Dancing on Margret Thatcher’s Grave: by Donovan Reynolds Blogger and Independent Writer

 

Dancing on Margret Thatcher’s Grave: by Donovan Reynolds Blogger and Independent Writer

The name Margret Thatcher is like a sorcerer’s curse to the ears of most left leaning working class British Citizen. She is like the rain- loved by some and loathe by others. The announcement of her death on Monday of this week sparked some of the biggest street party from her birthplace in Grantham to Brixton who lined up maliciously to dance on her grave. It’s not my style to dance on people’s grave so when the invite came for me to attend a central London Party this Saturday I politely declined.

The last time I did something vengeful to a dead person was at the age of 27 out of share unadulterated anger -let’s say for politeness sake -I became overwhelmed with alcohol and unresolved childhood anger when I foolishly emptied my bladder on my physically abusive dad’s grave. So as a rule ,feisty as I am I don’t to the murky business of dancing on my enemies grave-at least not anymore. The revelation of it in a burdensome confession to my family I have regretted to this day. As most of my first divorce I had to endure the emotional pain by sulking to myself in private without the emotional support of my avenging family members as pay-back. But let us offer a sober assessment of the late Baroness life and legacy before the lingering hatred for her boil over in the days leading up to her funeral.

Twenty three years after demitting office as Britain’s first woman Prime Minister demitted office at Number 10 Downing Street she died earlier on this week at the Ritz Hotel in London at the age of 87 yrs. from a stroke after a long period of illness. Born in Grantham England the daughter of a local grocer became the first woman leader in British politics. She took over the helm of the conservative led Government in Briton in 1979 when the United Kingdom was considered as the sick economic man in Europe and carried out a number of social and political reforms that were both decisive and divisive. By 1999 when she left office because of the introduction of a deeply unpopular implemented poll tax although she had left the economy in a much healthier position she had by then become the most conflict-ridden leader of post war British Politics. Thatcher’s claims to promote low inflation, the small state, and free markets through tight control of the money supply, privatisation and constraints on the labour movement has been both her success as a leader and her demise. She was loved by US President Ronald Regan at that time for her conviction capitalism and was his key ally with the US in the Cold War and earned her name as the Iron Lady by the Russian press following one of her speeches criticising the USSR.

The Iron Lady earned her hatred because of her determination to reduce the power of the trade unions over plans to close 20 state owned mines and cut 20,000 jobs .She won the dispute at a price tag of 1.5 billion pounds and the loss of thousand s of job in rural Britain leaving to untold hardship on a scale that was unimaginable and closed the door to future female British Prime Ministers. News of her death sparked a feeding frenzy of coal miners across Britain dancing unsympathetically in the streets to the music of Morrissey’s hate fuelled song about the Baroness. While all of this was happening Republicans on the other side of the Atlantic in the US led by Nancy Regan showered praise on her and worshiped at the altar of her macro-economic legacy.

At home in Britain she was accused by comedian Alexi Sayle of making a conscious decision to run down manufacturing and concentrating on selling arms and growing the financial services. Former Labour Prime minister called Lady Thatcher a towering figure while others cynically commented that he was the main success of her Legacy as she bequeathed her crony capitalism him to so much that it seem at times during his premiership he was reading joint right wing hawkish foreign policy document give to him by Gorge Bush.

Margret Thatcher was by far the most masculine Woman among men in British politics: with the exception of Baroness Young, no women were promoted to the Cabinet or to junior Minister. Novelist Lionel Shiver hailed her as a feminist not for what she said but what she did. That compliment coming from a man is hardly comforting when she did so much to undermine women such as freezing child benefits and accused women during her premiership of raising a “crèche Generation”.The only bold feminist statement that she made was by way of a gaffe in 1989 when she declared “we are a grandmother “shortly after the birth of her grandson Michael in 1989.She once disclosed to a personal adviser in private that she reviled the feminist movement yet she was admired by women for her steely determination and her astute and firmness as a leader and she had the beauty and aura of a Hollywood film star. She held a squeaky clean image in her public life yet her son Mark was charged in 2004 with an alleged plot to overthrow the Government of Equatorial Guinea in Africa and he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of f helping to finance the plot and was given a tap on the wrist in order to preserve his ailing mothers dignity. In 2009 her daughter attracted controversy when she was sacked from the BBC by describing a black tennis player as a ‘golliwog’.

In all of this she was extremely successful in government. A historical sweep of Margret thatcher life in politics reads like the story of an extremely successful but reckless male formula one driver who has won the grand prix. However in doing so- have wreaked a lot of havoc along the way and made a few friends and many enemies on his way to pole position. In all of this the honourable Baroness deserves a measured and dignified state funeral with her family, friends and foes sobbing over her casket. Not the ugly spectre a few right wing zealots ready to snort her ashes or vengeful left-wingers waiting to dance on her grave to the wizard of Oz song “Ding Dong! The witch is dead”.

Donovan Reynolds is a Blogger and Independent Writer. He is a British based Social Worker and Human rights Activist. He has an interest in Politics, Culture, and Human Rights. Readers may comment on this blog or email feedback at dannygerm63@hotmail.co.uk

Debunking the Myth of Creationism-Does god really exist?

Debunking the Myth of Creationism-Does god really exist?

An explanation for the origin of the world man and other creatures is found in all human cultures. Traditionally all three Abrahamic religions such as Christianity, Muslims and Judaism- all explain the origin of man and the universe as the handiwork of an omniscient god. When the Secular Rastafarian and Poet Mutabaruka did a Poem” Is God schizophrenic” it plunged religion in an existential crisis. Central to the poem was a scathing request for god in the sky to come down and die. Mutabaruka a clever outspoken humanist trough his poem appealed to religious addicts high on the god delusion to think outside of the box of religious myths.

The promise of a god in the sky is misleading and fancy fairy tale dreamt up and believed by religious theorist. The religious hatemongers were infuriated by this cleverly crafted dialectic that is indeed radical and thought provoking. But on the positive side of the equation it created a quiet revolution unnoticed by the Oxford and Princeton brigade who claimed responsibility for the second wave of Secularism and the contemporary post -religious philosophy. History is replete with records of many secularists who have been persecuted by religious fanatics for not believing in creationism. Their Punishment often range from being burnt at the stake, torture or long periods of imprisonment.

But let us examine the historical trajectory that led to the discovery of evolutionary biology. Even Ancient Greece who staked it claim in Western Civilization was bogged down with the myth of an intelligent designer. Anaximander a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher who lived in Miletus btween610 – 546 BC proposed that animals could be transformed from one kind to another. It seem wholly unusual that the roots of evolution had its early groundings in religious thought as Christian theologians such as Gregory of Naizahus and Augustine maintained that not all species of such was created by god and that some species must have come into existence after the flood as it would have been imposable for Noah ark a single vessel could hold all the species of the world in that time.

Charles Darwin the founder of modern evolution theory: owes a debt of gratitude to his forerunners French naturalist Jean Baptise- Lamark who published a seminal writing’ Philosophical zoology’. The work of the Reverent Thomas Malthus became widely known for his theories about population and its increase or decrease in response to various factors. The six editions of his An Essay on the Principle of Population, published from 1798 to 1826, observed that sooner or later population gets checked by famine and disease. Charles Darwin attributed his seminal theory of the original species to Malthus influence. I hate to admit this but atheist like myself owe a debt of gratitude to early Christian theologian’s for handing us evolutionary biology on a platter.

So let’s get to the meat of the matter -that is -to lay bare the ludicrous idea of creationism. We know from palaeontologists and molecular biologist that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. The oldest know rocks, dated at 3.96 billion years are found in north western Canada. Most professionals in the scientific community that is worth their grain of salt all widely believe that the universe started about 15 billion years ago in the ‘Big Bang’. It was a monumental explosion that sent matter and energy exploding in all directions. As the universe expanded, matter collected into clouds that condensed into galaxies such as our own milky way. Gravitational attracted materials that in many ways condensed into stars where nuclear reaction took place forming small planets like the earth and the sun. This is more comforting than the Adam and Eve and “Yaccubs theory “of Creationism as most of it is scientifically validated and the gaps in understand are emerging continuously.

We owe an infinite amount of gratitude to the work of several evolutionary biologist, palaeontologist archaeologist and genealogist to our understanding of the origin of species most importantly Charles Darwin. We know know that women have their pace in the evolutionary process than the subservient belief that they share a rib from man given to them by god. Evolution is the process of decent with modification. The virtual infinite variation of life are the fruit of evolution and not a designer of a god in a back room call heaven knocking and fitting bones and flesh together with an hammer and an anvil.

There is such too much to say about the evolutionary process that cannot be done in a single blog. Except to end by saying god and creationism is as real as the cow jump over the moon. People accuse me of being self-centred but that accusation is wide of the mark. I owe no apology for being knowledge centred if gods exist- show me the evidence.

Donovan Reynolds is a Blogger and Independent Writer. He is a British based Social Worker and Human rights Activist. He has an interest in Politics, Culture, and Human Rights. Readers may comment on this blog or email feedback at dannygerm63@hotmail.co.uk