Here’s an important message to CounterPunch readers from
Here at CounterPunch we love Barbara Ehrenreich for many reasons: her courage, her intelligence and her untarnished optimism. Ehrenreich knows what’s important in life; she knows how hard most Americans have to work just to get by, and she knows what it’s going to take to forge radical change in this country. We’re proud to fight along side her in this long struggle. We hope you agree with Barbara that CounterPunch plays a unique role on the Left. Our future is in your hands. Please donate.
Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.
Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.
CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.
The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.
Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)
To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683
Thank you for your support,
Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel
CounterPunch PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558
Thatcher’s Legacy and British Identity
The news of Margaret Thatcher’s death earlier this week was hardly a shock; given her age as well as the ability of social media to conduct miniature dress rehearsals of the event almost once a year since the creation of Twitter. As journalists, economists and politicians queue up to eulogise the Iron Lady, no one doubts her impact, especially as her ideology is still very much alive and kicking in Britain today.
Her death brought a certain catharsis for those on the Left, despite her frail physical and mental state meaning that she was unlikely to be making any public speeches or privatising anything from her bedside in London’s Ritz hotel. This outpouring of relief seemed strange at first, not withstanding that Britain’s current Conservative government is making sure that they pick up where Thatcher left off by ensuring that the poorest in society pick up the slack left by the richest. If anything, her death was a reminder that there is little to celebrate, given both the axe-wielding power of the Conservatives and the total lack of any coherent or believable opposition.
The success, if you can truly call it that, of Thatcherite ideology was to reach beyond politics, especially given its ability to infect the Labour Party at its core, and to change the mentality of British citizens. As Russell Brand writes in the Guardian on the 10th April, “what is more troubling is my inability to ascertain where my own selfishness ends and her neo-liberal inculcation begins…If you behave like there’s no such thing as society, in the end there isn’t.”
Thatcher re-defined what Britain stood for- self-serving and bullishly aggressive, both inside and out. We are still trying to decide if this is really us: are we people who marched in numbers against the invasion of Iraq in 2003 (something that might never have happened without the US-UK relations forged by Thatcher) or are we the nation who grudgingly accepted the financial and moral consequences of the war as they cosied up to George W.Bush’s foreign policy?
Are we a nation who rejects the current government’s besieging of public services, or are we the people who turn their heads to focus on the concocted issues of immigration in the hope that will somehow keep the UK afloat? Most importantly: are we a country that sees value in the existence of community or are we people who will allow the riots that happened across England in 2011 to become a sadly inevitable occurrence?
Nothing showed the divisions in British identity better than the media gulf between the BBC’s coverage immediately following Thatcher’s death and the outpouring that happened via social media. Despite the BBC’s recent promises to increase its coverage from the North of England, the cameras bounced between interviews with elderly former constituents in Finchley, North London and the London studio, ensuring that criticism of the effects of Thatcher’s policy was extremely limited. Meanwhile, across Twitter and Facebook, residents from the towns and communities that Thatcherite policy decimated, posted pictures and videos of pubs full of revellers, singing songs to express the outpouring of relief. In effect, what the residents of the UK were doing on Monday evening was competing to grasp this moment as their own- seeing who could claim the moral high ground, and in the process questioning their own identities.
As the hangovers took hold and plans for a funeral, whose cost to the UK taxpayer is still unknown (some estimates have put it as high as £8-10 million), are unveiled, it is clear that this moment presents an opportunity. Thatcher’s death provides a moment for the residents of the United Kingdom to indulge in their favourite pastime, that being nostalgia with just a hint of self-analysis, and to truly decide if we want to allow her to define us. The pushback against David Cameron’s repulsive “Big Society” idea provides some hope, but the fight goes beyond a need to protest. This is, in its purest sense, a battle for hearts and minds- a fight that decides whether Thatcher’s “no such thing as society” adage is the prism by which we can choose to see society. In the process perhaps there even a chance to finally answer the question that Thatcherite ideology has caused us to ask ourselves while plagued with doubt: is there such a thing as British identity?
Ruth Michaelson is a journalist living and working in the Middle East. She has been published by Index on Censorship, Vice, The New Statesman and Reality Check among others. She’d like it if you followed her on Twitter @_Ms_R