Cette thèse étudie le début de carrière d’Enoch Powell de 1946 à 1968 et analyse l’évolution de son système de pensée qui oscilla entre la tradition paternaliste disraélienne et la tradition libérale. Elle montre ainsi, d’une part, que le consensus butskellite de l’après-guerre fut très largement un mythe et, d’autre part, que la rupture thatchérienne ne fut pas seulement préparée par Mme Thatcher et ses gourous dans les années 1970, mais par un long travail de réflexion et d'expérimentation au cœur duquel on trouve Enoch Powell. Après une formation au Département de Recherche Conservateur pendant trois ans, Powell devint député pour la première fois en 1950 et rejoignit le groupe "One Nation" qu’il quitta en 1955. Lors de ses neuf premières années politiques, il s’intéressa principalement à la situation de l’Empire britannique et à la politique du logement. Il tenta à partir de 1952 de convaincre ses collègues du groupe "One Nation" de défendre plus activement des positions libérales au détriment du paternalisme disraélien. Puis, pendant ses trois expériences ministérielles successives – au Logement, au Trésor et à la Santé, il appliqua des idées libérales sans toutefois renier complètement la philosophie disraélienne, car le Premier Ministre Macmillan défendait une approche paternaliste qui visait à mettre en œuvre les conceptions qu’il avait développées vingt ans auparavant dans son ouvrage intitulé The Middle Way. Powell refusa de participer au gouvernement de Douglas-Home en 1963, décida dès lors de rompre avec l’héritage de Macmillan et inventa le powellisme. Il devint le chantre du libéralisme en Grande-Bretagne avant d’être marginalisé au sein de son parti en 1968 à cause de ses vues nationalistes exposées dans le discours des "Fleuves de Sang". / This thesis is a study of the early stages of Enoch Powell’s career, from 1946 to 1968, and an analysis of his system of thought, which wavered between the disraelite paternalistic tradition and the liberal one. It thus shows that, on the one hand, the post-war butskellite consensus was mainly a myth, and on the other hand, the Thatcherite revolution was not only prepared beforehand by Mrs Thatcher and her gurus in the 1970s, but was also the outcome of a long process of reflection and experimentation Powell played a major role. After a three-year training at the Conservative Research Department, Powell was elected as Member of Parliament for the first time in 1950 and joined the One Nation Group, which he left in 1955. During his first nine political years, he focused primarily on the situation of the British Empire and on housing policy. From 1952 onwards, he tried to convince his One Nation colleagues that they should defend liberal stances more actively, at the expense of disraelite paternalism. Then, during his three mandates in the Ministries of Housing, of the Treasury and of Health, he applied liberal ideas without entirely denying the disraelite philosophy, for Prime Minister Macmillan defended a paternalistic approach aiming at implementing the ideas he had developed twenty years before in The Middle Way. Powell refused to be part of the 1963 Douglas-Home Government and consequently decided to break with Macmillan’s legacy thereby inventing Powellism. He became the champion of liberalism in Great Britain before being ostracized within his party in 1968 on account of his nationalistic views as presented through the "Rivers of Blood" speech.

Texte remanié de: Doct. diss.--University of Illinois. / Bibliogr. p. 325-344. Index.

As Matthew Arnold saw the philosophies of the classical ancients as touchstones for evaluating the new political and social philosophies of his own time, Arnold himself has served as a "touchstone" for historians who must evaluate the political and social events of the Victorian Age. Arnold made many comments about the three great Prime Ministers of his time: Lord Palmerston, Benjamin Disraeli, and William E. Gladstone, and about the policies of their respective administrations. Arnold's point of view toward these men is reflected in personal letters to members of his family and in his most significant political works, Culture and Anarchy and Friendship's Garland. In the study that follows, these selections are examined in terms of the three Prime Ministers. Chapter I is an introduction to Arnold's political philosophy and an account of Arnold's comments about Disraeli, for of the three, Arnold had the least to say about Disraeli. Arnold dwells almost exclusively on differences he has with the government, and he found less to disagree with in Disraeli's policies than with the others. Arnold's reactions to Disraeli were more personal in nature than political. Chapter II deals with Lord Palmerston's administration and with key events and people associated with it. Chapter III deals more specifically with Culture and Anarchy and with political and social events that served as a background for Arnold's commentary. Finally, Chapter IV concentrates on the Gladstone years, concluding with Arnold's assessment of the Liberal party and its leader in "The Nadir of Liberalism."

! Victorian period is the golden age in British history. During the 1870s Great Britain was still the leading world power and Benjamin Disraeli had a credit for that. This dissertation deals with his attitude to Empire, his ideas about British foreign policy and his objections to Liberal foreign policy, specifically against his rival William E. Gladstone. It also presents important events during Disraeli's second ministry and evaluates his influence on British foreign policy.