The Battle of Orgreave
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
This really, Scargil did far more to shut down mining in this country than Thatcher ever did. And like a WW1 General, he came out of it just fine while his soldiers went metaphorically over the top to be mown down like Wheat.
Manual Deep mining was in decline and had been for some considerable time.
(If you look at this article and scroll down to Fig3, Uk coal production with a hubbert fit, and the impact of the "Great Strike" as it is called is hard to see even if you know where to look)
Had Scargil and the NUM been more realistic and less confrontational, Mining, and Miners, in the UK could have had a much softer landing
And what is more, production might well have been retained by the use of new technologies that replaced manual face working with robotic mining (Under development since the 60's actually, but suppressed by the NUM) or even in-situ gasification (Which would have been an effective way of exploiting the vast undersea coalfields under the north sea where conventional mining would have been impossible)
[TW]Fox;30165356 said:
No idea on both points.
It's not my feelings, I don't have any towards this situation, I agree that it is irrational but I wasn't there and didn't witness what happened.
People 'oop norf' have long memories - who am I, a southerner born in 1986 too say they shouldn't feel aggrieved by this.
The scenes from that day were broadcast to the nation, what people did not no at the time was the fact the BBC edited them out of sequence, something that they have since apologised for.
It created a false picture, before anyone jumps on me, I accept it as a mistake, not some part of some conspiracy.
It created a false picture, before anyone jumps on me, I accept it as a mistake, not some part of some conspiracy.
Last edited:
Mining was unprofitable and was dying - What Thatcher did was correct.
It was Scargill who turned it into a war, instead of facing facts.
Altered for effect.
Having lived through the episodes of 1984, I can say there was a huge amount of malfeasance on all sides in this dispute.
There were miners, and there were not miners and there were the police (and maybe not police). Events leading up to Orgreave were orchestrated on all sides.
Any enquiry (and one was considered, not promised) would be a huge muddle, incredibly lengthy and expensive and persuede nobody from their currently held views.
I expect we would see Scargill et. al. crawl out from under a stone. The man is as undemocratic as they come. He is the one who decided to try and repeat removing the government as they did a decade earlier in concert with other unions.
It is best that this episode is now left to historians and writers rather than politicians, lawyers and judges.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 2,180
- Location
- Edinburgh
How she did it however was not really correct. The aftermath of the mine closures should have been handled considerably better than just letting the local areas die.
Don't really see what an enquiry would gain though.
Its more how its was done, the state used the police, army and SIS against its own population
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
Quite the little Nazi stormtrooper aren't we. However most people in Britain still think the police should be held to account for what is criminal behaviour. Just because you wear a uniform does not give you carte blanche to do as you see fit. There is an iconic picture about the time of a mounted police officer in the process of clubbing a female who is taking a photograph. What needs, urgently, to be addressed is allowing police officers to retire rather than face prosecution. It gives the rest a bad name and reinforced the view of corrupt police.
There would be no prosecution here, it is not a court, just an enquiry. Same as at Hillsborough.
There was much more corruption in the 1980's police than now, but we have moved on and it is 2016. I think that an enquiry would reinforce a bad image for the police today which would be undeserved and not a reason to hold one.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
At the time all miners were in autonomous regions. They decided what to do, not Scargill. One of the pit regions had already voted to come out on strike and other regions followed or came out in sympathy. Scargill could not tell regions to come out on strike, they were independent. McGahey was the Scottish leader for example. The right wing media like to portray it as Scargill in command telling everyone what to do, reality was different.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
I disagree, regularly prosecuting police officers gives the impression the State will not tolerate criminal policemen and is a warning to other officers. The theory that it was all yesterday and we have all changed so we will just ignore all previous criminal behaviour reinforces the public view that the State will protect as far as possible corrupt policemen. Prosecution can follow the inquiry even though the inquiry could not do so themselves.
yes but when the police were doing the states work not the peoples it's a bit awkward.
I think this is the key point and why they will never look into it, it was done on orders from the government, they did the same at Wapping on a smaller scale.
Did you miss the Labour government that was also in power after 1984 ?