Enoch the Uncounselled Joe Egerton th The 100 anniversary of the birth of Enoch Powell on 16 June has provided an opportunity for commentators to assess the lasting reputation of a man who became an infamous figure in British politics after delivering a single speech. Joe Egerton presents a paradox at the heart of Powell’s career: the same man that delivered the ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech was a devout Christian. On the night of 16 June 1912, a One night in Wolverhamp- baby was born in Birmingham. ton I was coming home from The thunder that night was an the station. The bells of St omen. At half past two on the Peter’s were ringing for even- song and I went in. It was afternoon of 20 April 1968, in the first time I had been into the same city, that baby – now a a church for worship, to a leading member of the Conser- service, for fifteen years or vative Shadow Cabinet – rose more. I sat down in a dark to his feet to deliver one of the corner, just by the south most notorious speeches in door, hoping I wouldn’t not- modern British history. One of ice myself, because I didn’t the passages caught by televis- know what I was doing and I ion was this: ‘We must be mad, was rather ashamed of it. As literally mad as a nation, to be Photo by Allan Warren I listened, the language of it all came back to me. permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part Robert Shepherd, in his biography of Powell, the material of the future growth of the immigrant- described the sequel: ‘The following Easter, Powell descended population. It is like watching a nation told himself, “Look, you can’t stay here, you either go building its own funeral pyre.’ The cameras did not back or you go forward.” He knew he could not go record the line that was to give the speech its name: back, so “forward I went” and at 6.00AM on Easter ‘As I look ahead I am filled with foreboding. Like the Sunday 1950 he took communion’. There then foll- Roman, I seem to see “the River Tiber foaming with ows this assessment: ‘his devout belief in Christ and much blood”’. 1 the resurrection as the prerequisite to salvation were 3 A Christian and a racist? to remain essential to his private being.’ Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech led to his Simon Heffer, in his biography, provides an being denounced as a racialist. He was summarily interesting insight into what we might consider to be dismissed from the Shadow Cabinet. Two years later, an Ignatian dimension of Powell’s practice, when he when Powell pledged to bring about an effective halt quotes him saying: to immigration in his election address to the voters of Over and over again, and often in the course of a Wolverhampton, Tony Benn declared, ‘The flag of day, I am conscious in my life as a politician of racialism which has been hoisted in Wolverhampton committing the sins of hatred, or envy, or malice; is beginning to look like the one that fluttered over and I am conscious of the command operating, to 2 Dachau and Belsen.’ But unlike Hitler and his accom- some extent at any rate, upon my nature which plices, who planned to destroy not just Judaism but not merely forbids these things but equates them Christianity, Enoch Powell had undergone an with death. 4 Augustinian conversion to Christianity in 1949: However, Powell’s views on immigration were Powell was in fact addressing a very serious problem. condemned as ‘unchristian’ by Sir Edward Heath; and The meeting’s chairman, the Conservative MP for some Anglican bishops complained when Powell’s Hall Green Reginald Eyre, said later that he had body was received to rest overnight in Westminster detected early in the speech a stirring in the audience, Abbey because of his part, as they saw it, in exacer- which included some of the most competent figures bating racial tension. 5 We are confronted then with a in the West Midlands: ‘They knew that a major paradox: how can the same person be a devout Chris- politician was giving voice to their long held fears.’ tian (albeit of rather heterodox views 6) and a racialist? What were those fears? Without doubt that major Powell was no racist towns and cities were heading fast for a segregated society that many, including Powell himself, had in Ian Gilmour wrote of the Rivers of Blood speech that the 1960s seen in America. It was only in 1964 that Powell may have made a racialist speech, but he was President Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights not a racist. 7 The evidence seems to support this view. Act and, although we now see the successes of the drive against segregation, fifty years ago the legislation For example, in 1944, Powell was serving in India and seemed a recipe for strife, not peace. The situation on a visit to Poona refused to stay in the Byculla Club there appeared completely impossible and it was when it refused to admit a fellow officer, General K M understandable that those who, like Powell, had Cariappa, who later became first Chief of Staff of the visited America should be determined to prevent the Indian army. 8 same evils here. And in 1959, with an election imminent, Powell put Learning from Powell’s error at jeopardy the prospect of a return to office with a formidable denunciation of the Macmillan govern- ‘Poor Enoch,’ Iain Macleod once remarked to the ment’s handling of the death of eleven Kenyan detain- political columnist Alan Watkins, ‘driven mad by the ees at Hola. He spoke late in the debate, and was remorselessness of his own logic.’ The Thames has affronted by a fellow Tory MP’s suggestion that the not foamed with blood; England has not been torn Africans were ‘sub-human’: apart by another civil war; and Powell was simply wrong to assert that mass immigration would lead to I would say that it is a fearful doctrine, which civil war. But his reputation for formidable logic must recoil upon the heads of those who pronou- suggests that his error lay not in his reasoning but the nce it, to stand in judgement on a fellow human premises he started from. being and to say, ‘Because he was such-and-such, therefore the consequences which would other- 9 One fallacy that underpinned Powell’s conclusion was wise flow from his death shall not flow.’ his belief that there was no prospect of integration between black and white. At earlier stages in his Neither of these interventions would be expected of a career, Powell had not believed this; it was only man labelled as a racist. following his first visit to America in 1965 that he seems to have reached a different conclusion. But it So how did Powell make the Rivers of Blood speech? clearly was a belief that he came to hold. When asked how he would react if one of his daughters married a The Birmingham speech undoubtedly contained black man, he replied that he would be far less worr- passages that shock. Powell, however, convinced ied about the future of the country if there were himself that he was simply setting out Conservative intermarriage. policy. Indeed the actual policy prescriptions – the decision to restrict immigration, the decision to Another error that led him to despair of integration as present a reasoned amendment to the Race Relations a solution was a failure to appreciate that Christianity Bill – were Conservative policy. It was, however, his might prove a basis for unity. This is tragic, given language that caused the outrage. that Powell had earlier recognised what a powerful force Christianity could be. ‘It may appear an Enoch the Uncounselled 2 Joe Egerton www.thinkingfaith.org Copyright © Jesuit Media Initiatives 19 June 2012 unpractical assertion, but it is an arresting and Enoch the Uncounselled undeniable one, that if everyone were a full member of the Church, the class war and that mutual fear and It is little wonder that even such strong supporters of envy that is socialism would instantly be inconceiv- Enoch Powell’s economic views as John Biffen – who able’, wrote Powell in the 1950s in an unpublished delivered the eulogy at his funeral – regretted the essay arguing that the Conservative Party needed to Rivers of Blood speech, or that it ended his friendship give attention to the Church. 10 Powell’s diagnosis of with Clement Jones, his long standing friend and the immigration issue was that it caused fear, so per- editor of the Wolverhampton Express and Star . Powell’s haps he could have appealed to the Church as the bas- characteristic approach of solitary thinking, and his is for a solution to the problems of immigration as he decision to press ahead with the speech without saw them, just as he had done for those of socialism. consulting senior advisers or supporters beforehand, destroyed his career. Not a single subject person Had he been constrained by obligations to colleagues, When Powell died in 1998, the chairman of the Powell’s legacy may not be what it now is. Powell in Association of Black Clergy put out a statement: office was a very different man from Powell in ‘Powell was not a single subject person and served his opposition. When in office, he was willing to comp- country well.