Margaret Thatcher was the dominant political figure of my early adulthood. I never liked what she stood for: from the moment I saw her 1978 World In Action TV interview in which she talked of Britain being “swamped by people with a different culture” – and in so doing dog-whistled to the racism of the National Front – I knew I would never vote Conservative. Not only that – she put millions on the dole without a care, and crushed those who defended workers’ rights. Her reputation as evil incarnate was sealed for all time.

Or so I thought.

I remember the first time I felt an ounce of sympathy for her. It was some time in the 90s, when I heard that she’d said anyone over 26 who ever travels by bus was a failure in life. Immediately I suspected “fake news” (as we didn’t say back then). Nothing she had said or done up to that point had shown contempt for public transport – and certainly not for those who used it (given the crossover with council home dwellers, whose votes she’d sought so strongly). There wasn’t Google in those days, but it’s since become clear that the “bus” quote came from Loelia Ponsonby, a former duchess of Westminster. Yet the bogus story still gets widely circulated.

She never ‘slashed the state’: in fact, public spending rose under Thatcher

Those who fall for it completely misunderstand Thatcher. Yes, she was ruthless; yes, she had a view of the world that believed poorer people would fare better if their safety nets were removed, despite the harsh initial consequences. But she didn’t hate people. She just thought they should take responsibility for themselves, and not look to the state for help. In her notorious “there’s no such thing as society” interview, she spelled this out. “It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour, and life is a reciprocal business, and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations, because there is no such thing as an entitlement unless someone has first met an obligation.”

She was absolutely wrong to take this to extremes, and the mass unemployment her policies caused has led to social problems that have passed down the generations. But in many ways she was not the hardline ideologue that even her most rabid Tory supporters believed her to be. Her upbringing in the family shop marked her out as different to most politicians, realising at an early age that spending more than you have is not sustainable in the long term. Her scientific brain (she studied chemistry) also gave her a strong sense of how things worked. To understand her fully, just look at what she didn’t do.

She refused to privatise the Royal Mail, saying she was “not prepared to have the Queen’s head privatised”. When the Tory-Liberal Democrat government pushed this through in 2013, shortly after her death, it was judged by a parliamentary committee to be a botched operation that undervalued the state asset by £1bn.

She never wanted to sell off British Rail, saying it would be “a privatisation too far”. This unpopular policy was carried out under John Major, and has been a disaster – for passengers, for the public purse – in fact for just about everyone except the shareholders of the massively subsidised private rail companies. No wonder one of Labour’s most popular policies at the last election was rail renationalisation.

She never “slashed the state”: in fact, public spending rose under Thatcher (though mainly as a result of unemployment benefits). She argued that cutting taxes would actually increase the tax take, by creating more wealth.

She never wanted to join the euro. She held out for years against joining the currency’s forerunner, the exchange rate mechanism. After losing her long-term chancellor Nigel Lawson over this, and with her authority ebbing away in her final months, she was effectively forced into joining by his successor, Major. Just two years later – as she had warned him, we now know – Britain humiliatingly crashed out of the ERM on Black Wednesday, proving her right all along.

And look at what she did do. She guided Britain into the single market because she realised that, no matter how frustrating other European nations may be, close cooperation with them brings jobs and economic growth. Those Tories who believe they’re building on Thatcher’s legacy by taking us out are simply delusional.

She stood up to the US. She was no poodle, nor did she hold hands with the US president. Even though she and Ronald Reagan had an excellent working relationship, she ripped into him when his US troops invaded the Commonwealth island of Grenada in 1983, forcing him into a grovelling apology.

When she went to war, she planned for the aftermath. Many people, myself included, opposed the Falkland Islands war, given the huge loss of life relative to the number of islanders. But given Britain’s military disasters since, this has to go down as an example of excellent long-term planning. The troops didn’t just leave and say “job done” when the conflict was over. They stayed to give the islanders a secure future. Contrast this with the short-termism of Tony Blair and David Cameron, exposed so bloodily in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

And all this she achieved having fought against the unadulterated sexism of Britain in the 50s, 60s and 70s on her way to the top. In fact, Thatcher singlehandedly changed the way Britain, and much of the world, viewed women as professionals and leaders.

Other prime ministers since have had her ability (Gordon Brown) or her charisma (Blair) or her communications skills (Cameron). But none have had her courage and determination to bring about a radical change to society, and embed it for generations.

In fact, the more one sees the puny, second-rate Thatcher-wannabes in the modern Conservative party (Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove etc), the more she stands out as a thoughtful and grounded leader. And would she have been duped by the City before the financial crash, as New Labour (and George Osborne) were?

There is, though, one leader who may match her for courage and revolutionary zeal, and who may yet bring about another major shift in society. His name is Jeremy Corbyn.