Rank the post-war PMs from best to worst

Watch
theeetimdoherty
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Rank the post-war PMs from best to worst, giving reasons.

I'll start:
1) Attlee, for implementing the welfare state.
2) Thatcher, for fixing the unions and showing actual leadership. Many of her policies were terrible tho and she was lucky thanks to North Sea oil and Falkland Islands).
3) Macmillan, for taking initiative in decolonisation and on joining the EEC (tho he did support Suez).

The rest weren't particularly successful:
3) Churchill because he was okay despite hiding strokes from public. Just did nuclear weapons and allowed society to move foreward without his conservatism standing in the way, though he let an unwell Eden come to office.
4) Blair, because although he did nothing to prevent the 2007 financial crisis. The Iraq war was embarassing and immoral.
5) Wilson, because the only good things during his time weren't creditable to him (social liberalisation goes to Roy Jenkins, technological advance was in the making before he came to office) and the bad things were (devaluation was entirely his fault, and his refusal to abandon the US-GBP exchange rate peg made him a slave to the US, he was also terrible at industrial relations).
6) Heath, because he would have been great if he had stood up to the unions. He wanted union reform but couldn't after there was outcry against unemployment hitting a million.
7) John Major, haven't studied him yet but I know he served through Black Wednesday and the economy was meh. I'm not sure if he made any real change.
8) Eden, because he was delirious to attack Egypt. It literally led to the collapse of Western influence in the Middle East, he was out of tune with the new post-colonial world. Plus Nasser hadn't actually threatened to block the Suez Canal and he was forced to nationalise because the Americans withdrew funds from the Aswan Dam, and he couldn't break his promise to his people. He was also against joining Europe at a time when de Gaulle wouldn't have blocked British entry.

I won't rank Callaghan, Brown or May because they all served during extreme circumstances which were beyond their control. I won't rank Home because his time in office was short and uneventful.
2
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
Cameron and May as the worst for obvious reasons with Blair not too far behind for besmirching our name in Iraq simply to fellate that prized prat Bush.
I imagine Johnson will soon be joining the list of ignominy though.
1
reply
theeetimdoherty
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#3
(Original post by Napp)
Cameron and May as the worst for obvious reasons with Blair not too far behind for besmirching our name in Iraq simply to fellate that prized prat Bush.
I imagine Johnson will soon be joining the list of ignominy though.
Oh yeah I forgot about Cameron. Austerity didn't even work and he just led us into Brexit, he is probably the worse second only to Anthony Eden
1
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
1) Thatcher - Destroyed militant unionism, lowered taxes for the majority of ordinary people, gave millions the Right To Buy. Oversaw the Lawson boom of 84-91. Took back the Falklands and sunk the Belgrano.

2) Blair - Destroyed the left in his party by forcing them to adopt the Thatcherite consensus. Gave BOE independence. Brought in the minimum wage. Maintained Tory spending plans until 01. Invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and Sierra Lionne and Kosovo.

3) Major - Continued the Thatcherite consensus. Invaded Iraq and freed Kuwait. Recession early on was avoidable but ultimately the buck stops with Thatcher for being PM when we entered ERM.

4) MacMillan - The best of an uninspiring bunch between 45-79. Oversaw a massive expansion of social housing (even for working people). Oversaw strong economic growth.

5) Cameron - Maintained a coalition for the full 5 years (we see in other states how difficult that can be), oversaw a falling deficit, falling unemployment and reasonable growth from 2013. Oversaw air strikes in Iraq and Libya. Oversaw the greatest changes to education since the 80’s.

..

6) Attlee - Overrated because most of what he did was discussed in the national government and so would have been done by Churchill anyway. In addition people are somewhat selective in that the original welfare state was not like todays, unmarried mothers for example were feckless and sent to charities. He did at least continue the nuclear programme and fought the Korean War. He is no doubt be spitting in his grave at the modern lefts naive lack of patriotism.

7) Churchill - Continued the post WW2 consensus. Oversaw strong economic growth.

..

8) Heath - Oversaw our entry into the Common Market which in hindsight was a bad move given our links to the Commonwealth were sacrificed. Accomplished little of note and cowed to the unions.

9) May - Despite her Steps Of Downing Street Speech being pornographic she became a victim of her electoral failing and lacking the resolve to leave the EU when she said she would. Failed on the dominant issue of the day.

10) Callaghan - Changed social housing rules to limit the number of working people. A disastrous policy responsible for the Ghettos of the 80’s and 90’s. Accomplished little else due to little to no majority.

11) Brown - Possibly the most unlucky PM in timing, he became PM just months before the Banking Crisis blew up. Accomplished nothing as a result beyond avoiding being knifed.

12) Wilson - Accomplished little, was suspected of being a Republican and having Soviet sympathies. Has more in common with Corbyn than Attlee.

13) Eden - Capitulated to the US at Suez marking the end of any hope of maintaining hegemony.

..

I chose not to judge Alex Douglas Home since he was only PM for a year.
2
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by Rakas21)

11) Brown - Possibly the most unlucky PM in timing, he became PM just months before the Banking Crisis blew up. Accomplished nothing as a result beyond avoiding being knifed.
In fairness he did manage the crash quite well, or at least as well as can be expected
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
(Original post by Napp)
Cameron and May as the worst for obvious reasons with Blair not too far behind for besmirching our name in Iraq simply to fellate that prized prat Bush.
I imagine Johnson will soon be joining the list of ignominy though.

I can’t remember exactly where but I seem to recall many accounts, pretty sure C. Hitchens and Campbell’s diaries -That it’s a misconception about Blair following Bush’s lead- if anything Blair was more hawkish than Bush.

Blair was always a NeoCon. Bush actually run as a non interventionist before 9/11
Last edited by Alt Tankie; 1 year ago
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
None of them are good , this is a case of least bad. The last three ought to rot in hell. The ones I’ve missed aren’t even worth mentioning.

1: Wilson
2: Attlee
3: Cameron
4: Heath
5: Major
6: May
7: Brown
8: Thatcher
9: Blair
10: Churchill
0
reply
theeetimdoherty
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
None of them are good , this is a case of least bad. The last three ought to rot in hell. The ones I’ve missed aren’t even worth mentioning.

1: Wilson
2: Attlee
3: Cameron
4: Heath
5: Major
6: May
7: Brown
8: Thatcher
9: Blair
10: Churchill
Wilson number 1? What did he achieve, other than the open university?
0
reply
NinjaBurger1337
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
None of them are good , this is a case of least bad. The last three ought to rot in hell. The ones I’ve missed aren’t even worth mentioning.

1: Wilson
2: Attlee
3: Cameron
4: Heath
5: Major
6: May
7: Brown
8: Thatcher
9: Blair
10: Churchill
How can you say none of them are good? What are your criteria for a "good prime minister".
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by theeetimdoherty)
Wilson number 1? What did he achieve, other than the open university?
Nothing but he wins by not doing anything that bad
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by NinjaBurger1337)
How can you say none of them are good? What are your criteria for a "good prime minister".
Making society a better place for the bulk of the country than when you took over. Not needlessly going to war.

Stanley Baldwin was probably the last ‘good’ leader we had.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
Nothing but he wins by not doing anything that bad
And being the only PM to be investigated for Republican and Soviet sympathies.
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by Rakas21)
And being the only PM to be investigated for Republican and Soviet sympathies.
That’s probably why he didn’t do anything bad 👍🏻😂
0
reply
theeetimdoherty
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
Nothing but he wins by not doing anything that bad
Wilson was very unsuccessful. He put the UK through two years of crippling austerity to avoid devaluation, but failed and so devalued anyway - this was a massive failure on his part and led to the collapse of the sterling area, arguably the coup de grace to Britain's international power (which to maintain was his objective). Alongside austerity, he created the DEA to implement a 25% increase in economic output but this failed miserably - you can't achieve rapid growth under austerity. Not to mention the unions, which he handled poorly.
0
reply
username402722
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 year ago
#15
Attlee was the best for founding the NHS and post war reconstruction.

The worst and indeed the worst at least since Lord North in the 18th Century, if not of all time, is Boris Johnson. In fact if you compared it to a football league table and placed all the others somewhere in the Premier League, he would not even make the National League South (sixth tier).
0
reply
NinjaBurger1337
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
(Original post by barnetlad)
Attlee was the best for founding the NHS and post war reconstruction.

The worst and indeed the worst at least since Lord North in the 18th Century, if not of all time, is Boris Johnson. In fact if you compared it to a football league table and placed all the others somewhere in the Premier League, he would not even make the National League South (sixth tier).
That's just silly. He's not actually done anything yet.
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
(Original post by theeetimdoherty)
Wilson was very unsuccessful. He put the UK through two years of crippling austerity to avoid devaluation, but failed and so devalued anyway - this was a massive failure on his part and led to the collapse of the sterling area, arguably the coup de grace to Britain's international power (which to maintain was his objective). Alongside austerity, he created the DEA to implement a 25% increase in economic output but this failed miserably - you can't achieve rapid growth under austerity. Not to mention the unions, which he handled poorly.
Still better than the others in that this did the least damage to the country.

Best in this case doesn’t mean competent and successful . Blair was very competent and successful but was dreadful for the country
0
reply
username402722
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 year ago
#18
(Original post by NinjaBurger1337)
That's just silly. He's not actually done anything yet.
He has done plenty of bad things already. Making no effort to renegotiate the Brexit deal and putting no alternative to the backstop, trying to shut down Parliament, just for starters.
1
reply
NinjaBurger1337
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 year ago
#19
(Original post by barnetlad)
He has done plenty of bad things already. Making no effort to renegotiate the Brexit deal and putting no alternative to the backstop, trying to shut down Parliament, just for starters.
Shutting down parliament was the effort! If the EU knows parliament can block a No Deal Brexit then Johnson has no leverage to negotiate a more favourable deal. I don't understand how people don't see this, Johnson can't threaten the EU with a no deal (and force them to give a better deal) if he can't threaten them with a No Deal.
0
reply
username402722
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 year ago
#20
(Original post by NinjaBurger1337)
Shutting down parliament was the effort! If the EU knows parliament can block a No Deal Brexit then Johnson has no leverage to negotiate a more favourable deal. I don't understand how people don't see this, Johnson can't threaten the EU with a no deal (and force them to give a better deal) if he can't threaten them with a No Deal.
Theresa May tried that in March and it did not work. How can you have a better deal in any case if you don't say what you think a better deal is?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you experienced financial difficulties as a student due to Covid-19?

Yes, I have really struggled financially (20)
13.16%
I have experienced some financial difficulties (42)
27.63%
I haven't experienced any financial difficulties and things have stayed the same (63)
41.45%
I have had better financial opportunities as a result of the pandemic (23)
15.13%
I've had another experience (let us know in the thread!) (4)
2.63%

Watched Threads

View All