1Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
That's an easy one - Churchill, during the war years. He really got the people through a terrible time. He wasn't so good in peacetime admittedly, but as a war time leader he was beyond compare.
This is a discussion on Who was Britain's greatest Prime Minister? within the United Kingdom Politics & Political Forum forums, part of the United Kingdom Political Forums category; I am wondering who you all think was Britain's greatest PM and why? I think we can all make an ...
accidental genius!
I am wondering who you all think was Britain's greatest PM and why?
I think we can all make an educated guess to the winner, which leads me to wonder how many generations it will be before he is considered nothing more than an historical figure consigned to the twentieth century.
"The object of universities is not to make skilful lawyers, physicians or engineers. It is to make capable and cultivated human beings." John Stewart Mill
Senior MP
That's an easy one - Churchill, during the war years. He really got the people through a terrible time. He wasn't so good in peacetime admittedly, but as a war time leader he was beyond compare.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Chancellor
I rather discounted Churchill for that very reason; the conditions were so unique and it was a coalition government with just one aim in mind, to win the war. As you say in 'normal' conditions he didn't do so well and just hadn't got the popular support to be able to continue.Originally Posted by Trouble43
That's an easy one - Churchill, during the war years. He really got the people through a terrible time. He wasn't so good in peacetime admittedly, but as a war time leader he was beyond compare.
By a process of elimination that leaves my vote with Thatcher, but I will say right now she did make some big mistakes. For all that though you mustn't forget she received the popular mandate for three consecutive terms so must have been doing something right, and even when she'd gone after the poll tax debacle, the Conservatives still won out for another term with John Major at the helm.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised 'for the good of its victims' may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us 'for our own good' will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C.S. Lewis
Senior MP
Unique or not, those years needed a really strong leader and Churchill was it. He'd get my vote out of the candidates listed every time.
If I could choose anyone from history then I would have to choose Disraeli.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
El Diablo Tejano
Churchill, Thatcher....in that order.
"That's a man.....That's a stand tall, walk straight, put God's share in the collection plate, Man"- Jack Ingram
Senior MP
Op74, I think my vote would go to Clement Attlee who took over a totally bankrupt Britain after the war and built the foundations of democratic socialism . He has never been given the recognition he deserved.
Although I must admire Churchill in spite of his history before WW2, with his failed military campaigns, and his use of strike breaking troops against the poverty stricken Welsh miners on behalf of the mine owners.
He redeemed himself in WW2. I remember as a 12 year old, him rallying the country with his measured and simple sound bite speeches we hung on every word.
BBC - History - Clement Attlee (1883 - 1967)
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
accidental genius!
I agree with you there Expounder, he gets my vote by virtue that I am judging them all by their legacies, as such Churchill's war-time premiership is overshadowed by his lack of acheivement in peace time. That is not to say I do not agree he was a great leader (and certainly best man for the job in 1939), but as Midas points out he was head of a coalition government with one (very important) aim and it was Attlee's government charged with the job of healing a damaged and grieving country which created the NHS, nationalised industry and enabled economic recovery.
"The object of universities is not to make skilful lawyers, physicians or engineers. It is to make capable and cultivated human beings." John Stewart Mill
accidental genius!
Must say though I am quite surprised Winston isn't the run away winner (yet).
"The object of universities is not to make skilful lawyers, physicians or engineers. It is to make capable and cultivated human beings." John Stewart Mill
For me, it has to be Churchill. Yes, a Tory, but the right man for the job at the time and had the dogged resilience to get the nation through a hard, hard time.
P. S, just come back after long absence, whats with the new system, points activity, thanks etc?
Welcome back CS , check out the vBulletin Experience link on the top bar. Thanks is self explanatory and we even have some new Moderators ...
Banned
I'd say Attlee was about the only decent, respectable man ever to hold the job, unless we go back to Gladstone. Many of the others were, after all, tories.
Yes, but they could STILL ( shock horror I know), be good PMs as well as tories.
Banned
How? A man, as the Good Book tells us, cannot serve two masters, and if you serve the people of Britain you can't also serve the rich, surely?Yes, but they could STILL ( shock horror I know), be good PMs as well as tories.
Senior MP
So? If you're a brilliant PM, what does it matter what party you belong to?
I'd rather have a tory PM that saves this country, than, say, a lib dem that kills it. Or even an idiotic nulab one like we have now.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
accidental genius!
I think perhaps the question is whether someone to whom you are ideologically opposed can be a good PM despite introducing policies with which you disagree.So? If you're a brilliant PM, what does it matter what party you belong to?
I'd rather have a tory PM that saves this country, than, say, a lib dem that kills it. Or even an idiotic nulab one like we have now.
"The object of universities is not to make skilful lawyers, physicians or engineers. It is to make capable and cultivated human beings." John Stewart Mill
Conservative Member
I will split this into two categories.
The best peacetime Prime Minister has to be Thatcher. There is no debate there for me.
The best wartime Prime Minister has to be Churchill. There is again no debate there for me.
Senior MP
It's worth pointing out that Attlee was Churchills deputy during WW2 and undertook major responsibilities in the war effort was not just parachuted in, in 1945 to rebuild the country's bankrupt economy.
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
Senior MP
For me peacetime would be Atlee - because, along with Bevane, he brought about the origins of the welfare state. As much as we may moan about it now, it is a lifesaver for many people who would not otherwise be able to support themselves in old age, nor healthcare.
Wartime would have to be Churchill. No contest.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
THATCHER!!!!!!!!! Gaaarrrggghhhh!!!!!!!!!
Haha, CS and LA are going to have a beautiful, loving relationship I thinkTHATCHER!!!!!!!!! Gaaarrrggghhhh!!!!!!!!!
I voted Attlee, as it is unfair to judge others against Churchill IMO. Who is to say that Gladstone, Pitt, Peel, Macdonald or anyone else would not have been so successful in such extraordinary circumstances. Attlee created the welfare state, which kept us away from the horrific goings on in America, with huge numbers of people unable to afford healthcare.
There seems to be a lot of love for Gladstone here. I don't know how many of you have done research on him, but he was a crazed religious fanatic who flagellated himself daily and insisted that the poor had only themselves to blame for their disadvantages at a time when that was even less true than it is now...
Conservative Member
Thatcher is truly a gem of Britain.THATCHER!!!!!!!!! Gaaarrrggghhhh!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, maybe Attlee is the one.
I voted for Winston- but its a hard one
Conservative Member
This is a difficult one because all three of them are truly brilliant Prime Ministers.
Churchill needs no real introduction, as Thatcher does not. But Attlee with help created the National Health Service, which is truly a system we should be thankful for.
Senior MP
I notice that, not surprisingly, Blair is still on a big fat zero. I can only assume if Brown was there we'd actually be entering minus digits?
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Anti-Ascription Crusader
Voted Attlee. It's far more challenging to be the originator of something than the protector, destroyer or wholesaler.
Generational Robbery and My Rantings
FAIR VOTES NOW - Sign the petition
"Modern capitalism, organising the reduction of all social life to a spectacle, cannot offer any other spectacle than that of our own alienation."
~ Vaneigem/Kotanyi ~
Conservative Member
Let me guess.
Protector = Churchil
Destroyer = Thatcher
Wholesaler = B'liar
Anti-Ascription Crusader
see above
Generational Robbery and My Rantings
FAIR VOTES NOW - Sign the petition
"Modern capitalism, organising the reduction of all social life to a spectacle, cannot offer any other spectacle than that of our own alienation."
~ Vaneigem/Kotanyi ~
Conservative Member
I was trying to see this as someone who does not have support for Thatcher.
Those who do not support Thatcher generally see her as a destroyer of Britain. Whilst I put B'lair has Wholesaler because he sold Britain to the EU.
B'liar did not literally sell Britain but the point stands.
Senior MP
Not sure that the british people who lived through the war years would necessarily agree with you on this one. I think protecting a country and its people from the actions of a dictator like Hitler are just as commendable as what Atlee did.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Banned
What is 'this country' except a piece of land? The people in it are robbed by the rich or they are robbers: if you are on the side of the rich you may be a brilliant robber. So - who needs brilliant robbers?So? If you're a brilliant PM, what does it matter what party you belong to?
I'd rather have a tory PM that saves this country, than, say, a lib dem that kills it. Or even an idiotic nulab one like we have now.
Banned
Hard, cold, sharp-edged and ultimately totally useless except for cutting glass.
What complete and utter rubbish.
You are the very epitome of what is wrong with this country an opinion I garner based on your previous contributions. You are Anti-Tory; Anti-Establishment; Anti-Religion; quite simply you have no faith in anything including yourself. You no longer seem able to identify what you stand for only what you oppose. Very sad!
Banned
On the contrary, I have every faith in myself, the working class, socialism and my own own people. I dislike thieves, mugs and liars, certainly. Don't you?
I consider taking one mans endeavour to feed another mans lack of is akin to thievery - the basic tenet of Socialism is the redistribution of wealth after-all. I take no issue with or hold any contempt for the working class - the underclass however? I fear for my own people and our reliance on state and acceptance of what is, should be.
Senior MP
What are you on about? Surely if someone is trying to help us that is more important than what party they are affiliated to?
Which would you rather have a tory PM who helped, or a nulab one who tortured?
Oh and this country is where I was born, where I live and I live with my family. It might be a Godforsaken little rock to some, but to me it is more than that; it is more than dirt and muck - it is mine and it belongs to all of us that reside here. I think, kynaston, you will find an awful lot of people feel the same.
As for sides - I am on no one's side in politics. I am on the side of the poor and working class - whoever helps them, us, has my vote. End of.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Senior MP
But what is a mug? What does that word mean to you? Someone easily taken advantage of? But surely the fault then lies with the one taking the advantage?
To me it means someone who is vulnerable; someone in need. NOT someone I would dislike; rather someone I would try to help if I could.
Your superior attitude does you no credit at all - a lack of compassion for your fellow man will only come back to bite you.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Banned
'Underclass' is like 'untermensch' - a mental preparation for murder by the bosses. The point of socialism is to take wealth away from the thieves and give it back to the vast majority whose labour creates it. Who are 'your people' - the rich? Nobody is threatened by socialism except those who try to prevent democratic control of the economy, as we all know, despite the VAST resouces that are spent on trying to confuse us.
Senior MP
So, who do you support? Gordon Brown? Or Gormless Brown as he's more 'affectionately' known?
A man responsible for thrusting this country in the worst recession since the 30's. Or Blair? A man responsible for lying, not only to his country, but to the rest of westminster, just to play poodle to Bush and follow the US into an illegal war. Causing so many of our brave servicemen to die in a conflict they shouldn't have even been fighting.
Or perhaps you support plain anarchy? Where the dog eat dog world of the survival of the fittest reigns supreme? But are you sure you are one of the fittest? If not, you could find yourself being fed on, instead of feeding on others.
A superior opinion does not automatically lead to a superior life - it merely means you might think more of yourself than you actually are.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Banned
Anyone who believes interested propaganda, like, for instance, working-class readers of the Sun, BNP members, working-class tories and such. Yes, the greatest fault is with the crooks, but it is reasonable to get fed up with those who continue to invest in obviously-dead horses, I think.
I've been trying rather a long time, and being severely tried too. You are right in theory.
Well, at least I haven't become a social-democrat or a bliarite. I have, in fact, considerable compassion for my fellow-man: he needs kicking awake to get to the lifeboats the rich are monopolising while he drunkenly snores.
Sir, you are bordering on Godwins Law.
I use underclass due to a portion of society no longer fit to assume the title working class. Their economic deprivation and social exclusion is born from their own lack of aspiration, endeavor and agency, instead expecting the state and in most part the working class to support them.
Socialism does not work in practice, and more often than not creates exactly the opposite to its original intention. When I say my people I refer to the British, I can look past a mans wealth and realise that in many cases it was his endeavour that created such. By democratic economy I assume you mean state control? Everyone should be fearful of this as it benefits nobody, when the state fails everything is lost.
Senior MP
Oh so you have nowt but contempt for the working classes? But aren't they the same people you've just lauded to Tete as being the ones who should have the wealth? So you hate the rich and the poor? Not very sensible as those two classes are the ones who run the country - the pseudo intellectuals neither work nor hoard, they merely float along on the efforts of others.
You never give up on those in need. Being used is a sad side effect of helping others; some are merely users, but it should never stop anyone from still endeavoring to aid those genuinely in need.I've been trying rather a long time, and being severely tried too. You are right in theory.
Neither have I; my politics rely strictly on what someone will do to aid those most in need in society.Well, at least I haven't become a social-democrat or a bliarite. I have, in fact, considerable compassion for my fellow-man: he needs kicking awake to get to the lifeboats the rich are monopolising while he drunkenly snores.
I don't believe in kicking a man when he's down. I certainly don't believe in thinking I know everything either - I am always willing to learn and indeed I have learnt much here on this forum.
I believe we are all born equal - its just that some think they are more equal than others; in either station, money or intellect. The latter is the most dangerous.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Banned
Go back and see what I actually said. I don't hate anybody - what a total waste of time and energy! The mugs who follow the Sun, the Tories and the BNP are doing my people out of a life with their vomitous perversions. They don't have to - they just can't be bothered to fight the Al Capones who run this dump. The working class have to become conscious of themselves AS a class, or they are just the famous 'underclass' we are told about. Take care - you'll end up like slavophils worshipping the drunken peasantry.
No, it shouldn't, but you should stop playing Lady Bountiful and remind them WHY they are in need.
You are changing the metaphor - I was talking of kicking a drunkard awake to see his desperate danger. 'Equal' is just a daft song - people are neither equal nor unequal - a knife is better than another knife because it cuts better - but what are PEOPLE for, man? You are being robbed rotten by a gang who will soon burn the world. That's fact. All the rest is mouth-music.
I clarified this point. The 'underclass' and 'working class' are 2 distinct groups not to be confused or conflated.
How erroneous to claim the working class have no consciousness of themselves - it is the defining term most individuals use in describing their identity.
Conservative Member
These rich people you speak of are not stealing off the poor, they are making money off the poor. What you and socialism advocates is the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor and for those who work to share the fruits of their toil.
However, to me socialism; in its attempt to redistribute the wealth, is stealing money from the rich to give to the poor.
That statement backedfired on you really.
In my opinion Socialism rewards those who do not wish to work but merely wish to feed and latch themselves onto the hard working masses.
[quote=Trouble43;61040]Oh so you have nowt but contempt for the working classes? But aren't they the same people you've just lauded to Tete as being the ones who should have the wealth?
I have heard of contemporary politics and opinions but this is something else, he has changed in opinion in the time of a thread.
Indeed you are correct. When a method fails to help those in need, you give up? No. You merely try a different method.You never give up on those in need. Being used is a sad side effect of helping others; some are merely users, but it should never stop anyone from still endeavoring to aid those genuinely in need.
Senior MP
I'm sorry but your contemptuous remarks such as these only goes to show you do hate those of us who are not adhering to the psuedo intellectualism that you apparently do.
The 'mugs' you mention work just as hard as the rest of the people here - their political leanings or reading matter do not make them lesser human beings. Well, not to anyone except the pseudo intellects who feel they are superior to everyone else.
I am NOT an 'under'class - I am 'under' no one. I am my own person, I may have issues and problems but they are down to me. I certainly look down on no one else, because I am not better than anyone else. But I understand this would be a totally alien concept to you.
Who exactly are 'your' people? More psuedo intellectuals that feel they are so much better than the 'mugs' who do the work and the 'robbers' who run things (in your opinion)? I can't agree with your take on society; I have learnt an awful lot about human nature in recent years, and your type is the scariest.
If you are being undermined, whose fault is it? Soon there will be a general election - even us mugs will have a vote; we will use it to the best of our abilities. I suggest you do the same.
Oh Im not 'playing lady bountiful'; I merely help those in need; people like me. You would understand that if you bothered to visit the gutter most of us now live in once in a while. Your ivory towered, psuedo intellectual existence does not really give you a true picture of the real world the rest of us 'mugs' inhabit.No, it shouldn't, but you should stop playing Lady Bountiful and remind them WHY they are in need.
I believe if we all help each other there is hope for survival; by your standards, its a case of let the needy fall so long as you don't suffer. But of course you wouldn't let it stop you telling them why you're letting them rot.
I have to admit that I prefer my way.
You are changing the metaphor - I was talking of kicking a drunkard awake to see his desperate danger. 'Equal' is just a daft song - people are neither equal nor unequal - a knife is better than another knife because it cuts better - but what are PEOPLE for, man? You are being robbed rotten by a gang who will soon burn the world. That's fact. All the rest is mouth-music.
No, I am merely pointing out what all your threads say. You feel you are better than everyone else and you'd kick a downed dog to step up the ladder so you can better yell out your theories to those of us further down.
'what are people for,man?' is the call of the greater tie dyed hippy - or, in extreme cases, the lesser bespectacled psuedo intellectual. In fact the entire rest of that paragraph is well known hippy/PI mumbo jumbo. Designed to merely indicate how you are somehow 'in on' the real story whilst, apparently, the rest of us plod along in life.
I hate to tell you this, but the real story is there is a world recession and most of us are struggling to survive day to day. No one is spouting 'mouth music' nor is anyone wondering 'what people are for, man'. Mainly because we're all to busy trying to retain our jobs, homes and families - we don't have the luxury of sitting around contemplating our navels.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
Banned
The rich don't work - they steal. Workers work, owners steal. Socialism is the expropriation of the expropriators - in other words we rob the thieves of their swag, wicked old us. You see it otherwise because your economic position is different, presumably, since you seem passably bright.
I also find it hard to see ridiculously rich people and distressfully poor people- it isn't right, but as long as the people who matter are those who have the most cash..... it ain't about to change.
Conservative Member
So not only are you foolish but rude too.
Rich people do work, and quite hard - unless they inherited it.
It merely requires the working class to work hard also. If the working class word hard enough they get promoted.
Chancellor
That is utter rubbish! The rich are the providers of the incentive and capital needed to get industry and commerce moving and are the providers of the money that 'the workers' earn. It's a bargain struck in a free market, if you ignore any government-imposed constraints on both sides, and both parties to such an agreement benefit.
In its widest terms, socialist is a misguided attempt to both level a playing field which will never be level and to rob from those who have and give to those who can't or won't. People are not equal and no amount of left-wing intellectualising will make them so.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised 'for the good of its victims' may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us 'for our own good' will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C.S. Lewis
Senior MP
That analogy is rubbish. I am a worker, but I know not all owners steal; that is a ridiculous assumption made by someone who obviously doesn't know the working world very well.
Do you hear that? That's the sound of no one caring - anon
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks