Julia Hartley-Brewer sees nothing wrong in the Rivers of Blood speech

[JudyCoolibar]

twitter.com/juliahb1/status/775448373218406400

Thick or deluded?

[Mistigri]

I've scanned quickly through her Twitter feed (since I'd never heard of her).

Surely the correct question is "thick, deluded, or racist?" and the correct answer is "all three".

[ProfessorPreciseaBug]

IIRC,
Enoch Powel was saying that imigration will lead to tension and social unrest. He was lambasted by people who decided to mis-interpret him.

He was more right than wrong.

[twofingerstoGideon]

Enoch Powell was saying that imigration will lead to tension and social unrest....He was more right than wrong.

No, he was much more specific than that. He was a white supremacist. His speech included the phrase: ...in 15-20 years the black man will have the whip hand over the white man...' I don't think that leaves much room for 'mis-interpretation'.

He criticised the racial discrimination act, as he didn't want 'them' to have equal (or any?) rights.

He was 'othering' a whole sector of our population, many of whom came here from Jamaica and, as British subjects of the empire, were absolutely entitled to do so, as were the many immigrants from the Indian sub-continent - also British subjects. They were British subjects because we'd colonised their countries, but it was okay for us to go and be in their countries - because hey, we're white - but not okay for them to come here.

Powell's speech was a classic example of the kind of hate speech that groups like Britain First and the BNP spout. Here's a couple of comments from one of his YouTube videos, posted 2 months ago, so probably immediately post-referendum:
"I bet Enoch is smiling down on us after yesterday now"
which elicited this response: "crying more like. the country is a n*er breeding ground."
These are the people he appeals to now and those are the people he appealed to in 1968.

[forkhandles4candles]

Twofingerstogideon you are very right. Vile speech. Vile man.

[SinisterBumFacedCat]

She's muscling in on Kate Hopkins

[derxa]

She's a complete Insert any insult you wish. So superior and condescending whenever I've seen her on TV.

[pepperpot99]

I didn't know about this latest comment, but Julia HB was an utter cunt to Owen Jones on sky tv following the mass shooting at the gay nightclub in Florida a couple of months back.

[ShelaghTurner]

Cannot abide this woman. All the above and shockingly rude as well.

[GoblinLittleOwl]

Hooray.
Read the whole speech, research the conditions under it was made, then make a judgement.

[010816dot]

I find JHB very offensive - her strategy is just to bring down and humiliate any point that somebody who opposes her views make. She constantly interrupts, shouts down and tries to belittle when she can. She is the reason I stopped listening to LBC and went back to R4.

[nicenewdusters]

Yep, glad she was dumped by LBC. Complete bore. Used to bang on about how she'd worked all her life, starting in menial jobs, but also that her mum was a GP and she went to George Osborne's wedding, so not quite a working class hero. LBC now have Katie Hopkins, what can I say!

[pepperpot99]

Yes it's bad news about KH. I like LBC as a rule but feel let down by the presence of Hopkins

[Vixxfacee]

She's always come across racist.

[Lottapianos]

JHB is truly awful, just as bad as Hopkins if you ask me. Not remotely surprised by her views

[mathsmum314]

Enoch Powell was quoting someone when he said, "he black man will have the whip hand over the white man".
He made many speeches on immigration, he never made one on race. Something we all now realize is a problem.
What the heck is is 'othering' a whole sector of our population, and why is it bad?
You can't blame Enoch Powell for comments that Britain First and the BNP spout .

[LadyConstanceDeCoverlet]

Of course you can blame Enoch Powell for the fact that his words are called in aid by Britain First and the BNP. They are inherently racist organisations, they wouldn't quote Powell if he didn't support their viewpoint, would he?

When he quoted the man who made the comment about the "whip hand", he emphasised that, in his view, the man in question was a decent man and represented the views of supposedly ordinary decent British people. He didn't just talk about immigration, he talked about immigration from the Commonwealth - and we know perfectly well that he wasn't talking about Australia.

Classic example: he told an affecting story about an old white lady in a "respectable" street where a house was sold to" a Negro". Why use that term if his concern was solely about immigrants? He says that to her "growing fear", she saw one house after another "taken over". Why should someone inevitably feel fear because a black person moves in next door? But to Powell that was completely understandable and indeed axiomatic. Why use inflammatory terms like "taken over" at all? If a number of white people had moved in, he wouldn't be claiming that they had "taken over". He then goes on to claim that the day after the last white person left, she was woken by two "Negroes" who wanted to use her phone and, when she refused, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked. No acknowledgement that at the time there were plenty of extremely nasty white gangs around who were regularly abusing and attacking people. She had been letting rooms out but stopped because the only applicants were black, so her income dropped. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, "Racial prejudice won't get you anywhere in this country." So she went home... She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. "Racialist," they chant."

FFS, the whole thing utterly reeks bigotry and prejudice - and don't forget that the speech was made in opposition to the principle of allowing equality under the Race Relations Act. God forbid that deliberately trying to stir up racial hatred be made a crime, or that people be prevented from discriminating against others because of their race.

I think JHB is both thick and bigoted.

[BreakWindandFire]

Enoch may have been quoting someone, but he did so approvingly. You can read the entire speech here. It's clearly race, not just immigration, based.

The context was Powell's opposition to the 1968 Race Relations Act which made it illegal to refuse housing, employment, or public services to somone on the grounds of race. He makes it clear in the speech that white people should be allowed to do so.

He also dug into the 'taking our jobs' argument; apparently black people get an easy ride as "employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker".

He didn't see it possible for black people to be British - they were "immigrant-descended" in that speech, which is why he he refers to re-emigrating them, not repatriating.

And that's before we get to the "wide-grinning piccaninnies" putting shit through decent white people's letterboxes...

[BreakWindandFire]

Ha. Cross-posted with LadyConstance!

As for 'whip hand', have you ever heard the expression that 'homophobia is the fear that another man will treat you like you treat women'? Powell was the same with race. He thought if black people became too numerous, they'd treat white people badly. Integration wasn't possible, just one side dominating the other.

[twofingerstoGideon]

Enoch Powell was quoting someone when he said, "he black man will have the whip hand over the white man".
It hardly matters who said it first; he used it to advance his argument.
What the heck is is 'othering' a whole sector of our population, and why is it bad?
You really need to ask? It doesn't take much imagination and is still happening today... to people who 'speak Polish' for example. helpful link for mathsmum here

[mathsmum314]

For example the BNP could use Nigel Farages words are their motto, that doesn't make him a bigot or prejudice.

And 50 years ago a lot of people held those views, we are more enlightened but is it right to judge historical figures by the stands of a different era?

[LadyConstanceDeCoverlet]

mathsmum, have you actually read my earlier post or those of Breakwind or twofingers?

I promise you that 50 years ago those views were still, rightly, condemned by all but the bigots who thought the same way. The speech caused a massive shitstorm. Why do you imagine that was if his views were generally acceptable by the standards of the time?

200 years ago people thought slavery was OK. Does that make it right? Should we really not judge people who thought that way?

[LozzaChops]

JHB is repulsive.

[pepperpot99]

hahaha at Nigel F "not being a bigot or prejudice"

(it's prejudiceD by the way.)

[cdtaylornats]

When Powell made his speech it was quite probable a black family moving in would give an elderly lady the vapours. If you replace "negro" with "muslim", "traveller" or "biker" you can get the same effect today. Everyone has a fear of the other - it's primal- most people move past it because of more evolved brain functions.

Part of Powells problem was he was a brilliant classical scholar and quoting a line from the Aenid was never going to go down well with most journalists who would no doubt be trying to find out about Enid.

He was wrong about most things in the speech but politicians are wrong about a lot of things a lot of the time - like getting seats on trains.

[LadyConstanceDeCoverlet]

Yes, it could well be true that a black family moving in would make an old lady react like that. The point is that Powell cited the story quite deliberately to inflame - indeed, the way he told it was extremely inflammatory: the little old lady was very clearly painted as the poor, victimised white person who had every reason to feel threatened by the mere fact of black people moving into her street, and absolutely justified in refusing to take in any black people as lodgers. He couldn't contemplate any other possibility.

None of that means that his speech was acceptable at the time. Yes, there was a vocal body of people that supported him, just as there are people who support racism now; but mainstream opinion was against him, and it rightly effectively brought his political career to an end.