Splendid stuff. Many cheers for the marvelous Glenda Jackson. Thanks for the post.
Comment by Kirk Hill — April 10, 2013 @ 11:30 pm
Comment by MB — April 11, 2013 @ 1:31 pm
Glenda Jackson always had guts. Charles Marowitz in his memoir “Burnt Bridges” tells how she broke into acting in 1964. The Theatre of Cruelty was conducting radically different and upsetting auditioning for what would eventually lead to the famous RSC “Marat-Sade” production. “The Bourgeois members of the acting profession, who make up the majority, caught wind of things very early and either stayed away or began to cast opprobrium on the project.” (p.87) Jackson stuck it out.
Comment by Peter Byrne — April 11, 2013 @ 1:44 pm
Glenda Jackson is everything we could want in an elected leader – brilliant, gutsy, heartful about her constituents, outraged at the appalling effects of thatcherism and steadfast in her vision of what a healthy society would look like. And what womanhood should stand for. Hats off, as always.
Comment by Jody Freeman — April 11, 2013 @ 2:19 pm
i suppose with a blood-clot in her noggin
it cud be said that one faction of thatcher’s
organ as been a bleeding well striking success
but afore we piss on her grave ’tis a dead set
imperative that we remember she was only the
neo-con fascists talking-head with a handbag
full of their edicts & while the ruling paradigm
still rules the rusty serving maids voice lives
until wage-slaves take the neccessary steps
Comment by jim sharp — April 12, 2013 @ 12:21 am
Rage is not enough. She’s a MP of New Labour, and was during the entire period of Blair’s leadership. His successor as labour leader Ed Miliband had earlier in the Commons joined in the sycophantic eulogies to Thatcher.
New Labour has no differences of significance, and certainly not of principle with the tory government present policies of withdrawing cash welfare payments across the board, and it is committed, as was Blair to the neo conservative economic agenda.
So what on earth is Jackson doing in such a party?
The central political question for the British left is how to break from New Labour. Glenda Jackson, and a small number of left MP are one further obstackle, because although they oppose much of the party agenda, they nevertheless provide an degree of credibility for the party, by promoting the false idea that it remains a party of left reform.
Comment by Kegan — April 12, 2013 @ 7:51 am
Pissing on her grave is a good start for the memory process.
Comment by Peter Byrne — April 12, 2013 @ 8:20 am
You make my point well.
insults, like mere anger is a distraction.
Comment by kegan — April 12, 2013 @ 7:34 pm
A pithy, high-brow, historical analysis of Thatcher as the Modern Princess of neoliberalism was provided recently by Richard Seymour. This Glenda Jackon’s speech was not. It was, however, a terrific example of someone telling it like it is. Many years ago I marveled at her sensual strength and intelligence in films such as “Sunday, Bloody Sunday” and “Women In Love.” Now, I admire her still theatrical and very brilliant method of speaking truth to power, loyalty to Labor notwithstanding.
Comment by Burghardt — April 18, 2013 @ 9:59 pm
seymour maybe your cuppa coffee
but mcqueen is my cuppa tea
Thatcher: silver bullets, garlic and a wooden stake
Thatcher is not dead. She is not dead because Thatcherism is going strong. Thatcherism is not dead because capitalism is still fighting to expand.
Thatcher was never more than the chair of one executive committee of monopolising capitals. Like Howard, Killard presides over a branch office.
Delightful as is it to chorus ‘Ding-dong, the witch is dead’, Thatcher’s viciousness was not the result of her personality. Similarly, Howard did not serve up WorkChoices because he was a nasty man. He is, indeed, a nasty man but he was serving the needs of capital. Killard continues to do the same with un-Fair Work Australia. Small wonder that Thatcher looked on ‘New Labour” as her greatest achievement.
Shouting abuse at the TV screen might make us feel good. But it ain’t Marxism. Science begins from the need that capital has to expand. Capital flows to where the money is. The biggest chance for profit is at home or in the other metropolitan markets. The 1980s provided lessons around the globe.
To understand Thatcherism we need to go back to the collapse of the post-war settlement. By 1945, the big winners had been the US monopolising capitals. They came out of the Bretton Woods negotiations that year with three instruments to dominate their allies and enemies alike. Those enforcers were the IMF, the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation. Lurking behind that trio was the dollar standard. Henceforth, other economies could exchange US dollars for gold. For this to work, they had to earn US dollars.
This arrangement worked well enough for US capital until the mid-1960s. In 1967, the Wall Street Journal warned against the costs of the Vietnam war. To finance the war, the US was inflating its currency. That meant that its trading ‘partners’ were not getting the full value from their purchases of US dollars. Germany and France led the way in refusing to be short changed. In 1971, Nixon announced the end of convertibility. We are still living under the shadow of the implosion of the post-war settlement.
The biggest losers out of the fiddling with the US dollar had been the oil producers. They got together to win back some of what they had lost. The result was OPEC and the two oil price shocks. The higher petrol prices nearly bankrupted the US makers of gas-guzzlers. Massive re-tooling and devalorisation followed.
Everywhere, the agents of capital scrambled to survive. Nixon declared a trade war against Japan. The aim was to make Tokyo to revalue the Yen, which was giving its exporters a vast advantage and blocking imports. At the same time, the creepy David Rockefeller – Standard Oil and Chase Manhattan Bank – set up the Trilateral Commission. This body had twin aims. One was to bring Japan into the fold alongside the expanding European Community and the US economy. The other was to put a stop to the participatory democracy that had burst out in 1968. One recruit was Jimmy Carter.
Under Carter’s presidency, the head of the Federal Reserve threw the switch for Reaganism by driving up the value of the US dollar. The aim was to purge the US economy of its inefficient manufacturers. The result is the rust-bucket of Detroit.
Meanwhile, under Fraser, Australia was being driven down side roads towards the same goal. Tariff walls no longer promised the highest return on capital for GM and Ford. They had to find a way to beat the Japanese makers. So we got the world car. Parts were made in several countries and shipped here to be assembled. Today, we are staring into the next stage of that solution with the total closure of car-makers. Fraser also set out to break the power of the unions. The O’Shea strike had broken the penal powers of arbitration. The new fetter was the Trade Practices Act and the busting of secondary boycotts. Today, even primary boycotts are illegal.
One more fact shows how late Thatcher or Reagan was in joining the fray. In February 1979, Fraser appointed the Campbell Committee to report on how to regulate the financial sector. US agent Hawke implemented the findings. The most important switch was floating the Australian dollar in December 1983. The currency traders took off. Today, the value of the Australian dollar is so high because those parasites can earn a higher rate of return here than almost anywhere else on the planet. Real interest rates are higher and the economy is more stable. The flow-on is that Australian producers are locked out of export markets. Bye-bye the car-makers and anyone else you care to name.
The need that capital has to expand also found expression in the pressure from the traders to financialise every sphere of life. The sale of government- controlled assets was one example of colonising the home market. Hawke-Keating handed QANTAS and the Commonwealth Bank over to corporates under the lie of ‘privatising’. Now the traders want to get their claws deeper into education, health and retirement funds.
Woven through these drives to restore the rate of return on investment is the ideology of the market. But let’s be clear. The ideas serve the needs of capital to expand just as did Thatcher’s vindictive personality. Her ideas and viciousness were not the cause for ruining the lives of millions.
We must push back against capital at every level. Marxism is our weapon to vanquish bourgeois ideology. For it to work, we have to rise above capitalism’s supersaturated solution of sociological bull-dust. One example is the tut-tutting against Thatcher’s assertion that there is no such thing as society; there are only families and individuals. Marxists spurn waffle about ‘society’. We start from the power structures that exist above and through individuals and households. Thatcher knew there was much more. After all, she presided over the state machinery to promote the welfare of corporations. They are the substance of capitalist ‘society’.
Our world will not be free of Thatcher until we have driven a stake through the heart of capitalism. That will be a day to rejoice. That is the grave to dance on. ‘Ding-Dong, the boss class is dead’. by renowned aust. historian & public interlectual humphrey mcqueen
Comment by jim sharp — April 19, 2013 @ 2:14 am
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
The Rubric Theme Blog at WordPress.com.
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.
Join 1,467 other followers