What do you think?
Rate this book
Margaret Thatcher's Memoirs #1-2
Margaret Thatcher: The Autobiography
A newly edited, single-volume commemorative edition of ‘The Path to Power’ and ‘The Downing Street Years’; this is Margaret Thatcher in her own words.
Margaret Thatcher was the towering figure of late-twentieth-century British politics. Now following her death in 2013, this is her account of her remarkable life.
Beginning with her upbringing in Grantham, she goes on to describe her entry into Parliament. Rising through the ranks of this man’s world, she led the Conservative Party to victory in 1979, becoming Britain's first woman prime minister.
Offering a riveting firsthand version of the critical moments of her premiership – the Falklands War, the miners' strike, the Brighton bomb and her unprecedented three election victories, the book reaches a gripping climax with an hour-by-hour description of her dramatic final days in 10 Downing Street.
Margaret Thatcher's frank and compelling autobiography stands as a powerful testament to her influential legacy.
Margaret Thatcher was the towering figure of late-twentieth-century British politics. Now following her death in 2013, this is her account of her remarkable life.
Beginning with her upbringing in Grantham, she goes on to describe her entry into Parliament. Rising through the ranks of this man’s world, she led the Conservative Party to victory in 1979, becoming Britain's first woman prime minister.
Offering a riveting firsthand version of the critical moments of her premiership – the Falklands War, the miners' strike, the Brighton bomb and her unprecedented three election victories, the book reaches a gripping climax with an hour-by-hour description of her dramatic final days in 10 Downing Street.
Margaret Thatcher's frank and compelling autobiography stands as a powerful testament to her influential legacy.
700 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 9, 2013
440 people are currently reading
2964 people want to read
About the author
Margaret Thatcher
99 books303 followersBritish politician Baroness Margaret Hilda Thatcher from 1979 served; measures against inflation, a brief war in the Falkland Islands in 1982, and the passage of a poll tax marked her prime administration to 1990.
Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Thatcher, LG, OM, PC, FRS (née Roberts) of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990 and Leader of the Conservative Party from 1975 to 1990. She was the first and to date only woman to hold either post.
She went to read chemistry at Somerville College, Oxford. She was selected as Conservative candidate for Finchley in 1958 and took her seat in the House of Commons in the following year of 1959. Upon the election of Edward Heath in 1970, people appointed Thatcher as secretary of state for education and science. In 1974, she backed Sir Keith Joseph for the Conservative party leader, but he fell short and afterward dropped out the race. Thatcher entered and led the Conservative party in 1975. She defiantly opposed the Soviet Union, and her tough-talking rhetoric gained her the nickname the "iron lady." As the Conservative party maintained leads, Thatcher went in the general election of 1979.
The longest tenure of Thatcher the longest since that of Lord Salisbury and was the longest continuous period in office since the tenure of Lord Liverpool in the early 19th century. This first woman led a major party in the United Kingdom and held any of the four great offices of state. After her resignation, she was ennobled as Thatcher, of Kesteven in the County of Lincolnshire, which entitled her to sit in the House of Lords. During her tenure, she needed sleep of just four hours in a night.
Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Thatcher, LG, OM, PC, FRS (née Roberts) of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990 and Leader of the Conservative Party from 1975 to 1990. She was the first and to date only woman to hold either post.
She went to read chemistry at Somerville College, Oxford. She was selected as Conservative candidate for Finchley in 1958 and took her seat in the House of Commons in the following year of 1959. Upon the election of Edward Heath in 1970, people appointed Thatcher as secretary of state for education and science. In 1974, she backed Sir Keith Joseph for the Conservative party leader, but he fell short and afterward dropped out the race. Thatcher entered and led the Conservative party in 1975. She defiantly opposed the Soviet Union, and her tough-talking rhetoric gained her the nickname the "iron lady." As the Conservative party maintained leads, Thatcher went in the general election of 1979.
The longest tenure of Thatcher the longest since that of Lord Salisbury and was the longest continuous period in office since the tenure of Lord Liverpool in the early 19th century. This first woman led a major party in the United Kingdom and held any of the four great offices of state. After her resignation, she was ennobled as Thatcher, of Kesteven in the County of Lincolnshire, which entitled her to sit in the House of Lords. During her tenure, she needed sleep of just four hours in a night.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 84 reviews
May 8, 2016
No-one can deny that Margaret Thatcher was a divisive figure. As so often, I’m somewhere in the middle. To me, Thatcher has qualities that one can admire, even if one isn’t supportive – to put it mildly – of everything she did. As an autobiography, it’s wholly unsurprising that it is her positive attributes that tend to shine through here.
It seems a little unfair to compare prime-ministerial autobiographies, but with Tony Blair’s relatively fresh in my mind, it is hard to resist. Poor writing makes Blair’s volume difficult to consume, and it took me well over a year to plod through it in relatively short bursts. In contrast, Thatcher’s is entirely readable, and very enjoyable – bordering on being a page-turner. Thatcher genuinely masters the art of making the reader feel like a close confidant, as though this is a fireside chat in book form. I get the sense that this is what Blair strives to achieve, but fails.
And yet, Thatcher’s contains much more detailed political discussion. While Blair chooses to share his toilet habits, Thatcher writes long and detailed (though defensive) rationales for many of the policies she adopted. To give a single example from their respective autobiographies, I understand much more clearly Thatcher’s argument for defending the Falklands than Blair’s argument for invading Iraq. Where I disagree with Thatcher, I can still follow her line of argument in a way that I cannot even where I agree with Blair.
This set me thinking: perhaps the reason for Thatcher’s clearer explanations is the fact that she defended her policies more often and in greater detail than Blair. The long-form wide-ranging radio and television political interviews in which Thatcher participated simply did not exist in Blair’s day. I think that represents something lost at the heart of modern democracy. But I digress.
It’s worth pointing out that this is an abridged combination of two volumes: The Path to Power and The Downing Street Years. While I haven’t read those two volumes, it seems that the abridgement has largely been handled with skill. There are occasions where the detail of events is noticeably lacking in comparison to others, but these are rare, and don’t distract from the overarching narrative.
Perhaps it’s no surprise that Thatcher should write a self-assured autobiography, and it’s no surprise that many will disagree with much of the reasoning contained within. But it is the quality of the writing that stands out here, and that makes this volume worthy of four-star rating.
It seems a little unfair to compare prime-ministerial autobiographies, but with Tony Blair’s relatively fresh in my mind, it is hard to resist. Poor writing makes Blair’s volume difficult to consume, and it took me well over a year to plod through it in relatively short bursts. In contrast, Thatcher’s is entirely readable, and very enjoyable – bordering on being a page-turner. Thatcher genuinely masters the art of making the reader feel like a close confidant, as though this is a fireside chat in book form. I get the sense that this is what Blair strives to achieve, but fails.
And yet, Thatcher’s contains much more detailed political discussion. While Blair chooses to share his toilet habits, Thatcher writes long and detailed (though defensive) rationales for many of the policies she adopted. To give a single example from their respective autobiographies, I understand much more clearly Thatcher’s argument for defending the Falklands than Blair’s argument for invading Iraq. Where I disagree with Thatcher, I can still follow her line of argument in a way that I cannot even where I agree with Blair.
This set me thinking: perhaps the reason for Thatcher’s clearer explanations is the fact that she defended her policies more often and in greater detail than Blair. The long-form wide-ranging radio and television political interviews in which Thatcher participated simply did not exist in Blair’s day. I think that represents something lost at the heart of modern democracy. But I digress.
It’s worth pointing out that this is an abridged combination of two volumes: The Path to Power and The Downing Street Years. While I haven’t read those two volumes, it seems that the abridgement has largely been handled with skill. There are occasions where the detail of events is noticeably lacking in comparison to others, but these are rare, and don’t distract from the overarching narrative.
Perhaps it’s no surprise that Thatcher should write a self-assured autobiography, and it’s no surprise that many will disagree with much of the reasoning contained within. But it is the quality of the writing that stands out here, and that makes this volume worthy of four-star rating.
May 28, 2024
Over the course of my recent life, there is one subject, much more than any other, that gets mentioned when I’m talking to people: Margaret. Just the other day, a very famous and very successful man who’d only met her once said to me, “I envy you for one thing only: that you were a personal friend of Margaret Thatcher”.
At the time, I don’t think any of us knew how significant a period it would be in the country’s history but, looking back over the last four years and four different Prime Ministers, it’s not hard to understand how special she was. Although some people will argue that the public did eventually fall out of love with her, let’s not forget that Churchill lost the first election after the war. Politicians naturally go through those changes in fortune, but when we look back over the last 100 years, Churchill and Margaret will be remembered as our two great PMs.
For more of my reviews please visit My Unputdownable Articles
At the time, I don’t think any of us knew how significant a period it would be in the country’s history but, looking back over the last four years and four different Prime Ministers, it’s not hard to understand how special she was. Although some people will argue that the public did eventually fall out of love with her, let’s not forget that Churchill lost the first election after the war. Politicians naturally go through those changes in fortune, but when we look back over the last 100 years, Churchill and Margaret will be remembered as our two great PMs.
For more of my reviews please visit My Unputdownable Articles
December 13, 2013
Well, this is two books stuck together "Path to Power" and "The downing Street years" To read this I suppose you would have to have an interest in politics and Maggie herself. I really enjoyed this book but in two parts. The first part because it were the "Path to Power" and dealt with her road to Number 10. The second part was book two "the Downing Street Years" which was more of what I remember of her. Interesting reasd, though some of the politics got a little boring (but not much). Over all a great read and up there with Churchill.
Did I change my opinion of her, no! towards the end of her tenure in Downing street I still feels she was potty as a pot plant. But in her early to middle part of tenure I think she was strong and in a day in age where we are scared to be advised and lead, she was the only person who could have done the job. In the book I still think she did not get the uproar of the poll tax but over all a great book and a great leader. RIP Mrs Thatcher you will be remembered.
Did I change my opinion of her, no! towards the end of her tenure in Downing street I still feels she was potty as a pot plant. But in her early to middle part of tenure I think she was strong and in a day in age where we are scared to be advised and lead, she was the only person who could have done the job. In the book I still think she did not get the uproar of the poll tax but over all a great book and a great leader. RIP Mrs Thatcher you will be remembered.
April 27, 2018
I listened this book during two days and found it highly interesting. One could feel that Margaret Thatcher was an Iron woman. It becomes obvious through each page, each line. The book has less of emotions than I hoped, but many facts and analysis of political and economical events of the second half of the 20th century.
Somehow my main conclusion made on this book is that we are too far from equality than we think. 40 years ago the woman could become a leader, if she would be man-like, if she would be made of iron and if she would be brilliant specialist. 40 years later the situation didn't change. We cannot imagine Trump-like woman become a president! We cannot imagine non-professional women take high positions and build beautiful carriers, meanwhile thousands of relatively incompetent men reaching unbelievable success.
Somehow my main conclusion made on this book is that we are too far from equality than we think. 40 years ago the woman could become a leader, if she would be man-like, if she would be made of iron and if she would be brilliant specialist. 40 years later the situation didn't change. We cannot imagine Trump-like woman become a president! We cannot imagine non-professional women take high positions and build beautiful carriers, meanwhile thousands of relatively incompetent men reaching unbelievable success.
April 3, 2020
A tough read f you aren't an absolute fan of Margaret Thatcher or a stalwart student of history and British politics; Thankfully I am both. I enjoyed the book, as lengthy as it may be. For me the best parts are when MT writes about her younger years during the war and as a student at Oxford. Her upbringing is an inspirational story filled with memories that make her unlikely future career seem almost inevitable. Trust me, if her story or hardworking and resistance to groupthink can inspire a black boy from the South side of Chicago, then it will inspire you as well.
September 21, 2025
Margaret Thatcher comes across as an extremely dogmatic politician who relishes a fight with her enemies.
She also comes across as an exceptionally cool, calm, and competent operator.
Of all the political memoirs I’ve read, Thatcher comes across as the least likely I’d get along with over dinner.
She also comes across as an exceptionally cool, calm, and competent operator.
Of all the political memoirs I’ve read, Thatcher comes across as the least likely I’d get along with over dinner.
August 5, 2016
A good insight so far, but quite detailed. Amazing how forward thinking this woman was when we consider the problems we are experiencing just in the last half a decade.
I believe, The greatest prime minister that Britain has seen and her strength and focus was truly inspiring given what she had to stand up to. She took us out of the brink of the dark ages and contributed to us completely turning around our economy - we are now prosperous.
Book Now completed. Very, very detailed and some of the economics are so detailed it can be quite difficult to get your head around, hence it took me a while to read and understand about her arguments around inflation, interest rates etc etc, but I persevered and it was worth it. I also learned so much.
Although I was aware of some of the bigger politics such as the falklands war I was not aware of how much she did to stand up in the liberating of eastern europe - she was extremely well respected in places like Hungary for the part she (along with Reagan) played. She also stood up to the IRA and terrorism. This is a fascinating read and day by day account of some of the big politics in that time with robust economic arguments for her policies and vision. I didn't agree with all of her policies (who can agree with all of anyone's?) but I have always admired this woman and thought politics became and soft and empty place when she left office. We need more backbone and true conviction in politics. It's not really a personal account - although you do get some insight into her emotions.
I believe, The greatest prime minister that Britain has seen and her strength and focus was truly inspiring given what she had to stand up to. She took us out of the brink of the dark ages and contributed to us completely turning around our economy - we are now prosperous.
Book Now completed. Very, very detailed and some of the economics are so detailed it can be quite difficult to get your head around, hence it took me a while to read and understand about her arguments around inflation, interest rates etc etc, but I persevered and it was worth it. I also learned so much.
Although I was aware of some of the bigger politics such as the falklands war I was not aware of how much she did to stand up in the liberating of eastern europe - she was extremely well respected in places like Hungary for the part she (along with Reagan) played. She also stood up to the IRA and terrorism. This is a fascinating read and day by day account of some of the big politics in that time with robust economic arguments for her policies and vision. I didn't agree with all of her policies (who can agree with all of anyone's?) but I have always admired this woman and thought politics became and soft and empty place when she left office. We need more backbone and true conviction in politics. It's not really a personal account - although you do get some insight into her emotions.
April 27, 2013
As the Baroness herself says in the book "I am not introspective by nature" and this is probably the main fault of the book as you really don't get much below the surface of things in her remarkable life. For example we never know much about Denis, and practically nothing about Mark or Carol. It really is a remarkable story: from the corner grocers shop to global figure, all told in her relentless driving way. Many times she remarks on how she was opposed on an issue by someone, or some group, but then concludes that, as usual, she was later proved right. I listened to the audio book and it is always a bonus when the author reads the work themselves as you pick up on many of the nuances of the text that otherwise might be lost.
This book reminds me a little of Captain Blighs autobiography, which I also recently read. Bligh was also tough iconoclastic gifted man yet professes his astonishment when the mutineers strike, you get no sense whatsoever of the bitterness and disputes which appear in other descriptions of the voyage to that point. I was amazed that there was no mention of the Poll Tax anywhere in the Thatcher narrative. There is a lot to admire in her life but i can see how she drove people, even some of her closest allies, mad. Nevertheless I enjoyed the book, it makes reading through the tidal wave of press opinion in the aftermath of her recent death all the more interesting.
This book reminds me a little of Captain Blighs autobiography, which I also recently read. Bligh was also tough iconoclastic gifted man yet professes his astonishment when the mutineers strike, you get no sense whatsoever of the bitterness and disputes which appear in other descriptions of the voyage to that point. I was amazed that there was no mention of the Poll Tax anywhere in the Thatcher narrative. There is a lot to admire in her life but i can see how she drove people, even some of her closest allies, mad. Nevertheless I enjoyed the book, it makes reading through the tidal wave of press opinion in the aftermath of her recent death all the more interesting.
April 2, 2021
Despite not liking her or her politics, let alone the lasting impact she had on the UK education system, I actually enjoyed reading this book. While I still don't like her as a person (even her own telling of the story could not hide how egotistical and narcissistic she seemed), I discovered that there were policies that I agreed with and it did seem like she had the country's best interests at heart. It is obviously a one-sided telling of what happened, but I feel like I did learn something by reading it. There were parts that really slogged, but for the most part, the language she used was easy to understand and I could follow what she was saying.
I did buy this book based on my reignited disgust of her after watching the most recent season of The Crown, so the fact that I disliked her less after reading the book than I did going into it should tell you something about her writing style.
I did buy this book based on my reignited disgust of her after watching the most recent season of The Crown, so the fact that I disliked her less after reading the book than I did going into it should tell you something about her writing style.
January 3, 2018
This book is a must-read for anyone with an interest in politics and economics. I'm thoroughly in awe of the Iron Lady, her ideas, her deeds and her belief in herself. I wish the leaders of today had as much merit!
January 5, 2019
This autobiography was absolutely amazing! Even though this is for a school project, I couldn't have chosen a better book. Thatcher flawlessly described her education, goals and dreams, and all the ups and downs of her long career. An absolute must read, if you want to read a biography, that is.
July 8, 2021
An utterly fascinating peek into the mind of one of our greatest Prime Ministers. I particularly appreciated the light it shone on the political state of my country during my childhood - a period I'd hitherto not known much about in detail other than from a child's perspective. Given that the world I lived in and the future I would face were massively changed directly due to MT's policies and determination is reason enough to make this account 'required reading' for me.
Whether you agree with her politics or not, the motivations and driving force of what became known as Thatcherism is laid bare here and given her own justification. It is very much an account of a woman whose every decision was made 'for the good of her country'. Whether that's really the case or not, her words make it clear that she believed this straight down the line. A powerful autobiography by a remarkable political force.
Whether you agree with her politics or not, the motivations and driving force of what became known as Thatcherism is laid bare here and given her own justification. It is very much an account of a woman whose every decision was made 'for the good of her country'. Whether that's really the case or not, her words make it clear that she believed this straight down the line. A powerful autobiography by a remarkable political force.
February 5, 2024
A fascinating figure although not particularly reflective, which combined with a slightly unemotional and factual writing style caused the book to be a little difficult to connect with. She was clear in communicating her political convictions but gave very little of how she felt about things. For an autobiography there was little to nothing in the book about her as an individual outside of politics. Nothing on life as a mother for example, or what it was like bringing up children whilst in front line politics, which I felt would have made for more interesting reading.
March 13, 2021
What an amazing Woman and Leader! We need more like her in this world today.
Read
June 26, 2022complete https://notes.io/qtCrr
Chapter 1
Margaret Thatcher first told her husband, Denis, that she was going to run for the leadership of the Conservative party in 1974. He told her that she didn’t stand a chance.
It wasn’t that Denis didn’t back Margaret – no one supported her political ambitions more than he did. It was simply a statement of fact: the odds really were stacked against her.
There was her sex, for starters. A woman had never led one of the big parties, let alone the country.
Now, no one knew better than Margaret that women could get on in British politics. She was a trailblazer, after all. She’d become just the fifth woman to hold a senior government position in 1970. But, she did wonder if women like her could rise to the very top. When a journalist once asked her if she could imagine herself leading the country one day, she responded saying that she didn’t expect to see a woman prime minister in her lifetime – the male population was simply “too prejudiced.”
And sexism wasn’t the only obstacle in her path.
Margaret’s time as education minister hadn’t won her many friends. Charged with making budget cuts, she axed the popular policy of giving kids free milk with their school lunches. She emphasized that it was only middle-class parents who were being asked to pay their way and that poorer kids would still get subsidized milk. But the press’s new nickname stuck – Thatcher the Milk Snatcher.
That wasn’t Margaret’s world. She was the daughter of a grocer. She grew up above the family shop in a provincial town, and attended a modest grammar school, though only after winning a scholarship.
True, she did study at Oxford University, the traditional stomping ground of the British elite, but her background was much humbler than that of most leaders. Could she really lead the Conservative Party? As it turned out, her biggest stumbling block wasn’t either of these details – it was political. Margaret was a radical – the word people who disliked her used was “doctrinaire.” It was radicalism that put her at odds with most of her Conservative colleagues.
Margaret was born in 1925, and her father’s shop was in Grantham, a market town twenty miles east of Nottingham. Her childhood, she later said, was an “idyllic blur.”
The family didn’t have a lot of money, but it was resourceful.
The ’30s and ’40s were hard decades: There was the Great Depression and then the war. The goods they sold in their store were often in desperately short supply.
But Margaret’s parents prized self-reliance. They saved when times were good so that there was enough for when they were bad, and they knew how to make a little go a long way.
In October, 1943, Margaret went to Oxford to study chemistry. The city was cold and imposing. Its streets were blanketed in fog and the beautiful stained glass windows of its chapels were boarded up – a precaution against German bombing raids. Food and bathwater were tightly rationed.
Hard work, self-reliance, and private initiative – those were the values which Margaret admired. No faction in Oxford was more committed to those values than the Conservatives.
Margaret threw herself into politics. She took part in debates, gave speeches, and campaigned for the Conservative party in the general election of 1945.
She also started studying political philosophy. It was at Oxford, for example, that she first read Friedrich Hayek – one of the twentieth century’s most influential opponents of socialism.
When she graduated in 1946, she already knew what she wanted to do with her life – she wanted to become an MP and put Britain on the path to greater freedom and prosperity.
In 1946, that seemed more urgent than ever.
The Labour party had won the election in ’45 on a socialist platform and was busy transforming the country. Private industries were being nationalized and taxes were raised to fund a new welfare state.
In 1950, Margaret was chosen to stand as the Conservative candidate for Dartford, a tough industrial seat just outside London. It was a safe Labour seat and she didn’t really stand a chance. She lost, but she did reduce her Labour opponent’s majority from 20,000 to 14,000 votes.
It was a great achievement for an inexperienced politician, and senior Conservatives started taking notice. Whoever she was, Margaret Thatcher clearly appealed to voters.
The campaign in Dartford marked the beginning of an eventful decade. Margaret met her husband, Denis, a fellow scientist, and gave birth to twins – Mark and Carol. Her rise through the ranks of the Conservative party continued. In 1959, she was given a safe seat of her own – Finchley, in London.
It was also a conservative decade. Winston Churchill defeated Labour in 1951, and the party would stay in power for 13 years. But there wasn’t a counter-revolution. To win power, the Conservatives had promised not to dismantle the new welfare system created by Labour.
That pledge was central to what became known as the “post-war consensus” – a set of assumptions about politics shared by majorities in both parties.
The post-war consensus seemed to work – at first, anyway. The economy grew steadily for two decades. Over a million new affordable houses were built. Unemployment was low and wages high.
Refrigerators, TVs, cars, even holidays – what had once been unaffordable luxuries for most – were commonplace by the ’60s. The “affluent society” had arrived.
But things started going wrong in the early ’70s.
British productivity hadn’t kept up with other industrial countries, and economic growth stalled. The oil crisis shut down factories, causing a spike in unemployment. In the meantime, different administrations were spending huge amounts of money propping up inefficient state-owned industries.
Then there was inflation. Government tried to control it by capping wages, but that meant that workers’ wages rose more slowly than inflation. That was effectively a pay cut and trade unions weren’t going to stand for that. They were also powerful enough to refuse it. Britain’s power grid still relied on coal. So, when unions shut down coal production or refused to load coal onto trains, Britain was plunged into darkness. And governments that couldn’t keep the lights on didn’t last long. Unsurprisingly, they often backed down. This meant that the inflationary spiral continued. Wages went up, inflation continued to rise, and governments found themselves back at square one: negotiating new pay caps with the unions.
It was a wave of strikes over pay which broke the back of a Conservative government in 1974. The Prime Minister, Edward Heath had failed to take on the unions, and the party’s membership were furious – they wanted him to take a tougher line. But Heath remained committed to the post-war consensus. He also refused to stand down until a revolt forced him to accept a leadership contest.
Margaret Thatcher may have been a grocer’s daughter and a milk snatcher, but she promised to take the fight to the unions. That was enough for the membership. They elected her as leader in 1975. Denis Thatcher and the pundits had been wrong. She’d overcome all the obstacles and risen to the top of her party.
Then on May 4, 1979, Margaret Thatcher would go one step higher. On that date, she became Britain’s first woman prime minister. British voters had spoken: they wanted change. But, could she deliver it?
Chapter 2
There was a large crowd of reporters and TV crews outside Downing Street that day. They were there to hear the new prime minister’s first official message to the nation.
Britain, she said, was broken, but she would put it back together again. That wasn’t going to be easy – there were lots of battles still to be fought.
Margaret Thatcher ended her speech with a quotation from the Italian saint Francis of Assisi: “Where there is discord, may we bring harmony.”
But before the harmony could start, there would be more conflict.
The first priority of Margaret Thatcher’s government was to curb inflation – there was too much money chasing too few goods. As her government saw it, inflation in Britain had two causes.
The first was that more money was being spent than usual, but supply couldn’t keep up with rising demand. Lots of people wanted to buy, say, houses and cars, but not enough houses or cars were being built. As a result, prices rose and people’s savings didn't stretch as far as they used to.
The second cause was rising business costs. Trade unions enforced high wages and the state crowded out private investors by running large parts of the economy itself.
In the early 1980s, Thatcher’s administration raised interest rates, thus reducing access to credit, and cut government spending, primarily by privatizing utilities and slashing welfare.
The exchange rate also rose, meaning that the British pound was worth more compared to other currencies. As a result, it was cheaper to import goods and more expensive to export them.
These policies did reduce inflation, but there were side-effects. Deprived of subsidies, lots of British firms went bust. Others became uncompetitive because their goods were too expensive to export. Soon, some three million people were unemployed – around 13 percent of the workforce. For the first time in its history, Britain became a net importer of goods.
These policies and their fallout didn’t make the prime minister popular. But she was convinced that they were right – and for Margaret Thatcher that counted for more than popularity.
That said, she had to win the next election to have a chance of seeing her vision through. Would she be able to swing the 1983 general election? In early 1982, that was anything but certain.
But then everything changed. Britain was plunged into a national crisis. It was Margaret Thatcher’s greatest challenge – and an opportunity to prove herself.
The Falkland Islands are an archipelago in the South Atlantic around 300 miles east of the Argentinian coast. Several of the larger islands are inhabited; hundreds of the smaller islands aren’t.
British sailors first landed here in 1690, but the islands were only incorporated into the British empire in 1833. The first permanent inhabitants arrived shortly after that.
Britain’s legal claim to the Falklands rests on the express wishes of the people who live there – the descendents of the settlers who came from Britain in the nineteenth century.
Argentina doesn’t recognize this claim.
Having established a presence on the islands before 1833, it believes that the Falklands – las Malvinas in Spanish – belong to Argentina, even if its inhabitants see themselves as British.
For a long time, the Argentinian claim to the Falklands was a moot point – it was something British and Argentinian governments wrangled over in diplomatic talks that never really went anywhere.
That changed in 1981. A coup in Buenos Aires installed a new dictatorship, but unlike previous regimes, when it came to the Falklands, the military junta or “council” wasn’t happy to just talk the talk – it wanted to walk the walk, too.
That was down to Admiral Jorge Anaya, the commander-in-chief of Argentina’s naval forces. A hot-headed nationalist, he pushed for a full-scale invasion of the islands.
There would be international outcry, of course, but Anaya thought Argentina could get away with it. The country was a key ally of the United States, which was trying to contain Communism in South America. Britain, by contrast, was weaker than ever before. Officially, Washington would condemn Argentina. Unofficially, Anaya believed, the US might just turn a blind eye.
The invasion began on April 1, 1982.
There would have to be a war.
On April 5, 1982, a British task force of 100 ships carrying 25,000 men set sail for the Falklands.
The fighting lasted 74 days. It claimed 649 Argentinian and 255 British soldiers’ lives, as well as those of three Falkland Islanders. It ended on June 14 with Argentina’s total surrender.
It was a decisive victory and a surge of patriotism swept Britain. The prime minister had shown that a British government could still defend the national interest on the global stage. For many voters, Margaret Thatcher had put the “Great” back in Great Britain.
The triumph also suggested that she really was an “Iron Lady” – a nickname given to her by the Soviet press after she delivered a speech condemning Communism in 1976. Both her supporters and opponents came to see her as a woman who wasn’t to be taken on lightly.
That reputation helped her to a resounding victory in the general election of 1983. Having defeated an enemy on the other side of the world, she now had a mandate to complete her domestic agenda.
The forces of error, Margaret Thatcher believed, were firmly entrenched in Britain. Overcoming them simply wasn’t possible without some measure of discord.
Britain’s trade unions toppled Margaret Thatcher’s predecessor, Edward Heath. When he tried to impose limits on wage rises in 1973, they went on strike and brought the country to a standstill.
The National Union of Mineworkers played a key role in those strikes. They stopped coal production and caused severe fuel shortages. Heath’s government collapsed the following year.
Margaret Thatcher was determined to avoid that fate.
Conflict with the unions was inevitable, however – they were opposed to her plans to privatize or close state-owned industries. Coal was at the center of this disagreement.
The coal industry racked up huge annual losses. But even efficient mines weren’t competitive. It was cheaper to buy coal abroad than to mine it in Britain. Then there were the recently discovered oil fields in the North Sea which provided an alternative energy source.
So, in March, 1984, Thatcher’s government announced that it was reducing Britain’s annual coal output by four million tons. According to the National Union of Mineworkers, that would mean the closure of at least twenty collieries or “pits,” and the loss of over 20,000 jobs.
The union’s leader, a Marxist called Arthur Scargill, declared war on the government. It wasn’t the first time he’d done that – Scargill was on the frontlines of the strikes which toppled Heath in ’74.
The strikes began on the day the government announced its plan to cut coal production. Miners in Yorkshire were the first to down tools. Sympathy strikes soon spread to other areas of the country.
This wasn’t 1974, though, and Margaret Thatcher was no Edward Heath. The government had stockpiled enough coal to keep the country running for at least half a year and struck agreements with non-union truckers to transport it around the country.
The lights stayed on and the government weathered the storm. Slowly but surely, defeated miners started returning to work. On March 3, 1985, the National Union of Mineworkers voted to end the strike. Scargill had failed to win a single concession from the government.
But the miner’s strike wasn’t just about the future of coal pits – it was a political strike.
Between 1970 and 1985, the conventional wisdom in Britain was that no government could rule the country without the consent of its trade unions.
The Iron Lady had shown that, with decisive leadership, it could.
It was her second great triumph.
Chapter 3
The country’s economy grew steadily after the showdown with the miners, and Margaret Thatcher was rewarded with a third general election victory in 1987.
Voters were behind the Iron Lady. The same couldn’t be said of her party, though.
A growing number of Conservative MPs wanted rid of Margaret Thatcher. The bone of contention was an issue which causes divisions within the party to this day: Europe.
The European Community or EC – the forerunner of today’s European Union – had been designed to foster trade and economic cooperation between its members.
In the 1980s, though, there was a push to transform it into a political union.
European states would keep certain powers, but they’d also be integrated into a single federal structure. In some areas of political life, Brussels, not national parliaments, would have the final say.
A key part of the vision for a federal Europe was the single currency. Members of this new political union would use the same money, which would be printed and managed by a European central bank.
The Conservative party was traditionally pro-European. It was Margaret Thatcher’s predecessor, Edward Heath, for example, who oversaw Britain’s entry into the EC in 1973.
The reason for that support was self-interest. The EC was one of the largest trade blocs in the world. Membership, many thought, would help boost the British economy. They were right: joining the EC did help halt economic decline.
But by the mid-1980s, however, some Conservatives had come to see things differently. Britain’s economy was doing well and the costs of membership now seemed to outweigh its benefits. So, in 1984, Margaret Thatcher renegotiated Britain’s contributions to the EC budget and won significant reductions.
She became increasingly skeptical about the EC as time went on, though. The more powers that were delegated to Brussels, the more she worried that the EC was eroding democracy in member states.
Finally, in late October, 1990, she drew a line in the sand, giving a spirited speech in which she rejected the EC’s proposals to expand its powers. It ended with three words: “No, no, no!”
The pro-European wing of the Conservative party revolted. On November 13, the minister for finance and foreign affairs, Sir Geoffrey Howe, stepped down in protest. His resignation speech put wind in the sails of the prime minister’s opponents.
Michael Heseltine, a self-made multimillionaire who, in Margaret Thatcher’s words, had long been “lurking in the wings,” saw his opportunity, and made a challenge for the leadership of Conservative party.
The vote was held on November 20. The results reached Margaret Thatcher in Paris, where she was attending a summit. The news wasn’t good: she’d failed to win an outright majority.
Her control of the party was now in jeopardy. Back in London, she held one-on-one meetings with senior members of the party in her private office. Would they back her through this crisis?
They wouldn’t. And so in the early hours of November 22, 1990, Margaret Thatcher told her staff that she was resigning. She held one last cabinet meeting before informing the Queen of her decision.
Standing outside Downing Street for the last time, she tried to hold back her tears as she addressed the nation.
She was leaving after eleven-and-a-half wonderful years, she said, but she was happy to leave the UK in a much better state than when she first took office.
Chapter 1
Margaret Thatcher first told her husband, Denis, that she was going to run for the leadership of the Conservative party in 1974. He told her that she didn’t stand a chance.
It wasn’t that Denis didn’t back Margaret – no one supported her political ambitions more than he did. It was simply a statement of fact: the odds really were stacked against her.
There was her sex, for starters. A woman had never led one of the big parties, let alone the country.
Now, no one knew better than Margaret that women could get on in British politics. She was a trailblazer, after all. She’d become just the fifth woman to hold a senior government position in 1970. But, she did wonder if women like her could rise to the very top. When a journalist once asked her if she could imagine herself leading the country one day, she responded saying that she didn’t expect to see a woman prime minister in her lifetime – the male population was simply “too prejudiced.”
And sexism wasn’t the only obstacle in her path.
Margaret’s time as education minister hadn’t won her many friends. Charged with making budget cuts, she axed the popular policy of giving kids free milk with their school lunches. She emphasized that it was only middle-class parents who were being asked to pay their way and that poorer kids would still get subsidized milk. But the press’s new nickname stuck – Thatcher the Milk Snatcher.
That wasn’t Margaret’s world. She was the daughter of a grocer. She grew up above the family shop in a provincial town, and attended a modest grammar school, though only after winning a scholarship.
True, she did study at Oxford University, the traditional stomping ground of the British elite, but her background was much humbler than that of most leaders. Could she really lead the Conservative Party? As it turned out, her biggest stumbling block wasn’t either of these details – it was political. Margaret was a radical – the word people who disliked her used was “doctrinaire.” It was radicalism that put her at odds with most of her Conservative colleagues.
Margaret was born in 1925, and her father’s shop was in Grantham, a market town twenty miles east of Nottingham. Her childhood, she later said, was an “idyllic blur.”
The family didn’t have a lot of money, but it was resourceful.
The ’30s and ’40s were hard decades: There was the Great Depression and then the war. The goods they sold in their store were often in desperately short supply.
But Margaret’s parents prized self-reliance. They saved when times were good so that there was enough for when they were bad, and they knew how to make a little go a long way.
In October, 1943, Margaret went to Oxford to study chemistry. The city was cold and imposing. Its streets were blanketed in fog and the beautiful stained glass windows of its chapels were boarded up – a precaution against German bombing raids. Food and bathwater were tightly rationed.
Hard work, self-reliance, and private initiative – those were the values which Margaret admired. No faction in Oxford was more committed to those values than the Conservatives.
Margaret threw herself into politics. She took part in debates, gave speeches, and campaigned for the Conservative party in the general election of 1945.
She also started studying political philosophy. It was at Oxford, for example, that she first read Friedrich Hayek – one of the twentieth century’s most influential opponents of socialism.
When she graduated in 1946, she already knew what she wanted to do with her life – she wanted to become an MP and put Britain on the path to greater freedom and prosperity.
In 1946, that seemed more urgent than ever.
The Labour party had won the election in ’45 on a socialist platform and was busy transforming the country. Private industries were being nationalized and taxes were raised to fund a new welfare state.
In 1950, Margaret was chosen to stand as the Conservative candidate for Dartford, a tough industrial seat just outside London. It was a safe Labour seat and she didn’t really stand a chance. She lost, but she did reduce her Labour opponent’s majority from 20,000 to 14,000 votes.
It was a great achievement for an inexperienced politician, and senior Conservatives started taking notice. Whoever she was, Margaret Thatcher clearly appealed to voters.
The campaign in Dartford marked the beginning of an eventful decade. Margaret met her husband, Denis, a fellow scientist, and gave birth to twins – Mark and Carol. Her rise through the ranks of the Conservative party continued. In 1959, she was given a safe seat of her own – Finchley, in London.
It was also a conservative decade. Winston Churchill defeated Labour in 1951, and the party would stay in power for 13 years. But there wasn’t a counter-revolution. To win power, the Conservatives had promised not to dismantle the new welfare system created by Labour.
That pledge was central to what became known as the “post-war consensus” – a set of assumptions about politics shared by majorities in both parties.
The post-war consensus seemed to work – at first, anyway. The economy grew steadily for two decades. Over a million new affordable houses were built. Unemployment was low and wages high.
Refrigerators, TVs, cars, even holidays – what had once been unaffordable luxuries for most – were commonplace by the ’60s. The “affluent society” had arrived.
But things started going wrong in the early ’70s.
British productivity hadn’t kept up with other industrial countries, and economic growth stalled. The oil crisis shut down factories, causing a spike in unemployment. In the meantime, different administrations were spending huge amounts of money propping up inefficient state-owned industries.
Then there was inflation. Government tried to control it by capping wages, but that meant that workers’ wages rose more slowly than inflation. That was effectively a pay cut and trade unions weren’t going to stand for that. They were also powerful enough to refuse it. Britain’s power grid still relied on coal. So, when unions shut down coal production or refused to load coal onto trains, Britain was plunged into darkness. And governments that couldn’t keep the lights on didn’t last long. Unsurprisingly, they often backed down. This meant that the inflationary spiral continued. Wages went up, inflation continued to rise, and governments found themselves back at square one: negotiating new pay caps with the unions.
It was a wave of strikes over pay which broke the back of a Conservative government in 1974. The Prime Minister, Edward Heath had failed to take on the unions, and the party’s membership were furious – they wanted him to take a tougher line. But Heath remained committed to the post-war consensus. He also refused to stand down until a revolt forced him to accept a leadership contest.
Margaret Thatcher may have been a grocer’s daughter and a milk snatcher, but she promised to take the fight to the unions. That was enough for the membership. They elected her as leader in 1975. Denis Thatcher and the pundits had been wrong. She’d overcome all the obstacles and risen to the top of her party.
Then on May 4, 1979, Margaret Thatcher would go one step higher. On that date, she became Britain’s first woman prime minister. British voters had spoken: they wanted change. But, could she deliver it?
Chapter 2
There was a large crowd of reporters and TV crews outside Downing Street that day. They were there to hear the new prime minister’s first official message to the nation.
Britain, she said, was broken, but she would put it back together again. That wasn’t going to be easy – there were lots of battles still to be fought.
Margaret Thatcher ended her speech with a quotation from the Italian saint Francis of Assisi: “Where there is discord, may we bring harmony.”
But before the harmony could start, there would be more conflict.
The first priority of Margaret Thatcher’s government was to curb inflation – there was too much money chasing too few goods. As her government saw it, inflation in Britain had two causes.
The first was that more money was being spent than usual, but supply couldn’t keep up with rising demand. Lots of people wanted to buy, say, houses and cars, but not enough houses or cars were being built. As a result, prices rose and people’s savings didn't stretch as far as they used to.
The second cause was rising business costs. Trade unions enforced high wages and the state crowded out private investors by running large parts of the economy itself.
In the early 1980s, Thatcher’s administration raised interest rates, thus reducing access to credit, and cut government spending, primarily by privatizing utilities and slashing welfare.
The exchange rate also rose, meaning that the British pound was worth more compared to other currencies. As a result, it was cheaper to import goods and more expensive to export them.
These policies did reduce inflation, but there were side-effects. Deprived of subsidies, lots of British firms went bust. Others became uncompetitive because their goods were too expensive to export. Soon, some three million people were unemployed – around 13 percent of the workforce. For the first time in its history, Britain became a net importer of goods.
These policies and their fallout didn’t make the prime minister popular. But she was convinced that they were right – and for Margaret Thatcher that counted for more than popularity.
That said, she had to win the next election to have a chance of seeing her vision through. Would she be able to swing the 1983 general election? In early 1982, that was anything but certain.
But then everything changed. Britain was plunged into a national crisis. It was Margaret Thatcher’s greatest challenge – and an opportunity to prove herself.
The Falkland Islands are an archipelago in the South Atlantic around 300 miles east of the Argentinian coast. Several of the larger islands are inhabited; hundreds of the smaller islands aren’t.
British sailors first landed here in 1690, but the islands were only incorporated into the British empire in 1833. The first permanent inhabitants arrived shortly after that.
Britain’s legal claim to the Falklands rests on the express wishes of the people who live there – the descendents of the settlers who came from Britain in the nineteenth century.
Argentina doesn’t recognize this claim.
Having established a presence on the islands before 1833, it believes that the Falklands – las Malvinas in Spanish – belong to Argentina, even if its inhabitants see themselves as British.
For a long time, the Argentinian claim to the Falklands was a moot point – it was something British and Argentinian governments wrangled over in diplomatic talks that never really went anywhere.
That changed in 1981. A coup in Buenos Aires installed a new dictatorship, but unlike previous regimes, when it came to the Falklands, the military junta or “council” wasn’t happy to just talk the talk – it wanted to walk the walk, too.
That was down to Admiral Jorge Anaya, the commander-in-chief of Argentina’s naval forces. A hot-headed nationalist, he pushed for a full-scale invasion of the islands.
There would be international outcry, of course, but Anaya thought Argentina could get away with it. The country was a key ally of the United States, which was trying to contain Communism in South America. Britain, by contrast, was weaker than ever before. Officially, Washington would condemn Argentina. Unofficially, Anaya believed, the US might just turn a blind eye.
The invasion began on April 1, 1982.
There would have to be a war.
On April 5, 1982, a British task force of 100 ships carrying 25,000 men set sail for the Falklands.
The fighting lasted 74 days. It claimed 649 Argentinian and 255 British soldiers’ lives, as well as those of three Falkland Islanders. It ended on June 14 with Argentina’s total surrender.
It was a decisive victory and a surge of patriotism swept Britain. The prime minister had shown that a British government could still defend the national interest on the global stage. For many voters, Margaret Thatcher had put the “Great” back in Great Britain.
The triumph also suggested that she really was an “Iron Lady” – a nickname given to her by the Soviet press after she delivered a speech condemning Communism in 1976. Both her supporters and opponents came to see her as a woman who wasn’t to be taken on lightly.
That reputation helped her to a resounding victory in the general election of 1983. Having defeated an enemy on the other side of the world, she now had a mandate to complete her domestic agenda.
The forces of error, Margaret Thatcher believed, were firmly entrenched in Britain. Overcoming them simply wasn’t possible without some measure of discord.
Britain’s trade unions toppled Margaret Thatcher’s predecessor, Edward Heath. When he tried to impose limits on wage rises in 1973, they went on strike and brought the country to a standstill.
The National Union of Mineworkers played a key role in those strikes. They stopped coal production and caused severe fuel shortages. Heath’s government collapsed the following year.
Margaret Thatcher was determined to avoid that fate.
Conflict with the unions was inevitable, however – they were opposed to her plans to privatize or close state-owned industries. Coal was at the center of this disagreement.
The coal industry racked up huge annual losses. But even efficient mines weren’t competitive. It was cheaper to buy coal abroad than to mine it in Britain. Then there were the recently discovered oil fields in the North Sea which provided an alternative energy source.
So, in March, 1984, Thatcher’s government announced that it was reducing Britain’s annual coal output by four million tons. According to the National Union of Mineworkers, that would mean the closure of at least twenty collieries or “pits,” and the loss of over 20,000 jobs.
The union’s leader, a Marxist called Arthur Scargill, declared war on the government. It wasn’t the first time he’d done that – Scargill was on the frontlines of the strikes which toppled Heath in ’74.
The strikes began on the day the government announced its plan to cut coal production. Miners in Yorkshire were the first to down tools. Sympathy strikes soon spread to other areas of the country.
This wasn’t 1974, though, and Margaret Thatcher was no Edward Heath. The government had stockpiled enough coal to keep the country running for at least half a year and struck agreements with non-union truckers to transport it around the country.
The lights stayed on and the government weathered the storm. Slowly but surely, defeated miners started returning to work. On March 3, 1985, the National Union of Mineworkers voted to end the strike. Scargill had failed to win a single concession from the government.
But the miner’s strike wasn’t just about the future of coal pits – it was a political strike.
Between 1970 and 1985, the conventional wisdom in Britain was that no government could rule the country without the consent of its trade unions.
The Iron Lady had shown that, with decisive leadership, it could.
It was her second great triumph.
Chapter 3
The country’s economy grew steadily after the showdown with the miners, and Margaret Thatcher was rewarded with a third general election victory in 1987.
Voters were behind the Iron Lady. The same couldn’t be said of her party, though.
A growing number of Conservative MPs wanted rid of Margaret Thatcher. The bone of contention was an issue which causes divisions within the party to this day: Europe.
The European Community or EC – the forerunner of today’s European Union – had been designed to foster trade and economic cooperation between its members.
In the 1980s, though, there was a push to transform it into a political union.
European states would keep certain powers, but they’d also be integrated into a single federal structure. In some areas of political life, Brussels, not national parliaments, would have the final say.
A key part of the vision for a federal Europe was the single currency. Members of this new political union would use the same money, which would be printed and managed by a European central bank.
The Conservative party was traditionally pro-European. It was Margaret Thatcher’s predecessor, Edward Heath, for example, who oversaw Britain’s entry into the EC in 1973.
The reason for that support was self-interest. The EC was one of the largest trade blocs in the world. Membership, many thought, would help boost the British economy. They were right: joining the EC did help halt economic decline.
But by the mid-1980s, however, some Conservatives had come to see things differently. Britain’s economy was doing well and the costs of membership now seemed to outweigh its benefits. So, in 1984, Margaret Thatcher renegotiated Britain’s contributions to the EC budget and won significant reductions.
She became increasingly skeptical about the EC as time went on, though. The more powers that were delegated to Brussels, the more she worried that the EC was eroding democracy in member states.
Finally, in late October, 1990, she drew a line in the sand, giving a spirited speech in which she rejected the EC’s proposals to expand its powers. It ended with three words: “No, no, no!”
The pro-European wing of the Conservative party revolted. On November 13, the minister for finance and foreign affairs, Sir Geoffrey Howe, stepped down in protest. His resignation speech put wind in the sails of the prime minister’s opponents.
Michael Heseltine, a self-made multimillionaire who, in Margaret Thatcher’s words, had long been “lurking in the wings,” saw his opportunity, and made a challenge for the leadership of Conservative party.
The vote was held on November 20. The results reached Margaret Thatcher in Paris, where she was attending a summit. The news wasn’t good: she’d failed to win an outright majority.
Her control of the party was now in jeopardy. Back in London, she held one-on-one meetings with senior members of the party in her private office. Would they back her through this crisis?
They wouldn’t. And so in the early hours of November 22, 1990, Margaret Thatcher told her staff that she was resigning. She held one last cabinet meeting before informing the Queen of her decision.
Standing outside Downing Street for the last time, she tried to hold back her tears as she addressed the nation.
She was leaving after eleven-and-a-half wonderful years, she said, but she was happy to leave the UK in a much better state than when she first took office.
November 19, 2022
Probably it will be quite long review on autobiography book on life and facts from it of the most well-known woman in history mostly known as the Iron Lady - Margaret Thatcher. My name is Simona and I am the author or this report. Following the link I want to share with you here - https://specialessays.com/buy-book-re... you can read more of mine book reports and reviews on interesting books, mostly of which I have read because clients asked me to prepare the reviews on such. This autobiography book is one of such and perhaps it wouldn't be the book I had decided to read myself, but it turned to be really interesting. I love my job for the opportunity to create, write interesting reviews, like such you are going to read here (as a result help students with their book reviews) and of course your platform where I can share some of them with others and discover more interesting books.
The book Margaret Thatcher: The Autobiography written by Margaret Thatcher herself and first published in 2013 aims to tell about one of the most outstanding women politicians in the history of Great Britain. It was written at the end of her career, and it depicts Margaret Thatcher as the first and, so far, the only female who has managed to win the post of the Prime Minister in the country. What is more, she was re-elected three times. The book touches upon the life of this outstanding figure, her ups and downs, personal experiences, search for freedom and secrets of success. In addition, a reader is able to find the information on the economic reforms that saved the country from decay and patriarchal laws and conventions that prevented Thatcher from the achievement of the main political goals
The main points of the book are the story of Margaret Thatcher’s life and the facts that she has destroyed patriarchal stereotypes and become an example for imitation of a whole generation of English women. At the same time, this witty and honest piece of writing shows that the ‘Iron Lady’ had life beyond the boundaries of great politics. Overall, the author adheres to the idea that a concept of a female politician is real. Indeed, Margaret Thatcher was the first woman in the politics of the 20th century who overturned the belief that politics was the sphere of total men’s control.
A Summary of the Book
When summarizing the book, it should be noted that in the beginning, it describes Margaret Thatcher’s childhood in detail. For example, one learns that Margaret Thatcher (nee Roberts) was born on October 13, 1925 in Grantema, Lincolnshire. When telling about her early days, Thatcher intends to show that education that one receives is not necessarily an indicator of what heights a person reaches. For instance, the book states that initially Margaret Thatcher was educated as a chemist. She studied chemistry for four years at Oxford University and received her Bachelor of Science degree. Then, she worked as a research chemist upon the development of emulsifiers for the production of ice cream. Yet, she did not pursue this career and turned to politics. Her political career has actually become the main aspect in the autobiography. According to Margaret Thatcher, while she was still a student, she became a chairperson of the Conservative Party of Oxford University. From the beginning of the 1950s, she began to fight for a place in the Parliament, and in 1959, she achieved her goal by becoming a member of the House of Commons. Later, in 1979, Margaret Thatcher became the first and so far the only woman who occupied the post of the Prime Minister of Great Britain. She stayed on the position for three terms that was the longest time since 1827. At the same time, Margaret Thatcher was also the first woman prime minister of the European country. For such determination and commitment, she was given a ‘iron lady’. Therefore, the author shows the reader that a woman as well as a man can reach the top positions in politics. In addition to telling about Thatcher’s political career, the book uncovers facts regarding her personal and family life and proves that a successful woman can combine both work and family responsibilities.
Analysis and Evaluation
In the given autobiography, the reader can identify a few main themes. The first topic Thatcher touches upon is a way to and a place of a female in the world of politics. She says that a woman should have firm and masculine character to get there since there is no room for weakness in the sphere. She herself is the main illustration of the fact that it is possible. In fact, Margaret Hilda Thatcher occupied a special place in the history of the country. In particular, she is renowned as the founder of a new economic course called ‘Thatcherism’ that made it possible to defeat the crisis in the United Kingdom in the late 1970s-early 1980s. The main efforts of her government were aimed at privatizing enterprises, curtailing social programs and introducing principles of monetarism in the financial and economic spheres. She sought to change what she considered the cause of Britain’s decline. To do this, she advocated for a reduction in state intervention into the economy (deregulation), a decrease in the influence of trade unions, and a cut in spending on the social sphere. She also encouraged privatization of many state-owned enterprises and increased taxes. This caused a decline in the extractive and manufacturing industries, but it was a step towards the transition to the production of services, rather than goods. Unfortunately, despite all the positive changes, Thatcher’s economic policy was the cause of rising unemployment.
In addition to the vigorous activity regarding nation’s economy, Thatcher worked hard to implement changes in the social sphere. At the time, the majority of the British believed that the state should provide them with a certain set of social guarantees. Therefore, Thatcher’s first career achievements were connected with social life of the citizens. For instance, she was nominated for the post of the Parliamentary Deputy Minister of Pensions and State Social Insurance. Later, she dealt with the issues of construction and land ownership, supported the maintenance of the death penalty in the House of Commons and, at the same time, voted for the release of homosexuals from criminal liability.
Speaking about the activity in the political sphere, one has to mention that in the late 1960s, Thatcher participated in the International Visits Program and was able to meet with politicians from the United States, and later, became a member of the Shadow Cabinet of the official opposition. In 1970, after the Conservatives came to power, Margaret Thatcher was appointed a Minister of Education and Science and held this post until 1974. After the crush of the Conservatives, she was the head of the opposition. From 1979 to 1990, Margaret Thatcher was entrusted with resolving critical issues related to the British political course, since the head of government in Britain, although appointed by the monarch, performs many of the functions that nominally belong to the monarch. Owing to her unbending character, conservative and rigid policy, Thatcher received a nickname “The Iron Lady”. She was first called “The Iron Lady” by the Soviet military journalist Yuri Gavrilov in response to sharp criticism of the USSR on January 24, 1979. Therefore, when reading the book, one can witness the story of an ordinary female physicist who achieved enormous success in a political career and, owing to her strong personality, managed to change social, economic and political spheres of the country.
In addition, the book makes it clear that with the defined goals, success is inevitable, and the impossible is in fact possible. Moreover, a woman can be successful at men’s jobs and achieve better outcomes in comparison with males. Politics was the main goal of Margaret Thatcher, and all her life, she aspired to it. As a result, she became the first woman who headed Britain; the first prime minister who won the election three times in a row; and, the first British politician who stayed in power for a record eleven and a half years. Her determination that helped her to fulfill her goals is reflected in her motto that states, “I am extraordinarily patient, provided I get my own way in the end”. In this way, she is similar to another female renowned in the Muslim political history Benazir Bhutto. Bhutto was the first woman Prime Minister in the Muslim world. She was known to be callous to opponents and sympathetic towards animals. The mentioned above two female prime ministers were often compared because their political style was similar. In 1989, Bhutto became the prime minister of Pakistan, and this was a remarkable, ostentatious event as for the first time in a Muslim country, a woman headed the government. Benazir started from full liberalization: in particular, she granted self-government to universities and student organizations, abolished control of the media, and freed political prisoners. Moreover, it should be noted that having received excellent European education and being educated in liberal traditions, Bhutto defended the women’s rights, which was contrary to the traditional culture of Pakistan. For instance, she proclaimed freedom of choice. Women were allowed to choose whether to wear or not to wear a veil. Additionally, they received an opportunity to realize their potential not only as those responsible for keeping of the hearth. During her second term on the position of the prime minister, illiteracy levels among the population decreased by almost a third, many mountain areas were watered, children received free medical care, and the fight against childhood diseases began. Consequently, Bhutto became a popular politician in Pakistan and throughout the Muslim world. Margaret Thatcher was the Iron Lady of England, and Benazir Bhutto was the Iron Lady of the East. The stories of two women prove that there is nothing impossible.
The third theme which is reflected in the book is that despite constant pressure from various politicians, a strong woman should always defend her rights and interests. The autobiography shows that Margaret Thatcher always sharply criticized the Soviet Union, and communism was unacceptable for her. In the foreign policy, she focused on the US and always spoke negatively about Soviet political leaders. On the other hand, she believed that the communist and capitalist countries could coexist by means of mutual compromises and defended this position. The economic and social policies pursued by Margaret Thatcher were called Thatcherism. There were no people who felt indifferent regarding her ideas. For the supporters of “The Iron Lady”, she was a symbolic figure, and her ideas were excellent. Yet, Thatcher’s opponents believed that she did her best to weaken the UK, and thus, particular attention in the book is given to the section about the attempt of her assassination. In 1984, the Irish Republican Army tried to murder Margaret Thatcher. The separatists put a bomb in a hotel in Brighton during a conference of the Conservative Party. Five citizens were killed, but Thatcher herself was not hurt.
Another idea the author want a reader to pay attention to is that a woman can be a successful politician and at the same time have her own personal life. Thatcher underlines the fact that with a huge desire, every female can combine both career and family. Moreover, she stresses that moral support is necessary for a woman no matter what the position she occupies is. Thatcher’s support was her husband. Actually, according to the book, she believed that without his approval and help, she would never be the Prime Minister. She devoted a part of the book to tell about their relations. The reader learns that Margaret Roberts met her husband, a businessperson Denis Thatcher, back in 1949. They met at a dinner in honor of the official approval of Margaret’s candidate from the Conservative Party in Dartford. In 1951, they got married, and in 1953, the twins Carol and Mark were born. Denis Thatcher was 10 years older than Margaret, and for him, it was a second marriage. After his wife’s resignation, Denis Thatcher received the title of a baronet, and Margaret Thatcher, respectively, became a baroness. Denis Thatcher died in 2003; the famous wife lived 10 years more. Therefore, Margaret Thatcher showed that a woman can build a successful career and remains a good wife a mother.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it should be noted that the main argument of Margaret Thatcher’s autobiography is that it is important to have clear position and aspirations if a person wants to achieve something in life. Moreover, she proves that a woman can occupy high positions even in such sphere as politics if she has a desire and determination to do this. More importantly, Thatcher demonstrates that a successful woman is able to combine career and family. Her way to the top of the British political world was not easy, and she had to destroy the psychology of ‘universal well-being’ developed over many centuries that relied on high level of taxation. Instead, she had to inculcate a new system of values and teach everyone had to count on themselves. This innovative approach not only provided Britain with a gradual way out of the crisis, but also proved that capitalism was a flexible system that could adopt new rules of the game and adapt to new conditions depending on the political and economic situation. The book affirms that it is not important who is in power: a man or a woman. What is significant is what kind of person and politician he or she is and what convictions they have.
Despite the fact that the book is really worth reading, a few shortcomings have to be considered. Firstly, the autobiography will be more interesting for women since it describes the success story of a female politician, thereby narrowing down the audience. Secondly, it is full of political terms that ordinary readers will not understand. Overall, it seems that the book can be recommended to all women who dream of a career in politics. At the same time, it will be interesting not only for those involved in politics, but also for those who want to ‘catch’ Margaret’s unquenchable optimism having learned the secrets of her success. The way that the author writes the book is balanced as she clearly adheres to her position describing her childhood and personal life which were aimed at personal political achievements.
The book Margaret Thatcher: The Autobiography written by Margaret Thatcher herself and first published in 2013 aims to tell about one of the most outstanding women politicians in the history of Great Britain. It was written at the end of her career, and it depicts Margaret Thatcher as the first and, so far, the only female who has managed to win the post of the Prime Minister in the country. What is more, she was re-elected three times. The book touches upon the life of this outstanding figure, her ups and downs, personal experiences, search for freedom and secrets of success. In addition, a reader is able to find the information on the economic reforms that saved the country from decay and patriarchal laws and conventions that prevented Thatcher from the achievement of the main political goals
The main points of the book are the story of Margaret Thatcher’s life and the facts that she has destroyed patriarchal stereotypes and become an example for imitation of a whole generation of English women. At the same time, this witty and honest piece of writing shows that the ‘Iron Lady’ had life beyond the boundaries of great politics. Overall, the author adheres to the idea that a concept of a female politician is real. Indeed, Margaret Thatcher was the first woman in the politics of the 20th century who overturned the belief that politics was the sphere of total men’s control.
A Summary of the Book
When summarizing the book, it should be noted that in the beginning, it describes Margaret Thatcher’s childhood in detail. For example, one learns that Margaret Thatcher (nee Roberts) was born on October 13, 1925 in Grantema, Lincolnshire. When telling about her early days, Thatcher intends to show that education that one receives is not necessarily an indicator of what heights a person reaches. For instance, the book states that initially Margaret Thatcher was educated as a chemist. She studied chemistry for four years at Oxford University and received her Bachelor of Science degree. Then, she worked as a research chemist upon the development of emulsifiers for the production of ice cream. Yet, she did not pursue this career and turned to politics. Her political career has actually become the main aspect in the autobiography. According to Margaret Thatcher, while she was still a student, she became a chairperson of the Conservative Party of Oxford University. From the beginning of the 1950s, she began to fight for a place in the Parliament, and in 1959, she achieved her goal by becoming a member of the House of Commons. Later, in 1979, Margaret Thatcher became the first and so far the only woman who occupied the post of the Prime Minister of Great Britain. She stayed on the position for three terms that was the longest time since 1827. At the same time, Margaret Thatcher was also the first woman prime minister of the European country. For such determination and commitment, she was given a ‘iron lady’. Therefore, the author shows the reader that a woman as well as a man can reach the top positions in politics. In addition to telling about Thatcher’s political career, the book uncovers facts regarding her personal and family life and proves that a successful woman can combine both work and family responsibilities.
Analysis and Evaluation
In the given autobiography, the reader can identify a few main themes. The first topic Thatcher touches upon is a way to and a place of a female in the world of politics. She says that a woman should have firm and masculine character to get there since there is no room for weakness in the sphere. She herself is the main illustration of the fact that it is possible. In fact, Margaret Hilda Thatcher occupied a special place in the history of the country. In particular, she is renowned as the founder of a new economic course called ‘Thatcherism’ that made it possible to defeat the crisis in the United Kingdom in the late 1970s-early 1980s. The main efforts of her government were aimed at privatizing enterprises, curtailing social programs and introducing principles of monetarism in the financial and economic spheres. She sought to change what she considered the cause of Britain’s decline. To do this, she advocated for a reduction in state intervention into the economy (deregulation), a decrease in the influence of trade unions, and a cut in spending on the social sphere. She also encouraged privatization of many state-owned enterprises and increased taxes. This caused a decline in the extractive and manufacturing industries, but it was a step towards the transition to the production of services, rather than goods. Unfortunately, despite all the positive changes, Thatcher’s economic policy was the cause of rising unemployment.
In addition to the vigorous activity regarding nation’s economy, Thatcher worked hard to implement changes in the social sphere. At the time, the majority of the British believed that the state should provide them with a certain set of social guarantees. Therefore, Thatcher’s first career achievements were connected with social life of the citizens. For instance, she was nominated for the post of the Parliamentary Deputy Minister of Pensions and State Social Insurance. Later, she dealt with the issues of construction and land ownership, supported the maintenance of the death penalty in the House of Commons and, at the same time, voted for the release of homosexuals from criminal liability.
Speaking about the activity in the political sphere, one has to mention that in the late 1960s, Thatcher participated in the International Visits Program and was able to meet with politicians from the United States, and later, became a member of the Shadow Cabinet of the official opposition. In 1970, after the Conservatives came to power, Margaret Thatcher was appointed a Minister of Education and Science and held this post until 1974. After the crush of the Conservatives, she was the head of the opposition. From 1979 to 1990, Margaret Thatcher was entrusted with resolving critical issues related to the British political course, since the head of government in Britain, although appointed by the monarch, performs many of the functions that nominally belong to the monarch. Owing to her unbending character, conservative and rigid policy, Thatcher received a nickname “The Iron Lady”. She was first called “The Iron Lady” by the Soviet military journalist Yuri Gavrilov in response to sharp criticism of the USSR on January 24, 1979. Therefore, when reading the book, one can witness the story of an ordinary female physicist who achieved enormous success in a political career and, owing to her strong personality, managed to change social, economic and political spheres of the country.
In addition, the book makes it clear that with the defined goals, success is inevitable, and the impossible is in fact possible. Moreover, a woman can be successful at men’s jobs and achieve better outcomes in comparison with males. Politics was the main goal of Margaret Thatcher, and all her life, she aspired to it. As a result, she became the first woman who headed Britain; the first prime minister who won the election three times in a row; and, the first British politician who stayed in power for a record eleven and a half years. Her determination that helped her to fulfill her goals is reflected in her motto that states, “I am extraordinarily patient, provided I get my own way in the end”. In this way, she is similar to another female renowned in the Muslim political history Benazir Bhutto. Bhutto was the first woman Prime Minister in the Muslim world. She was known to be callous to opponents and sympathetic towards animals. The mentioned above two female prime ministers were often compared because their political style was similar. In 1989, Bhutto became the prime minister of Pakistan, and this was a remarkable, ostentatious event as for the first time in a Muslim country, a woman headed the government. Benazir started from full liberalization: in particular, she granted self-government to universities and student organizations, abolished control of the media, and freed political prisoners. Moreover, it should be noted that having received excellent European education and being educated in liberal traditions, Bhutto defended the women’s rights, which was contrary to the traditional culture of Pakistan. For instance, she proclaimed freedom of choice. Women were allowed to choose whether to wear or not to wear a veil. Additionally, they received an opportunity to realize their potential not only as those responsible for keeping of the hearth. During her second term on the position of the prime minister, illiteracy levels among the population decreased by almost a third, many mountain areas were watered, children received free medical care, and the fight against childhood diseases began. Consequently, Bhutto became a popular politician in Pakistan and throughout the Muslim world. Margaret Thatcher was the Iron Lady of England, and Benazir Bhutto was the Iron Lady of the East. The stories of two women prove that there is nothing impossible.
The third theme which is reflected in the book is that despite constant pressure from various politicians, a strong woman should always defend her rights and interests. The autobiography shows that Margaret Thatcher always sharply criticized the Soviet Union, and communism was unacceptable for her. In the foreign policy, she focused on the US and always spoke negatively about Soviet political leaders. On the other hand, she believed that the communist and capitalist countries could coexist by means of mutual compromises and defended this position. The economic and social policies pursued by Margaret Thatcher were called Thatcherism. There were no people who felt indifferent regarding her ideas. For the supporters of “The Iron Lady”, she was a symbolic figure, and her ideas were excellent. Yet, Thatcher’s opponents believed that she did her best to weaken the UK, and thus, particular attention in the book is given to the section about the attempt of her assassination. In 1984, the Irish Republican Army tried to murder Margaret Thatcher. The separatists put a bomb in a hotel in Brighton during a conference of the Conservative Party. Five citizens were killed, but Thatcher herself was not hurt.
Another idea the author want a reader to pay attention to is that a woman can be a successful politician and at the same time have her own personal life. Thatcher underlines the fact that with a huge desire, every female can combine both career and family. Moreover, she stresses that moral support is necessary for a woman no matter what the position she occupies is. Thatcher’s support was her husband. Actually, according to the book, she believed that without his approval and help, she would never be the Prime Minister. She devoted a part of the book to tell about their relations. The reader learns that Margaret Roberts met her husband, a businessperson Denis Thatcher, back in 1949. They met at a dinner in honor of the official approval of Margaret’s candidate from the Conservative Party in Dartford. In 1951, they got married, and in 1953, the twins Carol and Mark were born. Denis Thatcher was 10 years older than Margaret, and for him, it was a second marriage. After his wife’s resignation, Denis Thatcher received the title of a baronet, and Margaret Thatcher, respectively, became a baroness. Denis Thatcher died in 2003; the famous wife lived 10 years more. Therefore, Margaret Thatcher showed that a woman can build a successful career and remains a good wife a mother.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it should be noted that the main argument of Margaret Thatcher’s autobiography is that it is important to have clear position and aspirations if a person wants to achieve something in life. Moreover, she proves that a woman can occupy high positions even in such sphere as politics if she has a desire and determination to do this. More importantly, Thatcher demonstrates that a successful woman is able to combine career and family. Her way to the top of the British political world was not easy, and she had to destroy the psychology of ‘universal well-being’ developed over many centuries that relied on high level of taxation. Instead, she had to inculcate a new system of values and teach everyone had to count on themselves. This innovative approach not only provided Britain with a gradual way out of the crisis, but also proved that capitalism was a flexible system that could adopt new rules of the game and adapt to new conditions depending on the political and economic situation. The book affirms that it is not important who is in power: a man or a woman. What is significant is what kind of person and politician he or she is and what convictions they have.
Despite the fact that the book is really worth reading, a few shortcomings have to be considered. Firstly, the autobiography will be more interesting for women since it describes the success story of a female politician, thereby narrowing down the audience. Secondly, it is full of political terms that ordinary readers will not understand. Overall, it seems that the book can be recommended to all women who dream of a career in politics. At the same time, it will be interesting not only for those involved in politics, but also for those who want to ‘catch’ Margaret’s unquenchable optimism having learned the secrets of her success. The way that the author writes the book is balanced as she clearly adheres to her position describing her childhood and personal life which were aimed at personal political achievements.
July 27, 2020
1.5/5
I'm so proud of myself for finishing this book.
It was a pretty dry read overall - it is mostly a book about Margaret Thatcher's political journey and achievements. Thatcher provides incredibly detailed accounts of every political happening during her 11 years as Prime Minister.
As someone who knows very little about the workings of UK politics, I didn't understand or care about much of it. However, the few pages about the Falklands War and the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong was very interesting to me. It appears to me that for both the Falklands and Hong Kong, Thatcher had the citizens' best interest in mind - regardless of their culture or race. Despite the recent riots that have been happening in Hong Kong, it appears that Thatcher managed to secure the best possible deal for the people of Hong Kong at the time.
The parts I enjoyed the most were actually reading about her personal reflections rather than about political details but those were few and far between (only about 70 pages out of 788 pages… so 8%). I also found it interesting that Thatcher was a chemistry major and her scientific mind proved useful when analyzing facts and environmental issues.
Overall, I was disappointed by the lack of personal details. Thatcher's children and husband were only mentioned in passing, which made me wonder what the family relationship and dynamic was like. I was also hoping for more discussion on feminism but there were perhaps only 3 or 4 paragraphs in which she discussed being ill-suited as a housewife and needing a career that was well-suited for her and one that kept her mentally active.
Nevertheless, there's no denying that Thatcher was a highly intelligent, accomplished, capable, and impressive world leader.
I would definitely recommend this to anyone with a passionate interest in UK political history, politics, and world affairs.
*** #30 of my 2020 Popsugar Reading Challenge - A fiction or nonfiction book about a world leader ***
I'm so proud of myself for finishing this book.
It was a pretty dry read overall - it is mostly a book about Margaret Thatcher's political journey and achievements. Thatcher provides incredibly detailed accounts of every political happening during her 11 years as Prime Minister.
As someone who knows very little about the workings of UK politics, I didn't understand or care about much of it. However, the few pages about the Falklands War and the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong was very interesting to me. It appears to me that for both the Falklands and Hong Kong, Thatcher had the citizens' best interest in mind - regardless of their culture or race. Despite the recent riots that have been happening in Hong Kong, it appears that Thatcher managed to secure the best possible deal for the people of Hong Kong at the time.
The parts I enjoyed the most were actually reading about her personal reflections rather than about political details but those were few and far between (only about 70 pages out of 788 pages… so 8%). I also found it interesting that Thatcher was a chemistry major and her scientific mind proved useful when analyzing facts and environmental issues.
Overall, I was disappointed by the lack of personal details. Thatcher's children and husband were only mentioned in passing, which made me wonder what the family relationship and dynamic was like. I was also hoping for more discussion on feminism but there were perhaps only 3 or 4 paragraphs in which she discussed being ill-suited as a housewife and needing a career that was well-suited for her and one that kept her mentally active.
Nevertheless, there's no denying that Thatcher was a highly intelligent, accomplished, capable, and impressive world leader.
I would definitely recommend this to anyone with a passionate interest in UK political history, politics, and world affairs.
*** #30 of my 2020 Popsugar Reading Challenge - A fiction or nonfiction book about a world leader ***
October 11, 2020
It is so difficult to review an autobiography. The idea of a review is to comment on the book. Yet, it seems inevitable that one becomes ‘judgy” about the person who authored the autobiography. This seems awfully unfair. I experienced this work as extremely, dry, factual, humourless, definitive and dictatorial. The human being, Margaret - the person emerged only when her cabinet backstabbed her out of power. It was interesting that she grew ever more confident and autocratic as the years unfolded. It was her way or no way. Concepts like we, us, our, team, collaboration and cooperation were rapidly replaced by I, me and mine. Fascinating how in her micro management and controlling tendencies she lost the plot with her beloved monetary control - and failed to spot deviations and betrayals under her nose! Of course by that time she was flying high hob-nobbing with world leaders and her failure to nurture and build relationships with her supporters led to her demise. Good IQ - EQ not so much! But that said living in South Africa in 2020 I wish we had such a leader to deal with our Unions and privatize our State owned enterprises. Without a doubt, a courageous, principled and remarkable leader who sadly (like all humans) has that one fatal flaw! Power is indeed heady!
November 20, 2020
Before I start, I just wanted to say that I'm a bit of a 'floating voter' so don't hold any allegiance to any political party. My reason for listening to this book is in part that I grew up with Margaret Thatcher as my Prime Minister, but also, having recently listened to a book about the Falklands War I was interested to her a different perspective on things, that is, other than through the lens of the press.
Fascinating listen, read by Margaret herself, giving detailed accounts of not only her time in office, but her life leading up to her time as Prime Minister. She talks at length about Economics and International Relations, as well as reminding me of many events of the time and giving her predictions for the future. Worth a listen whatever your political beliefs.
Next on my reading list...Tony Blair...should make for an interesting comparison.
Fascinating listen, read by Margaret herself, giving detailed accounts of not only her time in office, but her life leading up to her time as Prime Minister. She talks at length about Economics and International Relations, as well as reminding me of many events of the time and giving her predictions for the future. Worth a listen whatever your political beliefs.
Next on my reading list...Tony Blair...should make for an interesting comparison.
December 5, 2014
Greatest Prime Minister in British history. The autobiography is incredibly detailed, making it at times heavy, however ignoring the details would be an injustice to her time and efforts that made her such a formidable woman. The first book of two within the autobiography is easier to digest and more about her personal life leading up to how she became Prime Minister, the second is a detailed account of politics in the '80s and how she made tough decisions. Well worth a read, though potentially tough on those unused to political and economic jargon.
January 30, 2018
Margaret Thatcher was a woman of conviction and sharp thinking. She was a great leader who achieved success in politics, economics, and world affairs. In this book, she is clear and laser-focused. While reading I feel like I was there looking at the turn of events, moment by moment as a spectator of one of the greatest political events in recent memory.
February 17, 2021
I can't fight the feeling that this book was an opportunity lost. She could have thoroughly described the philosophical and practical reasoning of that time, thus being a relevant document for policy today. Instead, it is a biography of her political life and a 'who said what.' There are some references to decisions made and the significant points of speeches without the underlying reasoning.
April 22, 2021
Contains a lot of information on British politics and while I thought it was good and solid information, I found the book a bit tedious to get through. The narrating was too monotonous to my taste, so I've taken breaks with this one. But definitely worth a read if you're into politics and a look behind the curtains of big decisions.
March 9, 2022
This is about 97% British politics and 3% personal life. That being said, it just wasn't really what I was looking for. I did find the later years politics between Soviet Russia and the UK interesting merely because of current events. I think I also walked away with a better understanding of NATO.
It is a very in depth look at her policies and what she thought of her policies.
It is a very in depth look at her policies and what she thought of her policies.
January 1, 2023
Big old 700 page read , very dry in places, perhaps due to my lack of understanding of the political jargon. I found the acronyms especially difficult to keep up with.
Margaret Thatcher love or hate her was an exceptionally hard working , passionate and intelligent woman who had a remarkable life.
Margaret Thatcher love or hate her was an exceptionally hard working , passionate and intelligent woman who had a remarkable life.
December 16, 2014
I frankly enjoyed this attractive book, I recommend reading of this book to my dear friend Saher who like the autobiography of the effective people in our wold. Nabil Alsagheer
April 4, 2015
A good story but terribly written. Did not motivate me to pick it up and start from where I had stopped.
April 5, 2017
A remarkable life, but unimaginatively and haughtily written. More an assembly of facts, data, dates and timelines than an interesting inspection of her life, thoughts and relationships
December 24, 2020
Eternally boring and uninteresting though it did have a few interesting stories that I enjoyed reading.
February 24, 2021
Couldn’t finish it. Fell asleep every time I picked it up.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 84 reviews