[Capablanca]

One man's prophet; another man's pariah.

Enoch Powell would have turned 100 years old today.

A decent piece by Ed West in today's Telegraph:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ed...opean-tragedy/

One point Ed doesn't touch on is the profound effect Powell's notorious 1968 speech had on both the Conservative and Labour parties.

[David Tee]

Originally Posted by Capablanca

One man's prophet; another man's pariah.

Enoch Powell would have turned 100 years old today.

A decent piece by Ed West in today's Telegraph:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ed...opean-tragedy/

One point Ed doesn't touch on is the profound effect Powell's notorious 1968 speech had on both the Conservative and Labour parties.

....and presumably you're not going to enlighten us either?

[oldfogey101]

The 'whip hand' doesn't seem especially prophetic. Unless counting serving tea to immigrants in cafes on the same footing to everyone else was considered as having the whip hand.

His numbers argument was fair enough I suppose as one factor, if not a little bit obvious.

[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by oldfogey101

The 'whip hand' doesn't seem especially prophetic. Unless counting serving tea to immigrants in cafes on the same footing to everyone else was considered as having the whip hand.

His numbers argument was fair enough I suppose, if not a little obvious.

He was quoting a conversation at that point. That was the view of a man who was taking his daughters out of the country because of that prediction of his. Powell was merely letting this concern be known.

[oldfogey101]

Originally Posted by Blairdennon

He was quoting a conversation at that point. That was the view of a man who was taking his daughters out of the country because of that prediction of his. Powell was merely letting this concern be known.

He agreed with it. The anecdote wasn't necessarily true.

As it turned out it wasn't very prophetic.

[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by oldfogey101

He agreed with it. The anecdote was necessarily true.

Then that is your misunderstanding. He recounted the anecdote because that was the concern of one of his constituents. That was to illustrate the problem and how others were perceiving what was happening. He may or may not have agreed with it as 'the whip hand' but he certainly stated that the Race Relations Act would allow injustice. Not quite the same thing.

[Capablanca]

Originally Posted by David Tee

....and presumably you're not going to enlighten us either?

Ok, a bit lazy of me I know, but I like to leave a little space for FMs to think for themselves.

For the Tories it presented the problem of how to deal with views that the progressive wing considered unpallatable in spite of them being widely held by the electorate and members of their own party. The Tories still have these quandaries on issues like Europe.

For Labour the problem was that the white working classes overwhelmingly agreed with Powell, This in turn led the leadership becoming suspicious of the people they formed to represent and turned their attention instead to those they considered victims.

For both parties the subject of immigration was for many years taboo. It still is really - they're both intensely uncomfortable with it, which is probably why it has been handled so incompetently.

I'm not saying Powell's speech singularly brought about these issues, but its impact did seem to crystallize them.

[oldfogey101]

Originally Posted by Blairdennon

Then that is your misunderstanding. He recounted the anecdote because that was the concern of one of his constituents. That was to illustrate the problem and how others were perceiving what was happening. He may or may not have agreed with it as 'the whip hand' but he certainly stated that the Race Relations Act would allow injustice. Not quite the same thing.

Ok. At the very least you might agree that bits of his speech like where he mentioned the beliefs of mystery people turned out to be incorrect and unfounded.

He did not foresee it, so again it wasn't especially prophetic.

[Airam]

Immigration has reached a point not even Enoch Powell could ever have imagined. We have plenty of grumbles, but no rivers of blood. Great orator, but way OTT re immigration.

There were so many passionate politicians back then, deep thinking men (mainly) of principle. Contrast the lightweights in the present cabinet.

[GreatGodPan]

A highly intelligent man but a seriously misguided politician.

I saw him speak once, in the early '70s (after protesting outside the building with my home made placard*!).

He was a good speaker - but so was Jack Dash (although I saw the latter in a smaller, more intimate room).



* I often wonder what happened to that placard (I had to leave it outside before being admitted). I can see it to this day!

[Capablanca]

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

A highly intelligent man but a seriously misguided politician.

I saw him speak once, in the early '70s (after protesting outside the building with my home made placard*!).

He was a good speaker - but so was Jack Dash (although I saw the latter in a smaller, more intimate room).



* I often wonder what happened to that placard (I had to leave it outside before being admitted). I can see it to this day!

I don't know why but the first thing that popped into my mind was that old record 'They're Coming To Take Me Away Ha Ha Hee Hee Ho Ho'!

[glasshalffull]

My abiding memory of the "rivers of blood speech" in 1968?

One of my friends at the time was first generation West Indian...we walked to school together, we used to go to each other's houses for tea, were in Guides and choir together and our parent's were friendly/occasionally socialised together.

In the midst of furore she asked me "Does this mean we can't be friends anymore?"

But I don't suppose when Powell said what he said he was thinking about the possible impact on black and white kids and their families like ours

The man had shot his bolt/was past his sell by date even then...a xenophobe about anything that wasn't a white and Protestant.

[Get Den Watts]

The 'Rivers of Blood' speech damaged Powell's legacy because he became a byword for racism but he was right about a lot of things.

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by Capablanca

I don't know why but the first thing that popped into my mind was that old record 'They're Coming To Take Me Away Ha Ha Hee Hee Ho Ho'!

Nah, I was -and am - more of a "I Wanna Find Me a Woman That'll Hold My Big Toe Until I have To Go" man, actually.

[Capablanca]

Originally Posted by glasshalffull

My abiding memory of the "rivers of blood speech" in 1968?

One of my friends at the time was first generation West Indian...we walked to school together, we used to go to each other's houses for tea, were in Guides and choir together and our parent's were friendly/occasionally socialised together.

In the midst of furore she asked me "Does this mean we can't be friends anymore?"

But I don't suppose when Powell said what he said he was thinking about the possible impact on black and white kids and their families like ours

The man had shot his bolt/was past his sell by date even then...a xenophobe about anything that wasn't a white and Protestant.

I don't think that was true, but your recollection perfectly shows his rhetoric was overblown and he should have employed a little more sensitivity.

I think he had made more measured speeches on the subject but they attracted little or no attention.

[Transient1]

Might be my memory playing tricks but wasn't Powell one of the first to encourage immigration when he was a government minister because he needed them to fill job vacancies in public transport?

[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by oldfogey101

Ok. At the very least you might agree that bits of his speech like where he mentioned the beliefs of mystery people turned out to be incorrect and unfounded.

He did not foresee it, so again it wasn't especially prophetic.

No the 'mystery' people you refer to were confirmed as existing. The lady who was the only white person in her street was confirmed as existing some dozen or so years later by solicitors who were acting for her. The one white pupil in a class of all other black pupils was confirmed as existing by the Education people in that area if the press had bothered to actually follow it up instead of just calling Powell a liar (and several politicians).

It was not supposed to be an accurate prophecy it was called a warning. The time frames, the specific accuracy of events and how they materialise are/were immaterial but the general tenor of what he said is indeed happening.

[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by Capablanca

I don't think that was true, but your recollection perfectly shows his rhetoric was overblown and he should have employed a little more sensitivity.

I think he had made more measured speeches on the subject but they attracted little or no attention.

He had made a speech at Walsall some months before but that had received little attention despite saying the same things. The Birmingham speech was a more measured speech to get his point across. I think Powell was always fully aware of what he said and how he said even if many others were not.

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by Blairdennon

No the 'mystery' people you refer to were confirmed as existing. The lady who was the only white person in her street was confirmed as existing some dozen or so years later by solicitors who were acting for her. The one white pupil in a class of all other black pupils was confirmed as existing by the Education people in that area if the press had bothered to actually follow it up instead of just calling Powell a liar (and several politicians).

It was not supposed to be an accurate prophecy it was called a warning. The time frames, the specific accuracy of events and how they materialise are/were immaterial but the general tenor of what he said is indeed happening.

Did Powell say it wasn't then?

When?

[Doc Shmok]

Usually rivers of blood come when the economy goes tits up...

If immigrants come, it usually means you are well off. Otherwise no one would bother.


But now even summer seems to have emigrated out of Europe.

[oldfogey101]

Originally Posted by Blairdennon

No the 'mystery' people you refer to were confirmed as existing. The lady who was the only white person in her street was confirmed as existing some dozen or so years later by solicitors who were acting for her. The one white pupil in a class of all other black pupils was confirmed as existing by the Education people in that area if the press had bothered to actually follow it up instead of just calling Powell a liar (and several politicians).

It was not supposed to be an accurate prophecy it was called a warning. The time frames, the specific accuracy of events and how they materialise are/were immaterial but the general tenor of what he said is indeed happening.

The general tenor of the whip hand being held over the white man seems to be happening? The rivers of blood that he based absurdly on what he had seen during partitioning of the subcontinent? The only thing he got partly right was the need to control immigration by mentioning that 1% isn't like 10% (which isn't a great deduction). He missed out on a lot of other factors governing social cohesion and focused on race for some weird reason.

[RacerWelsh]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3...od-speech.html

the speech itself.

[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

Did Powell say it wasn't then?

When?

Did he say it was? A prophecy indicates paranormal powers. He did not have paranormal powers. He identified a situation that would become a serious problem if action was not taken. It has become a serious problem and every indication is it will only become worse. In terms of numbers he was as ever accurate and even Crossman in his diaries concurred that he had downplayed the numbers as a matter of policy. Powell never counted illegals although he recognised their existence.

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by Blairdennon

Did he say it was? A prophecy indicates paranormal powers. He did not have paranormal powers. He identified a situation that would become a serious problem if action was not taken. It has become a serious problem and every indication is it will only become worse. In terms of numbers he was as ever accurate and even Crossman in his diaries concurred that he had downplayed the numbers as a matter of policy. Powell never counted illegals although he recognised their existence.

Oh, please!

[Biffo the Bear]

What he failed to realise is that immigration is positive where immigrants brings something of value to the table for the common good (e.g. in areas of skills shortage) and also at least partially assimilate into their new culture by learning the language and not, whether wittingly or unwittingly, find themselves ghettoised.

There's good immigration and there's bad immigration; all it takes is robust vetting and border controls to separate the wheat from the chaff. We want the best the world has to offer in the UK regardless of where they come from or what they believe. Yes, we have some members of our own population born here who are useless, but that's their right to exist within our framework by virtue of them being UK citizens.

I don't accept that totally open border policies are ever a good thing, because that's part of globalisation, which is in itself a corporate construct to enable movement of cheap exploitable labour; however, it's been cleverly tacked on to the ideology of 'the world is really one, there should be no borders'.