Margaret Thatcher at 100: Legacy of Britain's 'Warrior Queen'

Margaret Thatcher, who would have turned 100 on Oct. 13, remains one of the most polarizing figures in modern British history.

She died on April 8, 2013, at the age of 87.

Revered by supporters as a “warrior queen” and the domestic counterpart to Winston Churchill, she is credited with reviving Britain’s economy, breaking the power of trade unions, reducing taxes, and standing firm against socialism and Marxism.

To her critics — miners, industrial workers, and academics on the left — she destroyed traditional industries and trampled on ideological dreams, leaving lasting resentment in communities that never forgave her.

Yet Thatcher disdained consensus, seeing it as weakness, and relished confrontation in pursuit of principle.

The mention of her very name still evokes snarls, especially in two quarters.

First, there were the coal miners, with their powerful union, as well as other workers in the heavy industries of yesteryear. They were doomed to decline, but some of their labor leaders ensured that it was anything but orderly.

Thatcher stood up to the coal miners and their powerful union, as well as other industry workers, and defeated them.

Then, in the 1970s, a lot of those on the left had convinced themselves that Britain could be on the verge of a Marxist transition to socialism. To them, decline meant opportunity.

Thatcher was determined to frustrate their hopes, and she succeeded.

By the time she had been in power for 10 years, the “isms” had become “was-isms.” Marxism, which had seemed potent, was no more than an intellectual corpse.

This created another faction of Thatcher-haters.

But there is no danger of her reputation being obscured in a fog of consensus — and it ought to be easy to vindicate her status as a world-historical leader.

As for comparisons to Churchill, one similarity is evident: both were crucially involved with the U.S.

Churchill's relations with the U.S. were more complex, though.

Early in his career, he did not get on with President Theodore Roosevelt, which seemed surprising.

One would have thought that the two had much in common. That might have been the problem.

Alice Roosevelt Longworth, Roosevelt's eldest daughter, thought so. “They were too alike,” she once said.

From the outset, Churchill knew that American participation was the only hope of winning World War II and he strained every sinew to woo President Franklin D. Roosevelt. 

Despite that, strains appeared in the relationship as the war went on. It is noteworthy that Churchill did not attend FDR's funeral.

With President Ronald Reagan, everything was different.

Reagan was very fond of Thatcher. Her feelings were less sentimental, but she respected him.

This did not mean that he always did what she wanted.

When Argentina in 1982 invaded the British Falkland islands, Reagan’s Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick seemed far more interested in supporting the Argentinian military junta than in supporting America's most important ally.

Perhaps fortunately for the United Kingdom, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger was staunchly on Britain's side.

Once, while interviewing Thatcher, I suggested that there was a paradox in her relationship with Reagan.

She approved of ministers who could master detail.

Given his lack of interest in that approach to politics, would she have found any place for him in her government?

“Ron may not engage himself in detail,” she told me, “but he understands the principles necessary for the restoration of American greatness.”

Thatcher achieved her wins — from preventing nationalized industries from plundering the public purse to reducing income tax rates to a postwar low — with a formula of mental toughness, force of personality and a simple faith.

She revived the animal spirits of the people she most identified with, the middle classes, the bedrock of the country's prosperity.

Her first 100 years will be celebrated. If there is justice in history, the celebrations will be repeated down the centuries.

Well done, thou good and faithful servant.

Bruce Anderson is a London-based writer with close ties to Britain’s Conservative Party.