Doesn't seem like anybody here is a Conservative fan. Doesn't matter - I'm not, either.
I understand Clinton was very popular, but I thought Carter was hated by a fair few for not being able to do anything? I have some friends in the US who thought he was basically politically impotent.
I always heard about how much he contributed to the end of the Cold War and his discussions with Gorbachev. But upon a bit of investigation, it seems to me like Reagan was somewhat paranoid of the nuclear arms race and couldn't fully devote himself to ending it, and it seems like it was Gorbachev's moderateness that contributed more to the end of the Cold War than Reagan's "tear down this wall!" speech or anything of the sort.
I also heard the about the other side of the story, though - that Reagan and Thatcher were widely criticized in their final two years, apparently because they were showing an onset of Alzheimer's (and in her final two years, Thatcher seemed to be less powerful without Reagan).
Regardless of how effective or ineffective Reagan's Presidency was, he seemed like a nice bloke. Similarly, whatever controversiality Thatcher stirred up in her Prime Ministership, she should be credited for her unwavering strength of character and uncompromising politics. I mean, at least they wouldn't stand for the overwhelming political correctness of today.
So yeah, Robocop ended up being more or less a visionary documentary. 8-|
Basically, I agree with @Birdleson and @BeatlesSansEarmuffs. Yes.
My first election I could vote in was 1976, now that I think back. I voted for Carter.
But my friends and I were following Nixon early on, when I was quite young. Not one of us that I can recall (neighborhood of about 15 kids) felt comfortable with him, to put it politely. Many issues. Same with Reagan as an adult; many issues. Did I have Republican friends at that point? Yes, but politics was not the center of our friendship.
In my world, we cheered when Nixon resigned. My mom was sad (she came from lifelong Republic voters).
So as for Reagan being really beloved - that was in the press, yes, but it was not true in my world.
Nice point, @chrisisall.
I just remembered Jessica Lange saying (on her Actors Studio interview years ago) that she had left the U.S. as a very young adult and was living and working in Europe. She came back to the U.S. just to see Nixon resign and leave the White House. That made me smile. :)
Not a master of British politics myself, but I might be able to help. What were you interested in knowing?
I can, however, speak for Margaret Thatcher, who definitely caused problems with some of her policies, but for her unwavering and uncompromising style of politics, and the ease with which she destroyed her opponents in parliamentary debates, I'd say she was an effective Prime Minister - perhaps one of the greatest in our history. She's as controversial now as she was back when she was in power, though.
I'm not done with it myself, but it's not bad and offers very comprehensive insights into Miner's Strike.
For her foreign policy, I don't think you can get much better than Thatcher's War: The Iron Lady on the Falklands, which is an E-book extract of The Downing Street Years, which was written by Thatcher herself. Here's an article of a few years back which recalls how Thatcher shrugged off Reagan's attempts to pacify her and call for a ceasefire: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/29/world/europe/falklands-war-caused-rare-friction-for-thatcher-and-reagan.html?_r=0
I'd also recommend reading Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World, where she writes of the post-Cold War world, but draws her conclusions from "lessons learnt in the Cold War". She makes repeated references to the years that she was in power. If you found all of the above interesting, you should try your hand at The Downing Street Years, which is Thatcher's memoir of her premiership.
Here's my take on things. Thatcher is divisive like Reagan appears to be, and from my experience, divisiveness is usually indicative of effectiveness. Both Thatcher and Reagan were very effective in head office - Thatcher because of her unrivalled willpower, and Reagan because he managed to restore a sense of the American people's pride and faith in the President which was lacking ever since Watergate. Say what you will about their policies - even I admit Thatcher's policies were problematic and that she was too Conservative for me - but there's a reason that they're such important and divisive figures in political history.
They were both flawed - Reagan for his inability to handle any sort of major crisis, Thatcher for being too headstrong for her own good - and they both made mistakes, such as Reagan's lamentable approach to problems in the Middle East (which, as I've heard, almost became his Watergate) and Thatcher sealing her own fate with the poll tax. Which reminds me - both are reviled for the taxes and unemployment that rose dramatically during their time in office. But at the end of the day, this level of polarization is really just because of the extremity of their politics/political alignment. They have to be praised for the circumstances they came to office in and the problems they encountered. They didn't handle everything perfectly, but then again, no politician did. That they remain praised by academics who could view their terms in a larger context and probably had less biases than most of us suggests to me that they really were effective in the top office.
Anyway, take it from someone whose first two votes were for Thatcher and who mostly heard good things about Reagan all through his life (and probably not enough of the other side).
To my knowledge, Britain was in an economic malaise during James Callahan's time, and Jimmy Carter also presided over a recession.
Both were seen as weak and ineffective, with Britain in the throes of both unemployment & an inflationary spiral (stagflation) which Callahan chose to contain by imposing public sector wage caps. This resulted in widespread strikes during the 'Winter of Discontent' of 78/79. The public lost faith & this directly resulted in Maggie's election and platform during the following year as well as her mandate to 'break the unions'.
In the US, Carter also presided over stagflation. Moreover, he was in office during some quite significant foreign affairs events which the US was seen as losers on, namely the Iranian Revolution and subsequent hostage crisis, the 2nd OPEC oil crisis, & the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Domestically, there was also the Three Mile Island Nuclear incident. The public was longing for American strength again & Reagan sold it. Sounds familiar, no?.
As far as Carter & the Iranian hostage situation is concerned, let's not forget that Reagan meddled (quite illegally, immorally, and to my mind unforgivably) in that situation, essentially promising the Iranians arms for the hostages if he were to win the presidential election, i.e, "Just keep our guys until I take office & we'll both get what we want." How did he get away with it? Because he's Saint Ronnie and too many people can hear, see & speak no evil regarding him.
As for Reagan, I give Reagan very little or no breaks actually. "Nice guy" - maybe to an extent and certainly projected that publicly, but that does not in itself make a good leader or good president. His meddling with the hostage situation was horrible, I agree, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs and @Birdleson. I honestly cannot think of anything that I remember from his time as president that I considered to be a good thing. I'll give that more thought, but nothing is coming to mind. Breaking down the Berlin Wall ... ok, he had some impetus in that but I am not ready to give him full credit for that either. It does not matter to me that many Americans perhaps still applaud him. I don't.
His disregard for people, especially lower income and poor, his attacks on welfare and drug policies (along with Nancy) ... I cannot say he was good for our country, no.
Divisiveness as "... indicative of effectiveness" ~ I do very respectfully disagree with that.
Which reminds me - Gorbachev, Reagan and Thatcher were all very divisive figures, then and today. Domestically, they're reviled, but internationally, they're revered. I wonder why that is.