Talk:Arthur Scargill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

	This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.

"Subsequent events in the inductrial landscape of the UK saw Scargill's position during the strike largely vindicated." How exactly? No one would dispute the industrial landscape has changed, everyone thought it would and most far-sighted people saw it needed to. What was his particular position about it? How have subsequent events vindicated him? The industrial landscape of the country has dramatically changed but the economy has grown markedly. Doesn't that along with numerous other lines of evidence actually point to his being mistaken.

Until this statement is substantiated and supported, I'm removing it. --82.38.224.70 20:51, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think the point was that Scargill foresaw the mass closures of mines across the UK and was thus right to take a stand despire pressure not to. See for example, [1], which declares "History shows us that all Scargill predicted did indeed come to pass." I think it's important to make this point in the article, though it could be done in a more NPOV way.

That's an opinion not a fact. The UK mining industry had been in decline in terms of output, mines open and people employed ever since World War I so it did not take a genius to work out that this would continue. Was Scargill right to try to halt this decline through strike action (in fact - was this ever a realistic way of combatting the closures)?

That is the question, and not one I think we can answer even today. Failure to hold a ballot was certainly a tactical error that allowed the Labour Party to avoid declaring support for the strike.

Exile 11:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Acegikmo1 05:55, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"The industrial landscape of the country has dramatically changed but the economy has grown markedly." So the economy growing is the only thing that matters? The USA for example has the largest economy in the world but it has 12 percent of people living below the poverty line.

True - but the UK has a welfare system. Unemployment is now lower than at the time of the strike and the pit closures. Former mining villages and towns are obviously suffering - but this is a process that had been going on for decades before the strike and is repeated in other industries such as textiles, steel and railways. In other words, the UK has, for the last 100 years, gradually ceased to be a major manufacturing and heavy industrial economy (except in, ironically, arms). There are many reasons for this but the fact remains that despite (?) this decline, people in Britain are wealthier, healthier, longer lived (albeit maybe not happier) than at any time in the past.

Scargill believed this process could be halted by strike action - was this at all realistic?

Exile 11:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arthur Scargill - what was his legacy? How should we view him?

I posting this to start a discussion on Arthur Scargill and the way he is entered into the Wikipedia currently which I feel is biased and not objective. Particularly:

1. "fiery and effective orator" I feel that this should be altered to "a fiery and effective orator with sympathetic audiences". It was his lack of effective persuasiveness and communication to the general British public that resulted in him being such a marginalised and ultimately ineffective politician - he had a crushing defeat by the Thatcher government with the unsuccessful miner's strike.

Even his opponents regarded him as effective. Its fair to say it was one of his atributes so we should take the "sympathetic audiences" bit out. Thatcher was the same. She was opposed by the majority of the population consistently but you cant take her charisma and effective speeches away from her.

2. He managed to destroy the National Union of Miners which split during his leadership.

Thats POV. For a start the NUM was a powerful union right up until they were annilated, 1992 onwards is when they were finished. Also you cant ignore the government and coal boards role in trying to nuture the UDM to weaken the NUM.

He did split the union, which had been united until the 1984 strike.

Exile 11:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

3. Although he was elected with an 'overwhelming majority' when he became lifelong President of the NUM many observers felt it was a 'fix'. At the time the election was surrounded by controversy as he suddenly and with little warning ( six weeks) decided to put a vote to the membership for this change in status (previous Presidents were re-elected at regular intervals. This 'gamesmanship' resulted in no effective alternatives having time to organize and campaign.

I take it your refereing to his retirement? That was dodgy but you'll need to get some sources before putting it in.

4. Any way you look at it Arthur Scargill was considered to be way outside the mainstream and largely out of touch with reality - at the time he was referred to as 'the loony left'. Unlike other far left politicians such as Tony Benn or Michael Foot he never managed to really use influence effectively and gain any direct or elected political - somehow I'd suggest that needs to be reflected in the profile.

Again POV. Its right to say he was way way way outside the mainstream. Saying he never used his influence effectivley is wide of the mark. He was instrumental in defeating Heath in 1972 and toppling the Tories in 1974 and the 84 stike was a very close run thing. Mr Benn and Mr Foot never toppled any enemy government.

'Mr Benn and Mr Foot never toppled any enemy government.' That was Arthur's problem. Benn and Foot are democrats and wouldn't dream of toppling the enemy except at the ballot box. Scargill toppled one elected government, and wanted to repeat the performance. Such behaviour didn't endear him to a lot of people, and unsurprisingly the Tories were better prepared second time around...

Unfortunately in the final analysis Scargill failed himself and the people he purported to represent - how can this be put in to balance the entry which seems to infer he was successful at some level?

Opinions?

Nick

He led the NUM were defeated. Was it his fault? Thats debateable at best. "purported"? He was the elected leader of the NUM. He won a landslide in 1980 when elected president and won convincingly after the strike.

[edit] Foreign policy initiatives

How come there's no mention of Scragill's visits with and/or rhetorical support for Ghaddafi and various leaders of communist governments? He was pretty much the George Galloway of his day... AnonMoos 20:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

How come? Well if you can find evidence of this, do so and put it in the article. Wonder if you have got the point of wikipedia?

11:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] libel etc

It is not Ok to write sentences in the article along the lines of "many people think he was a criminal"! He was accused of specific things which were tested in court or in NUm enquiries. The accusations and the results of these enquiries is NPOV. Johncmullen1960 04:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)