This is a 1980 file photo showing British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Thatcher’s former spokesman, Tim Bell, said Thatcher died of a stroke Monday morning, April 8, 2013. She was 87. (Courtesy of AP)

Full disclosure: on the political spectrum, I lean to the left. I know this might come as a surprise to some of our regular readers, but it’s true, and I felt it necessary to properly discredit myself from the outset.

My sarcasm notwithstanding, I know that I’ve been spending way too much time at SMU when I comb through my Facebook feed and find all of these sparkling obituaries about Lady Margaret Thatcher.

Now, I’m not going to say that Margaret Thatcher was a war criminal or the spawn of Satan, partly because I don’t want to step on Morrissey’s toes. However, I do think that some of the juicier and more questionable details of Lady Thatcher’s tenure as Prime Minister have been ignored in favor of her image as “The Iron Lady,” and a more honest appraisal of her years in office is in order.

Thatcher is famous for leading a resurgence of the Tories in the United Kingdom, ushering in a new age of privatization, free enterprise and commonsense conservatism. She took on the dastardly labor unions, brought all sorts of business back to England, fought vehemently against the European Community and made England relevant as a world financial power again.

Now, if we limited our study of this important political figure to this pithy summary, we would more or less end up with the Meryl Streep version of Thatcher. We would see the woman who learned as a youngster during World War II about the importance of individual responsibility and welfare; who bravely made the choice to send in troops and defend the Falkland Islands; who narrowly escaped assassination at the hands of Bobby Sands and the Irish Republican Army; who forged a new era for women in politics by becoming the first female Western head of state in modern times.

Pardon my English, but a lot of this is pure poppycock. What about the Margaret Thatcher who denounced Nelson Mandela as a terrorist? What about the head of state who called Indonesian dictator General Suharto “one of our very best and most valuable friends?” What about the legacy of persistent income inequality she left behind after effectively being forced out of power by her own party? What about one of the most powerful women in the world who denounced the feminist movement as poisonous? Even if you consider some of these details qualifications rather than character flaws, they still merit mention in the historical narrative.

Was Margaret Thatcher an influential figure in British and world politics? Undoubtedly. Is she the Conservative champion we’ve made her out to be? That’s debatable. And it’s a debate we shouldn’t be afraid to have. Some Tory MPs like Louise Mensch have denounced critics on the left for rushing in to criticize Thatcher’s legacy, but why shouldn’t we be allowed view her life through this critical lens? As an historian and student of politics, I think it’s my duty to offer the most truthful analysis of public figures like Thatcher possible. Just because the wound is still fresh doesn’t mean it’s unworthy of investigation.

My right-leaning peers might vaunt Thatcher and that is certainly their prerogative. However, I believe that regardless of one’s politics, one should consider as many perspectives as possible when it comes to someone as polarizing as Margaret Thatcher. Speaking ill of the dead might be impolite, but history is a constant dialogue that requires honest criticism, and it’s something we shouldn’t be afraid to offer as we try to discern what Lady Thatcher’s legacy will mean in the coming decades.

Bub is a junior majoring in English, political science and history.