Partying Thatcher-haters merely demonstrate their irrelevance

A WEEK after Margaret Thatcher's death and with her state funeral taking place today, there is ample evidence of what's wrong with too many on the Left. And not just in Britain.

We must, of course, distinguish the many shades of Left, ranging from the irrational haters to the more serious critics of Thatcher. The former are intellectual pygmies, barely able to touch the hem of the three-times elected, towering figure of Thatcher. The latter form an important part of an ongoing debate about Thatcher's legacy. Along that spectrum, however, too many on the Left still eschew reason in favour of emotion. Instead of intellectual curiosity there is a blind adherence to orthodoxy and hypocrisy.

The mantra this past week has been that Thatcher was and remains a divisive leader. A more accurate assessment is that Thatcher united and continues to unite the extreme Left. On last week's Q&A program on ABC1, an ex-prostitute from Britain foreshadowed the death parties with her own lack of dignity. And "me with no champagne", lamented Brooke Magnanti, as host Tony Jones read breaking news that Thatcher had died.

Back in Britain, soon enough there were death parties complete with champagne and "Thatcher's dead cake". In Brixton, London, partygoers waved "The bitch is dead" signs. Lettering on a local cinema read: "Margaret Thatcher's Dead LOL". In Glasgow the Communist Party, the Socialist Party and their comrades celebrated the death of a democratically elected leader who put all her chips on freedom.

The Socialist Workers Party's newspaper blared "REJOICE" and under that: "THATCHER'S DEAD SPECIAL PULL OUT". When Osama bin Laden died, there was no rejoicing here. The newspaper described bin Laden as a "foe of US imperialism" and "the only serious response to the power of the West".

Independent MP George Galloway tweeted "tramp the dirt down", meaning let's dance on Thatcher's grave.

It makes perfect sense that many on the Left prefer language laced with emotion rather than logic. If they dare venture down the road of reason, it will inevitably take them far away from their beloved shibboleths -- hatred of the free market, contempt towards notions of individual liberty and responsibility, and, accordingly, a deep loathing of Thatcher. Better to frame their objections around alluring emotion in the hope of a fleeting victory. Fleeting because eventually reason wins out.

Let these irrational haters always be reminded that such emotion failed three times when Thatcher won elections. Witness too how British Labour came to its ideological senses, embraced much of Thatcherism and went on to win three elections under Tony Blair. This raises another myth about Thatcher. Contrary to popular belief, her stamp was felt more on the Left than on the Right.

After Thatcher, British voters did not seek out the SWP or some other far-left outfit as an alternative. Ultimately, they sought out Labour under Blair, whose memoirs record his admiration for Thatcher. For all the claims about Thatcher's divisiveness, the Iron Lady united a larger section of the sensible political class behind her reforms, leaving the extreme Left to wallow -- and bond -- in its political insignificance.

Once you understand this, the spiteful celebrations of Thatcher's passing are also better understood: they are a series of funereal wakes to mark the hateful Left's irrelevance.

Some will argue the extreme Left is too far removed from mainstream politics to warrant any attention. Not so. The preference for superficial emotion over reason is a stubborn strain of the Left's DNA -- and it travels far along the spectrum of left-wing politics. That explains one of the differences between Left and Right. While the latter think the former are just plain wrong, the former think the latter are wrong and evil. It also explains why last week Blair warned against the Left's default position of favouring heated emotion over cool reason.

In the wake of a reinvigorated debate about Thatcher's legacy, Blair wrote in The New Statesman: "So where should progressive politics position itself?"

Unlike many in his party, Blair favours logic. "The guiding principle should be that we are the seekers after answers, not the repository for people's anger," he wrote. "We have to be dispassionate even when the issues arouse great passion." That means Labour should resist settling "back into its old territory of defending the status quo . . . and allying itself with the interests" that are given over to passion rather than reason.

Blair wrote that, by contrast, the Conservatives under David Cameron have returned to their "old territory of harsh reality, tough decisions, piercing the supposed veil of idealistic fantasy that prevents the Left from governing sensibly".

Blair pinpoints the Left's flaw succinctly. Returning to the territory of sound reason will, he says, "inspire loathing on the Left".

Whether we are talking about toxic street displays of anti-Thatcher hatred or more covertly passionate rejections of reason, too many on the Left are unencumbered by careful, logical thought. Hence, the same people who hate Thatcher hate Blair. Blair rid Labour of the sentimental, but illogical, Clause 4 of the party's manifesto -- which cemented Labour to the public ownership of assets. He eschewed Labour's feel-good commitment to a big welfare state and old notions of redistributing rather than growing wealth. With that, out too went unrestrained power of the unions, a rejection of British Labour's emotional attachment to an outdated constituency.

Blair picked the nasty strain still runs through a stubborn rump of the mainstream Left. And we are not immune in Australia. For many within the Labor Party, the entire Greens and groups such as GetUp, emotional drivel is a daily indulgence. Deliberate attempts by these people -- from Julia Gillard to GetUp's Simon Sheikh -- to reignite an old-style hate-fuelled class war, be it over a mining tax or superannuation or education or any other policy, betrays a preference for expressing shallow sentiments rather than pursuing prudent lines of reasoning. Happily, the current polls suggest voters prefer the latter.