by Alexander Litvinenko »
25 Sep 2012 15:01
Royalclapper To understand Liverpool and it's polarisation of opinion, an understanding of the underlying social history is the most insightful.
When shipping and trade was booming there were fortunes to be made. However, there wasn't enough labour available. Irish immigrants were therefore invited over for promised work. The inevitable happened and they were living in squalid housing and basically exploited to the max. This is still the backdrop for the very detectable anti-establishment stance held firm by many there. I guess the Mancs have moved on or 'sold out' as the scousers would see it. Similar to pompey/saints I should think, but bigger cities with more illustrious teams.
Unfortunately Liverpool were the big news team at the wrong political time. Imagine what it was like in the 80's with Derek Hatton's mental militant nutters on one side and Thatcher's enforcers on the other!
Personally I'm happy to leave them to it and keep stum.
You're underestim8ing a lot. Rivallry between Liverpool & Manchester goes back a lot further than than.
Liverpool has nearly always controlled the supply of raw materials needed by Manchester to thrive, so there have been occasions when Liverpool merchants controlled the destiny of those in Manchester - the prices they set at the port literally meant the difference between food and starvation for the Manchester workers.
It's no coincident that the first effective canal, the first effective railway and the first effective large-scale ship canal in th UK were all built between Liverpool and Manchester, in attempts by Manchester to lessen the effect on their economy of the transport of coal and cotton from Liverpool merchants.