News0 min ago
50 Years Today Since The Infamous Rivers Of Blood Speech
Made by Enoch Powell ,very controversial for its time but a lot of it is happening with no controlled immigration nor any government in power or opposition ,willing to tackle it ,it’s seen as a poison chalice
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bobbisox1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
It means an avowed racist's speech stirring up hatred towards West Indian immigration, can now, with use of that hindsight, and in the face of immigration from just about anywhere but the West Indies, can now be seen as a prophesy, and conferring a undeserved status of seer on its originator.
It means an avowed racist's speech stirring up hatred towards West Indian immigration, can now, with use of that hindsight, and in the face of immigration from just about anywhere but the West Indies, can now be seen as a prophesy, and conferring a undeserved status of seer on its originator.
can now be seen as a prophesy, and conferring a undeserved status of seer on its originator.
er the Latin quote IS intended to be a prophesy ( blood in the Tiber foaming). Romans had a different view to us about prediction - Cicero wrote a whole book about it - de divinatione
( too technical)
One play where the entrails dont burn properly ( hiss and go pop) and everyone goes "oo-er Mrs" in er Ancient greek of course
er the Latin quote IS intended to be a prophesy ( blood in the Tiber foaming). Romans had a different view to us about prediction - Cicero wrote a whole book about it - de divinatione
( too technical)
One play where the entrails dont burn properly ( hiss and go pop) and everyone goes "oo-er Mrs" in er Ancient greek of course
Predicting that our country would be in thrall to, and I quote, 'the black man...' and then fifty years later, its immigration problems seem to be Albanians, who, last time I looked, were white, doesn't match my criteria for the label 'astute', but if people want to ignore one ethnicity to shoehorn another into the reality of how history panned out, in order to swerve Powell's racism and make him a 'visionary', then crack on.
Being deluded is free, you can have as much as you want
Being deluded is free, you can have as much as you want
Gromit: //As Minister for Health in the early 1960s Powell was responsible for encouraging immigrants from the West Indies to come and work in the NHS.//
You can't have it both ways; that doesn't sound like 'racist' does it?
And also, he certainly wasn't inviting ANYBODY to come & work in the NHS, what the country needed then was skilled & semi-skilled health workers, just as it still needs today.
A.H. //Albanians, who, last time I looked, were white,//
Depends a bit by what you mean by 'white'. The majority are Muslims which still, thank the stars, is not the religion of Britain, & never has been a religion of 'white' populations.
You can't have it both ways; that doesn't sound like 'racist' does it?
And also, he certainly wasn't inviting ANYBODY to come & work in the NHS, what the country needed then was skilled & semi-skilled health workers, just as it still needs today.
A.H. //Albanians, who, last time I looked, were white,//
Depends a bit by what you mean by 'white'. The majority are Muslims which still, thank the stars, is not the religion of Britain, & never has been a religion of 'white' populations.
Khandro - // Depends a bit by what you mean by 'white'. The majority are Muslims which still, thank the stars, is not the religion of Britain, & never has been a religion of 'white' populations. //
Islam is a faith, not an ethnicity, and I'm sure you know that.
Being a Muslim does not make you black, any more than being a Christian makes you white.
You are shoehorning to an alarming degree.
Islam is a faith, not an ethnicity, and I'm sure you know that.
Being a Muslim does not make you black, any more than being a Christian makes you white.
You are shoehorning to an alarming degree.
> In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man".
This speech was in 1968, 55 years ago, not the "50 years today " as claimed in the OP. And many other facts are wide of the mark. Like ... did "the black man" have the whip hand over "the white hand" by 1983-88? Let alone, is "the black man" one voice, and "the white man" another?
This speech was in 1968, 55 years ago, not the "50 years today " as claimed in the OP. And many other facts are wide of the mark. Like ... did "the black man" have the whip hand over "the white hand" by 1983-88? Let alone, is "the black man" one voice, and "the white man" another?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.