Michael always looked like the least together person in the room; but always, always a sharp mind. He never abandoned his principles either. I think history will look favorably on Foot; the last leader of a major political party in Britain who cared more for the issues than image, soundbite and spin.
@ERL I'm inclined to agree. I align more with conservative policies but I have great respect for Foot. He lived through the 30s when there really were massive differences in social wealth, and looking back, it's clear that Britain really did need a good dose of socialism to lessen the divide. Britain is much fairer today than it was in Foot's and Bevin's day, and it is so partly due to lifelong struggle for fairness by Foot, Benn et el. Regards.
Try to imagine nearly any modern politician who has read Hazlitt and Montaigne for pleasure; too intellectual I suspect to be a really successful politician.
@@andrewrobinson8305 two reasons ,he would never been able to Garner support from his soft base and the manifesto produced in 83 was in no way going to be accepted ,it was a total economic suicide note , As a working class guy I knew that thatchers agenda was scary but needed , Her character was totally opposed to the consensus of post war years ,she unlike any other premier took on her own party and labour to recapture the national pride that was destroyed by high minded patrons of old Tory left leaders, and labours socialistic passion for communistic beaucracy , Foot was not a politcal Machine he was a romantic poet and philosophical theorist He hadn't the skill to lay his own party in order how could he manage the state
@@phillusted7364the difference being that Powell was supported by the white working classes of all sections of the country. Thatcher was only really ever loved by the South East/East Anglian working classes
A great speaker who I first saw when I was 16. in the late 70's, and last saw when Hazlitt's new tombstone was unveiled in Soho. But Spike told the better jokes. Of course, I would say that.
Because in them days Remembrance Sunday was taken extremely seriously. Some may say it was used politically to attack Foot, maybe for some, but you have to remember in 1980 most WW2 veterans were still alive. And it was their opinion that counted. Many did see it as Foot not treating the day with the solemnity and reverence it absolutely deserved. Today you have public school boy sons of aging rock stars swinging from flag cords attached to the Cenotaph; only to claim later that he didn’t know the significance of what he was doing. And the outcry was minimal. A illustration if one was needed of how times and attitudes have changed.
NHS is an example. In 1948 it commenced, and yes it has its flaws, but it is there when anyone, no matter how much you earn, needs it. I should know, the NHS has saved my life in 2017.
@@johnking5174 yes I agree I'm very proud of the NHS, I think I worded my question wrongly I meant to ask if there were any examples of completely socialist countries being socially and economically successful. You're right the NHS is a shining example of what health care should be, yes we have to make sure it gets the funding it needs, but I have to say I think many countries could learn a lot from the NHS, I consider myself very lucky to have been born in a country where I know healthcare is a human right 👍
I guess the real problem with answering your question is that we don't know, because socialist counties have never been allowed to stand on their own to fail or succeed of their own accord. Socialist countries have never been allowed to exist without extreme interference from capitalist countries. Economic sanctions, military coups, or general interference have plagued socialist experiments in Chile, Bolivia, Cuba etc. So they have historically failed, but not necessarily because the system is doomed to failure, but due to the hostility of established capitalist nations strangling socialism in its crib wherever it raises its head. Socialism in Bolivia is perhaps the best example of success, although it fell to a right wing coup in 2019. However, they were re-elected overwhelming at the first election after the coup, if that's any indication. Poverty went down, literacy went up, and the general state of the country improved under MAS. Yugoslavia was also very successful under Tito as well, but fell apart without his leadership among other things. That being said, socialism in Venezuela and the soviet union has undoubtedly failed, but due to poor management and egotistical authoritarian leaders in my opinion. I think any social/economic system is only as strong as the circumstances, leadership and management allows; and socialism has been kept from playing out due to capitalist hostility. Probably a bit too long, but I hope that this helps to answer your question!
I have a problem with your question. Some things can work well controlled by the state and some things not so well. The idea that all things should be socialist or just all capitalised is a problem. Also remember that pretty much all states fall apart if they have a Peresidential system like what you see in the US.
Socialism works in small bursts, but the problem with Socialism is that it very quickly begins to look like communism, that the big difference with Capitalism, the line between Capitalism & Fascism is much more clearer than the line between Socialism and Communism, I use to be a member of The Labour Party under Corbyn, it was fine at first but then the Communists in the Momentum group were given too much power.. By Corbyn. I’ve since made it clear I will not rejoin Labour unless the Momentum group are expelled from the party... And I’m still waiting.. and probably will be waiting for the rest of my life, but the nice part is that I’m politically independent, and open to all ideas
Even if he wouldn't have made a good PM, he is a type of politician we are dearly missing today. The man stood for what he believed.
Passionate belief in a ideology that oppressed millions is nothing to be admired.
You need good presentation skills and the need to tolerate bullshit to become Prime Minister. Foot didn't have those "qualities"
So, so right. He was a brilliant man.
He spent an entire life (funded by the taxpayer) achieving absolutely nothing. What’s to admire about that?
Michael Foot: proof that one can disagree with almost everything he said or did but still hold him in respect.
Michael always looked like the least together person in the room; but always, always a sharp mind. He never abandoned his principles either. I think history will look favorably on Foot; the last leader of a major political party in Britain who cared more for the issues than image, soundbite and spin.
history looks back as the 1983 election as one of the bigggest mistakes in british politics
@ERL I'm inclined to agree. I align more with conservative policies but I have great respect for Foot. He lived through the 30s when there really were massive differences in social wealth, and looking back, it's clear that Britain really did need a good dose of socialism to lessen the divide. Britain is much fairer today than it was in Foot's and Bevin's day, and it is so partly due to lifelong struggle for fairness by Foot, Benn et el. Regards.
Not sure how you could not love this man - whether you agreed with him or not.
Easily. As we now know he WAS an agent for the KGB.
Thanks for posting ; I learned a lot. I wish the film covered his sisters, not only his brothers.
Great doc. Thanks for the upload. Jeremy Corbyn from 36:27
One of the few political documentaries I've watched where I actually feel better after watching (and I don't even agree with Mr. Foot on most issues).
Sorry for the lateness of my reply ,u spoke my own view
Try to imagine nearly any modern politician who has read Hazlitt and Montaigne for pleasure; too intellectual I suspect to be a really successful politician.
Heck, about the coat thing...even the Queen Mum think the coat is not wrong.
The brilliance of Foot!
and i wonder why labour never won?
Still did better than Corbyn
Michael was an extreme intellectual,his mind was way to high for politics,and I was opposed to him ,yet he was the only genuine opposer of thatcher
Why were you opposed to him?
@@andrewrobinson8305 two reasons ,he would never been able to Garner support from his soft base and the manifesto produced in 83 was in no way going to be accepted ,it was a total economic suicide note ,
As a working class guy I knew that thatchers agenda was scary but needed ,
Her character was totally opposed to the consensus of post war years ,she unlike any other premier took on her own party and labour to recapture the national pride that was destroyed by high minded patrons of old Tory left leaders, and labours socialistic passion for communistic beaucracy ,
Foot was not a politcal
Machine he was a romantic poet and philosophical theorist
He hadn't the skill to lay his own party in order how could he manage the state
He can’t have been that smart because he spent a lifetime advocating a system that has never worked.
Michael Foot was a decent man and tried to understand why the white working class supported Enoch Powell
pity he never understood why the white working class supported Thatcher?
@@phillusted7364the difference being that Powell was supported by the white working classes of all sections of the country. Thatcher was only really ever loved by the South East/East Anglian working classes
06:34 Jealous of his magnificent library!
It's probably all Marxist drivel.
@@jackhadroom4540 like Disraeli you mean?
A great speaker who I first saw when I was 16. in the late 70's, and last saw when Hazlitt's new tombstone was unveiled in Soho. But Spike told the better jokes. Of course, I would say that.
Michael Foots only problem was: He didn’t have a leadership bone in his body.
45:07 where G. Brown begins his speech
Credulous.
If he was so clever why didn't he realise what a disaster he would be at being the leader of labour.Or even being the pm.
I I don't understand why wearing a coat with cause so much Complaint
Because in them days Remembrance Sunday was taken extremely seriously.
Some may say it was used politically to attack Foot, maybe for some, but you have to remember in 1980 most WW2 veterans were still alive. And it was their opinion that counted.
Many did see it as Foot not treating the day with the solemnity and reverence it absolutely deserved.
Today you have public school boy sons of aging rock stars swinging from flag cords attached to the Cenotaph; only to claim later that he didn’t know the significance of what he was doing.
And the outcry was minimal.
A illustration if one was needed of how times and attitudes have changed.
The worst Prime Minister we never had.
And now in 2019 we have Theresa May (still as I type this on 17th May 2019) - and you think she is better?
It was him and his wife discussing extra marital experiences, that really really made me cringe... Jeepers ‼️
Question.... Can anyone give me an example of #Socialism working ❓ Serious question, can a country grow and be prosperous, or do they all stagnate ❓
NHS is an example. In 1948 it commenced, and yes it has its flaws, but it is there when anyone, no matter how much you earn, needs it. I should know, the NHS has saved my life in 2017.
@@johnking5174 yes I agree I'm very proud of the NHS, I think I worded my question wrongly I meant to ask if there were any examples of completely socialist countries being socially and economically successful. You're right the NHS is a shining example of what health care should be, yes we have to make sure it gets the funding it needs, but I have to say I think many countries could learn a lot from the NHS, I consider myself very lucky to have been born in a country where I know healthcare is a human right 👍
I guess the real problem with answering your question is that we don't know, because socialist counties have never been allowed to stand on their own to fail or succeed of their own accord.
Socialist countries have never been allowed to exist without extreme interference from capitalist countries. Economic sanctions, military coups, or general interference have plagued socialist experiments in Chile, Bolivia, Cuba etc. So they have historically failed, but not necessarily because the system is doomed to failure, but due to the hostility of established capitalist nations strangling socialism in its crib wherever it raises its head.
Socialism in Bolivia is perhaps the best example of success, although it fell to a right wing coup in 2019. However, they were re-elected overwhelming at the first election after the coup, if that's any indication.
Poverty went down, literacy went up, and the general state of the country improved under MAS. Yugoslavia was also very successful under Tito as well, but fell apart without his leadership among other things.
That being said, socialism in Venezuela and the soviet union has undoubtedly failed, but due to poor management and egotistical authoritarian leaders in my opinion.
I think any social/economic system is only as strong as the circumstances, leadership and management allows; and socialism has been kept from playing out due to capitalist hostility.
Probably a bit too long, but I hope that this helps to answer your question!
I have a problem with your question. Some things can work well controlled by the state and some things not so well. The idea that all things should be socialist or just all capitalised is a problem.
Also remember that pretty much all states fall apart if they have a Peresidential system like what you see in the US.
Socialism works in small bursts, but the problem with Socialism is that it very quickly begins to look like communism, that the big difference with Capitalism, the line between Capitalism & Fascism is much more clearer than the line between Socialism and Communism,
I use to be a member of The Labour Party under Corbyn, it was fine at first but then the Communists in the Momentum group were given too much power.. By Corbyn. I’ve since made it clear I will not rejoin Labour unless the Momentum group are expelled from the party... And I’m still waiting.. and probably will be waiting for the rest of my life, but the nice part is that I’m politically independent, and open to all ideas
He had an affair with a much younger woman in the 70s almost causing his marriage to end... almost alluded to here at about 29 minutes in