The insignificance of Margaret Thatcher is underscored on CHT with the lack of a timely post on her passing. Certainly, in a nation of stock jobbers, some ‘happy recollection’ would be understandable in Conservative Inc., and the absence on CHT, equally understood. Nothing to do with us.
What struck me, reading the epitaphs and myths (both pro and con) was that Enoch Powell did not receive a mention. Thatcher, like Powell, had been a rival to Heath (who?) in British conservative/Tory politics. Powell removed himself from the scene that Thatcher inherited, bits and parts of the rhetoric retained, if not policy, execution, or even an inkling of understanding in Powell’s thought. (Powell attended a Bilderberg gathering back in the day, so like Robert “Bonesman” Taft, has to be understood in a larger context of jobbing out.)
Thatcher was able to retain Powell’s wing despite being a Pro-American Cold Warrior (Powell considered the US of A an enemy and Russia, a natural ally) thanks to a compliant media that suggested the National Front was her street army—these were the days when Screwdriver was earning for the National Front and it would be news to that crew that they were Thatcher supporters, save they were Cold Warriors rather than Yockeyites or Powellites.
Powell, who still holds some position in American Right mythology, is famously recalled for his Rivers of Blood speech, which is a piece of rhetoric, but he is also the Anglo politician who introduced something close to Austrian School economics language into British political discourse.
Peter Brimelow called Powell the original paleolibertarian; Lew Rockwell recalled Powell’s support for gold and non-interventionism. And I should mention that Brimelow dissents from Sam Francis and Rockwell on the idea that the Rivers of Blood speech cost Powell his career (and I agree).
Only point being is that the passing of Maggie Thatcher, reminded me of Powell and what might have been.