This-England

Would you have wanted Enoch Powell as Prime Minister?

If not why not.

Britannist

He (Enoch Powell) went anti-nuclear and was, therefore, not suitable for the highest office in the land.

The Americans took two years to come into the last world war to help us and only did so when they were attacked in the Pacific.

We cannot rely on them for our nuclear defence.

Enoch Powell was right on the EEC/EU and on a range of other matters. But he was wrong on defence.

He also spoke repeatedly against attempts to get an anti-EU party formed on the UK mainland. This resulted in a a 20 year delay in one getting started (UKIP was formed in 1993).

Had it not been for Enoch Powell trying to stop a new specifically anti-EU party being formed, there is every possibility that UKIP could have started in 1973 (the year the UK was forced into the EEC/EU) and not 1993. He is responsible for the delay.

Had Enoch Powell helped form a new anti-EU party in the early 1970's and been the leader of it - it would, by now, have seats in the Commons.

He chose to 'do his own thing' and become an MP for a party which already existed (the Ulster Unionists in Northern Ireland) thus leaving anti-EU campaigners on the British mainland to fend for themselves without his support.

He was not much of a political ally.

I will leave others to decide if - in view of his record - Enoch Powell deserved to be in 10 Downing Street.

This-England

The National Front filled UKIP's roll in the early 1970s when it was far more respectable that it became and it had 17,500 members.

Enoch was anti-nuclear as he thought because both sides would be destroyed in a nuclear war there was no point in having Nuclear wepons.
Im sure with the reality of high office he would have kept the Nukes however.

rjt

Powells anti nuclear view rules him out as a suitable candidate for Prime Minster.

Britannist

I agree with you RJT.

When Enoch Powell came out with his anti-nuclear views 'that was it' as far as I was concerned.

22ANDUK

Thanks for this Britannist, as I wasn't too aware of Powell's beliefs and history other than the 'river of blood' speech and the Northern Ireland part so I voted 'no' at first before reading a bit about him.

Having a brief look at his life story he was also slightly anti-American, combine this with his anti-nuclear policy and in terms of realpolitik Britain would have been in a rather sticky situation, ironically this would have pushed us closer to Europe. he also believed that the CIA was behind the deaths of Mountbatten and Neave.

He was also pro-Russian too, right from the Second World War to the 1990s reunification of Germany (where he wanted an Alliance with the USSR).

He also supported the abolition of the death penalty and supportedhomosexual law reform, liberalisation of divroce law as well as taking steps to abolish 'mental asylums' and replace them with better Social Care. He also oversaw the employment of thousands of non-white staff in the NHS to fill the critical shortages in the health service.

After reading more about him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_Powell I have actually found him to be a rather fascinating politician with a 50 year career in politics and an amazing life story.

Whilst I don't think he would have been a great PM at the time, the lack of an Powell like figure in politics is a great loss and perhaps sorely missed now, as a leader of a party or the nation.

Britannist

There's no doubt he made politics more interesting. I have heard his deliver speeches and have a signed book by him.

Enoch Powell was a scholar - he had lived for some time in Australia and could speak German, Greek, Urdu and other languages. He had a very good knoweldge of religion and theology.

I was always concerned by his pro-Russian stance because of the communist regime in charge of that country until 1991. His view on relations with communist Russia was not far off from those of the leftist Benn (senior).

It is true that Enoch Powell appeared to be anti-American. But someone once told me it never stopped Enoch Powell going to America on lecture tours.

Enoch Powell's views on the EEC/EU were excellent. His predictions about the EEC/EU threat have ALL been proved to be correct. He was right to oppose Heath and all Heath's supporters.

He was the 'Father' of the anti-EU movement in the UK.

Even after he left the Conservative Party there were attempts to try to get Mrs. - now Lady - Thatcher to make him Foreign Secretary. If she had tried to do it, the spiteful europhile impostors in the Conservative Party would have caused big problems for her. They despised Enoch Powell because he told the truth about the EEC/EU.

These europhiles should never have been let into the Conservative Party.

rjt

It is a tragedy that he spent so much of his career on the backbenches although Margaret Tatcher claimed that his dismissal after the rivers of blood speach was a blessing for other Torys as he was able to then speak beyond his brief and epouse many policys which became popular with the people of Britian.

I often wonder would a Thatcher governement have taken a diffrent path on the EU if Powell had stayed a Tory and then became a minsiter in it but I am forced to conclude that his views on nuclear weapons would have meant it would not have been viable for him to be a member of such a governement.

Britannist

He should have been made a member of the House of Lords in 1987 (when his time as an MP ended).

He would have certainly delivered some interesting speeches in the Lords.

I never read anything about an offer of a place in the Lords being made to Enoch Powell.

rjt

The main problem was that he remained opposed to the idea of a life peerage.

pressure was put on Thatcher to offer him an heridatory peerage but although she had offered one to Whitelaw 4 years before she did not for whatever reason feel she was able too in this case.