No, I don't. I prefer Oscar Wilde's view on society than hers.

"Society" definitely exists, I just think it means something very different from what most people assume it does. Without some form of society, the very concepts of "War", "Class", "Poverty", even "Money" itself, couldn't exist, and the other, positive things whose existence depends on that of society, don't really add up to much compared to the massive sacrifices inherent in the existence of the negative ones. So I disagree, there is such as thing as society, it's just not an especially good thing.

i think margaret thatcher has no idea being she isn't even human.

Well... Sounds like somebody needs a lecture on ontology! Ontology is the philosophical sub-topic related to being: "what does it mean to say that something exists?" Back in the days of Bill Clinton and Monica, the press had a field day with Bill's creative noodlings over the definition of the word "is" -- and while surely he was wiggling with semantics, the underlying question is actually quite deep. What does it mean to say some THING exists? Where exactly is "society"? Certainly there are individual people, yes? Or are there? How exactly does one define an individual? At first, it seems like common sense: a person is a human being. Ok, does that include a dead body? The body decomposes gradually... at what point does it stop being an individual? Going in the other direction, at what point does a collection of individuals become "society"? Two? Three? A thousand? It's legitimate to say society doesn't exist, if by "exist" you mean something like: has a distinguishable boundary and location, takes up space, and has a definable arising point and departing point in time. It's legitimate to say that society DOES exist, if by "exist" you mean "can be the subject of thought". Even a unicorn exists by this definition: it exists as a real idea. Common sense is naive about ontology: it presumes that all kinds of existence are equivalent. Furthermore, it attributes certain qualities to things which are actually false: permanence and independence in particular. Find one thing in your experience which is permanent: even the stars burn out eventually. Find one thing in your experience which is independent of all other things, which depends on nothing else for it's existence... (Good luck, we'll not wait around for long on that one) Why should we even bother with this question? Isn't it just some silly philosophical exercise? In most cases, probably yes. But there's one case in particular where it really matters a lot: the ontology of "self" is the axle on which the wheel of ignorance spins -- we take ourselves to be fixed and permanent entities, independent of the rest of reality. That mistake is the ground of excessive self-centeredness, which is the basis of a whole mass of human malfunctions that plague mankind generation after generation. Ontology: it's not just for eggheads anymore.

What was the context her statement? To be able tonswer it is useful to know.

I'm sure she was trying to get at something that actually made sense...I don't know what that could possibly be though...

This quote is often taken out of context. She was talking about money and spending on good causes. What she really meant was "there is no such bank account as society". If you say "society should pay for... " what you actually mean is that people, via tax, should pay for... . It is unfair to take the exact phrasing of a sentence in an interview, not a pre-prepared speech, out of context.

Yes, it makes a difference. She was not intending to deny the general concept of society, only the concept of an entity which could reach into its wallet and pay for whatever social good it was that she was refusing to pay for. She was not denying - at that time, at least - the concept of society as a mutually sustaining group, only that when it comes to paying, it is the members of the group not the group as a whole who pay.

im very left wing... i believe in giving everyone a chance at life and if people abusse it so be it aslong as the people who need it get it. For what the torys did and stand for i dont agree... i know people who vote conservative just because they have made a break and now have money... what does that show when she says something like that? even if she didnt pre prepare it? lets privatize education? healthcare? and so on so that all the lower class people suffer? sounds just what i want to happen? fuck no! all the shit in politics now with gordon brown is just press... fuck it let the torys have it when thatcher quote 'Where there is discord, may we bring harmony'... yes for the people that have money fuck the parents who struggled! im probably just young and clueless but i know how much them being in power affected my family so i would never ever vote them! listen to the song Frank Turner - Thatcher Fucked The Kids if you can infact heres a link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjfSucUhJiQ sorry if i have any of my facts wrong and so on but you know hope everyones well x