We are we are, what is it with you lot, far right, police informers, drug dealers and other low life not of course not forgeting you?
Today was the start of the Great Miners’ Strike of 1984/85.
- Thread starter e19896
- Start date
We are we are, what is it with you lot, far right, police informers, drug dealers and other low life not of course not forgeting you?
dennisr
the acceptable face
I was going to say stick with your no 2 id stall, did note how you moved from on your own to the hub of those with you, our time will come, ha 60 pounds at long last BNDC has been usefull, shame you are not with your reformist polatics no2id what a strange bunch of bed fellows dear belboid, least we forget and we shall allways rember those scabs, becuase our time shall come, where we are proven right..
No2id are sound. It is only them stopping the country becoming a total police state.
i do notice a lot of sniping of about a million progressive organisations/small parties, it's been like that since the 80's i guess.
Me? I respect anyone doing something to fight all the variations of Tory thinking
<removed - FM>
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Maybe we shouldn't make reference to other posters' lives and accuse them of RL stuff hey.
<snipped again - FM>
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
You're not fucking getting it.
Do it again and you're out of here. Attempts to reveal RL data, let alone slander people, are something we take a bit fucking seriously.
Do it again and you're out of here. Attempts to reveal RL data, let alone slander people, are something we take a bit fucking seriously.
Banned for what telling a truth? and what belboid bullys lies bullshits and all is well, there is no slander, just truth oh well the community know about him and his mates let them deal with him, what lampost are for idd guess.
dennisr
the acceptable face
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
"thus always to tyrants eh? Scargill striped of voting rights by NUM - of course the guardian has it as 'expelled.
Scargill was arguing that no coal mine should ever be closed for any reason other than exhaustion. He believed coal output was a given, and that government's job was to organize the economy to ensure that it was burnt. That meant antiquated, energy intensive, heavy industry.
To follow that dictum would have been to sentence the country to a low growth future. But by the time of the strikes, the economy shifted from a structure in which a 2/3% increase in economic growth required a 7% growth in electricity, to economic growth on roughly constant electricity generating capacity, to the considerable enrichment of the (other) working classes.
So by the time of the strike, under Scargill's bonkers economic nostrums, the country was stockpiling massive quantities of subsidised, unburnable coal which was absorbing capital that otherwise could have been used to expand the economy. Ironically, all the surplus coal that Scargill generated was simply stockpiled at the power stations, with stocks rising from 11 million tonnes to around 30 million tonnes just before the strike, and allowed power generation to be maintained throughout the strike.
And every country needs secure energy supplies. Coal was indigenous and abundant. But, in Scargill's hands, it was not secure.
From the perspective of today, basing our power generation system on such an aggressive greenhouse gas source looks deranged. But even then, coal economics was marginal at best when the health and environmental costs of its production and consumption were internalised.
He was the agent of his own misfortune, and the people he represented were misled in every sense of the word.
To follow that dictum would have been to sentence the country to a low growth future. But by the time of the strikes, the economy shifted from a structure in which a 2/3% increase in economic growth required a 7% growth in electricity, to economic growth on roughly constant electricity generating capacity, to the considerable enrichment of the (other) working classes.
So by the time of the strike, under Scargill's bonkers economic nostrums, the country was stockpiling massive quantities of subsidised, unburnable coal which was absorbing capital that otherwise could have been used to expand the economy. Ironically, all the surplus coal that Scargill generated was simply stockpiled at the power stations, with stocks rising from 11 million tonnes to around 30 million tonnes just before the strike, and allowed power generation to be maintained throughout the strike.
And every country needs secure energy supplies. Coal was indigenous and abundant. But, in Scargill's hands, it was not secure.
From the perspective of today, basing our power generation system on such an aggressive greenhouse gas source looks deranged. But even then, coal economics was marginal at best when the health and environmental costs of its production and consumption were internalised.
He was the agent of his own misfortune, and the people he represented were misled in every sense of the word.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Coal wasn't in Scargills hands it was in the NCB's. The Tories took on the miners to break the trade union and their detrmination was bolstered by memories of 1974.
Coal was of coure imported during the strike , from those countries that subisidised its production.
Errr, no. The miners pushed through The Plan for Coal when Wilson's minority government took office, spending £600m to create 42 million tonnes of (unusable) new capacity while restricting imports. Inflation increased the costs another 74%. The union, NCB and government were all best pals.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
No, he argued that no pit should be closed while still economic to run. Take a look at the history of pit closures before and during Scargill's tenure. Plenty of unexhausted pits closed prior to 1984.
Right, so the NUMs' pushing for British Coal/The NCB to invest in research around "clean coal" technologies didn't happen?
It wasn't in his hands. He didn't own the pits, the mineral rights or the extraction licences, he merely led the trade union of the organised labour force, a trade union that acted within democratically-mandated boundaries.
So it'd all have been fine and dandy if those pesky health and environmental costs had remained externalities, as they did during private ownership, hmm?
Well, thanks for the Daily Telegraph version of history, even if it doesn't accord that closely with reality.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Miners aren't legislators, so can't enact or push through legislation, and given that Wilson's government was indeed a minority government at that time, can you explain how "The Plan for Coal" could be "pushed through" without recourse to Conservative and Liberal votes, even on a three line whip?
Yes. The miners brought the country to a state of national emergency in '73/74 through their control of the fuel source for electricity generation. The strike cost £103 million and no opposition was going to risk that again.
It took a few years before the government could stockpile coal at the power stations and diversify the fuel with oil. Until then the miners had their hands on the country's balls and, by extension, the government's. Their block vote and the government's minority position gave them leverage, which they extended by exploiting the Bennite struggle arising from Wilson's attempt to marginalise him by making him Secretary of State for Energy. It was billed as Britain's solution to the oil crisis, but it was Labour settling with the Miners.
Reference your other statement about Scargill's view of pit closures: his beliefs are well documented. He'd been a Communist, he held a crude Marxist theory of class struggle, and believed the NUM was a key instrument for establishing a Socialist paradise. So where Gormley focussed on wages and working conditions, his "principle" was no pit closures under any circumstance, which he held onto with impressive tenacity.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
they also controlled the TV and invaded schools, indoctrinating mind-control propaganda into childrens heads - why do you think there were so many fireplaces around at that time?? why do you think barbeques are so popular, even today, were it not a result of scargill's malicious legacy?? and now they're even trying to brainwash us to have them in winter ...
when will the sheeple wake up?
its all lies i tell you - LIES
OK.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I find it interesting how you ignore the World Energy Crisis which led, in part, to the 3 Day Week. Furthermore, Heath wanted to smash the unions. He failed.
This is a horrendous cliche
Are you saying that there is no class struggle because we're all equal now (thanks to neo-liberalism)?
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
can I suggest you see a doctor, or perhaps take a lie down?
What - a ten per cent reduction (decimation) is noteworthy? We managed to get rid of a lot more that that proportion in the UK.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
So, the miners took legitimate industrial action, rather than "pushing through The Plan for Coal", yes?
Leverage does not constitute control. In any struggle there are two sides, so why are you piling so much of your opprobrium on one side of the struggle, and so little on those )across the parties) whose hands were actually holding the parliamentary reins of power?
The number of working pits halved between 1974 and 1984. So much for "no pit closures under any circumstances".
Do try and transcend your personal animosities.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
She's being no more hysterical than you.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
They also put fluoride in the coal so that when people burnt it the NWO could implant a secret mind control chip into their brains, so that they would become brainwashed serfs, servants of Arthur Scargill's diabolical plan to take England under communist-Masonic rule. Thatcher knew this. And that's why they tried to DESTROY HER - be careful of they'll destroy you too
Similar threads
