Most of the Orgreave battle was captured by multiple video sources, public and private, and no doubt the police too. The reason most of this video was never seen was because of the broadcast monopoly held by the TV companies. There was no video-capable internet service available at the time, otherwise it's highly likely that the alternative views would have been widely disseminated privately. Who knows how it might have turned out.

But I think most people in Britain were aware of these large-scale abuses, whether they actually saw it on the news or not. It was just very difficult to challenge an almighty government with little concern for the welfare of its own citizens, and the inherent reluctance to lose the 'I'm All Right Jack' position which still accounts for much of the political apathy/social conservatism in Britain, especially when folks move into the middle-income bracket - and are unfamiliar (or uninterested) with the industrial cities of the midlands and the north and how they differ, both socially and economically. And historically. We're Vikings and they're Normans!

It still is difficult to challenge an almighty government, but not quite as difficult these days, and less risky to the more confident individual. I still find Alice's retort at the end of her Adventures in Wonderland to be one of the most apposite for all kinds of scenarios in modern society:

`Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

`I won't!' said Alice.

`Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

`Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) `You're nothing but a pack of cards!'

https://www.cs.indiana.edu/metastuff/wonder/ch12.html 

You might look at the election results for 1979, 1983 and 1987. I don't see an apathetic public; I see governments elected with large majorities on a platform which quite specifically included confrontation with the increasingly politicised unions.

I joined the offshore oil industry around that time and that industry never became effectively unionised - still hasn't - and while the reasons are far from simple, there is no doubt that the attitudes of men who had had a belly full of union politics - especially former construction workers with bitter memories of disputes like Isle of Grain - was an important factor in that.

The TUC generally never cared less about the livelihoods of men who weren't members, and (as at Isle of Grain) could be more interested in faction fighting than anyone's interests. They could also (as the NUM did) exclude whole categories of men from employment.

---

You might look at the election results for 1979, 1983 and 1987. I don't see an apathetic public; I see governments elected with large majorities on a platform which quite specifically included confrontation with the increasingly politicised unions.

I joined the offshore oil industry around that time and that industry never became effectively unionised - still hasn't - and while the reasons are far from simple, there is no doubt that the attitudes of men who had had a belly full of union politics - especially former construction workers with bitter memories of disputes like Isle of Grain - was an important factor in that.

The TUC generally never cared less about the livelihoods of men who weren't members, and (as at Isle of Grain) could be more interested in faction fighting than anyone's interests. They could also (as the NUM did) exclude whole categories of men from employment.

:thumbsup:

The 1979 General Election result was an inevitability.

Rampant inflation and the so called "Winter of Discontent" under the disastrous government of Jim Callahan took the country to the brink of economic collapse. The government had no overall majority but was supported by the Liberals, the so called "Lib Lab Pact". The Liberals stopped supporting the government which gave Thatcher the opportunity to table a motion of no confidence in the government.

The government (by one vote) lost when Liberals voted with the Tory's and so paved the way for Thatcher to come to power.

There is an old Chinese proverb "May you live in interesting times", interesting they certainly were but possibly something we could have well done without.

---

Indeed. Things could not continue on that basis.

That said, quite how close the country really was, to economic collapse is a pretty good question. By current standards we were actually in pretty good shape.

It would be simplistic to say Thatcher was elected to fight the unions - her intention to counter the huge inflation of the time was a major factor, and the obvious failure of anything tried up to that time, meant that voters were willing to support new and radical policies.

But she certainly WAS elected, and re-elected, to confront the unions and a lot of working people supported her in that. Look at the map of the result - to claim that she was supported in the South and rejected in the North, really doesn't bear examination

I'm afraid that I'm no believer in the endless re-visiting of "old, unhappy, far-off things, and battles long ago". Those days are gone, for better or worse.

---

I'm afraid that I'm no believer in the endless re-visiting of "old, unhappy, far-off things, and battles long ago". Those days are gone, for better or worse.

Hmm, I can sort of understand that BUT we really need to set history 'straight', as have the Hilsboro' relatives, because those who don't heed the lessons of history are destined to repeat it - and we REALLY DON'T want to do that do we ?

Hmm, I can sort of understand that BUT we really need to set history 'straight', as have the Hilsboro' relatives, because those who don't heed the lessons of history are destined to repeat it - and we REALLY DON'T want to do that do we ?

I believe some action was taken a fair while back.

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/football-stadiums-and-the-law.htm 

AARGH---
Don't you think resources should be spent sorting out whats happening now rather than digging up crap, I lived through the '80s' , I cut wood for the fuelless ones, I was in the centre of the cold homes -- this is all nasty, what is happening now is worse!,
Our mate Dave is really skrewing us, this is where the enquiries should be aimed. !!!

---

I'm afraid that I'm no believer in the endless re-visiting of "old, unhappy, far-off things, and battles long ago". Those days are gone, for better or worse.

Hmm, I can sort of understand that BUT we really need to set history 'straight', as have the Hilsboro' relatives, because those who don't heed the lessons of history are destined to repeat it - and we REALLY DON'T want to do that do we ?

Unfortunately it is impossible to set history 'straight'. History is always biased, and generally just perpetuates bad feeling.

Chris.

I find investigating history and discovering hitherto unknown facts gives me a really good feeling. Mostly, it's facts about old mines.

While we're at it, why not instigate an inquiry into the failures of Harold in 1066?,
At least it will re-direct public money into the pockets of Tory lackeys who run these things.

---

While we're at it, why not instigate an inquiry into the failures of Harold in 1066?,
At least it will re-direct public money into the pockets of Tory lackeys who run these things.

::) Well as you've brought it up: it transpires that the arrow didn't originally go into Harold's eye; the arrow's direction was modified by a poor restoration of the Bayeux Tapestry in the middle ages. And what do we learn from this? eye protection, health and safety at war....:lol:

While we're at it, why not instigate an inquiry into the failures of Harold in 1066?,
At least it will re-direct public money into the pockets of Tory lackeys who run these things.

::) Well as you've brought it up: it transpires that the arrow didn't originally go into Harold's eye; the arrow's direction was modified by a poor restoration of the Bayeux Tapestry in the middle ages. And what do we learn from this? eye protection, health and safety at war....:lol:

Aah, another example of manipulation by the 'powers that be' ---

---

That's interesting because the Hillsborough and Orgreave families aren't the 'powers that be'. And it's a Tory government.
So what's going on?
Who's pulling the string?

And in my opinion, if there are people still alive who have been affected by injustices of the past, then those events need to be revisited, even if they were a generation or two ago, then do it.

I just thought that this may be of interest:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-36302227 

---