读过 Letters from London
Those who opposed her, who felt each day of her rule as a sort of political migraine, tended to make two fundamental miscalculations. The first was to treat her as some kind of miscalculations. ...To the liberal, the snobbish, the metropolitan, the cosmopolitan, she displayed a parochial, small-shopkeeper mentality, puritanical and Poujadiste, self-interested and xenophobic, half sceptred-isle nostalgia and half count-your-change bookkeepping. But to those who supported her she was a plain speaker, a clear and visionary thinker who embodied no-nonsense, stand-on-your-own-two-feet virtue, a patriot who saw that we had been living on borrowed time and borrowed money for far too long.
If socialism's gut appeal lies in the argument from science (which implies inevitability, Thatcherism's gut appeal lay in the argument from nature (which also implies inevitablity). But arguments from nature should always remind us of one of nature's commoner sights: that of large animals devouring small ones.
The second miscalculation was the assumption, made until quite late in the day, that what she was doing to the country could, and would, eventually be undone. ... Now, post-Thatcher, the pendulum continues to swing, but inside a clock that has been rehung on the wall at a completely different angle. Like many, I used to think that the official saturation of the country with market values was a reversible phenomenon; a little skin cancer perhaps, but no irradiation of the soul. I abandoned this belief - or hope - a few Chrismases ago.
Mrs Thatcher's achievements were, in political terms, remarkable. She showed that you could disregard the old pieties about consensus, whether intraparty or cross-party. You could govern the United Kingdom while effectively shrinking your MP base to a purely English party. You could survive while allowing unemployment to rise to levels previously thought politically untenable. You could politicize hitherto unpolitical public bodies, and force holy principles of the market into areas of society presumed sacrosanct. ... You could make the rich richer and the poor poorer until you had restored the gap that existed at the end of the last century. You could do all this and in the process traumatize the Opposition: the presence since 1979 of a Tory Government that has been frequently unpopular yet ineluctably re-elected has driven the Labour Party steadily to the right, until it has abandoned much of what it believed in the Seventies and presents itself now as the party of nice, caring capitalists, as distinct from nasty, uncaring ones.
She and Reagan took readings from the same moral graph. One of the few genuinely comic moments in <<Margaret Thatcher: The Downing Street Years>> is a colour photograph taken during a banquet at No.10. The Prime Minister is banging out a speech while the President looks up at her with an expression of goofy awe. Underneath this official souvenir he has written, 'Dear Margaret - As you can see, I agree with every word you are saying. I always do. Warmest friendship. Sincerely, Ron.'
...in classic playground fashion, we did not really want, or think about wanting, the islands until someone else did. Hence the war sweetly characterized by Borges - a 'vain intellectual' living under a 'common or garden dictator' - as 'two bald men fighting over a comb'.
She can see, for example, that she was the most feted and fetishized of modern Prime Minister, but not that she was also the most loathed. She was loathed in a personal as well as in a political way, since her perceived character - domineering, mean-spirited, divisive, unheeding - seemed to inform and infect her policies.
She cannot conceive that the Falklands expedition might be seen elsewhere not as an early start on the new world order but as the last twitch of an imperial past. She imagines that her obstructive, nagging, bullying attitude to Europe was taken as a sign that Britain was walking tall once more. She thinks that if you insult people you gain their respect.引自 11 - Thatcher