Rivers of Blood - the legacy

Powell’s speech struck a deep chord with many British people - he claimed to have received over 120,000 letters as a result, the overwhelming majority sharing his concerns. Opinion polls also showed strong support for Powell’s stance. However, the British political establishment, then speedily moving in a liberal direction, denounced Powell as a populist agitator, intent upon stirring up race hatred for his own personal ends. He was promptly sacked from his shadow cabinet post by Tory leader Edward Heath for the 'racialist tone' of the speech. This was a moment in time when the British nation was presented with an opportunity to look into the abyss and step back. Instead our political leaders hurled us headlong forward to our almost certain doom.

For the 1970 general election the Conservative manifesto promised, 'that there will be no further large scale permanent immigration' and that 'future immigration will be allowed only in strictly defined special cases'. Moreover, it adopted the Powellite policy of giving 'assistance to Commonwealth immigrants who wish to return to their countries of origin' albeit in a very much watered down form. The Labour manifesto was proud to boast that 'the rate of immigration [was] under firm control and much lower than in past years'. However, none of the political parties seriously addressed the urgency of the problem. The election resulted in a return to power of the Conservatives under Edward Heath, and within a short time they had spectacularly broken their pledge on 'no further large scale immigration'.

Most unfortunately, the legacy of Powell’s speech has been the complete opposite of what he hoped to achieve. The uproar it caused galvanised liberals into the creation of the vast race relations industry with intrusive new initiatives to oversee public thought and behaviour, such as the Commission for Racial Equality, race equality officers in the public sector, race monitoring by local councils, 'hate' crimes, public funding of ethnic organizations, all overseen by the self righteous cant of the politically correct obsessives, which has created a stifling climate in which the majority of white people have been silenced from publicly expressing their true feelings. Powell accurately predicted race riots, ethnic ghettos, civil disturbances, the open ended increase in the numbers of ethnic people, and the ever expanding state apparatus to force race 'equality' on an unwilling population. However, even he failed to anticipate the rise of British born terrorists and the extent of 'parallel lives' which form a gulf between the different races and cultures in some British towns and cities. It is because of the latter development that governments started to distance themselves from the concept of multiculturism, towards one of promoting 'community cohesion', seemingly unaware that until the advent of mass immigration our society was largely homogeneous and thus cohesive, despite its obsession with class differences.

If the current policy of open ended mass immigration continues we risk sleepwalking into disaster. An end to such madness is the only answer, if the risk of increasing ethnic conflict is to be avoided in the future, if traditional British culture and way of life is to be maintained and if we are ever to regain a sense of togetherness, shared values, identity and character. Mass third world immigration has introduced into British society racial and religious conflict and tension, which we were previously spared. It is no doubt the case that the majority of people in Britain of all races can live together with a fair degree of tolerance of one another, and perhaps sometimes of acceptance. And clearly some people of ethnic origin have worked hard to integrate themselves into British society. Nevertheless, it has to be faced that the more brutish or fanatical elements on the front line of the racial, cultural and religious divide are unlikely to always share the elevated notions of political commentators such as Polly Toynbee on multicultural enrichment. The result has been low level conflict spilling over at times into what are euphemistically termed 'disturbances'.

To manage the problem an increasingly powerful politically correct elite has introduced intrusive laws and bureaucratic interference into the personal affairs of ordinary citizens and businesses, which should have no place in a free society. The 'fight against racism' can never be won since it is largely contrary to human nature. Moreover, the publicly funded bureaucracy established to combat it has a vested interest in discovering more subtle forms of 'racism' to keep the issue on the boil and their jobs secure. The liberal multicultural and diversity agenda is centred on insinuating feelings of guilt into the white population. Clearly violence, harassment or abuse of people because of the colour of their skin, or their religion, is completely unacceptable. But the definition by some politically correct institutions of what constitutes 'hate' has now been extended to cover those voicing criticism of immigration policy or questioning the benefits of a multicultural society. Many white people fear the epithets the politically correct class place on them such as 'racist', 'hater', 'extremist', and 'bigot' etc, applied to those who offer even the mildest dissent from their agenda. Children and young people have been brought up in an educational ethos where it is normal to denigrate their own history and culture, but to be uncritical of all others. Public concern about the level of immigration, and the changes it is causing to our communities and neighbourhoods, has for decades been suppressed and ignored. As a consequence Britain is losing its sense of shared cultural history and identity. The politically correct establishment’s only answer has been to desperately promote the bogus, and now discredited, concept of multiculturalism, whilst fanning the flames of social conflict by continuing to encourage mass third world immigration. Those whom the gods wish to destroy……..