RACIALISM
The document which is partly reproduced below was recently handed over to the TUSY General Secretary in Blantyre, Malawi, by an exiled Southern Rhodesian African nationalist. It is said to have been circulated secretly by the Rhodesian Front Party. We have no definite evidence of its authenticity. The document is, however, a good reflection of the opinions propagated by the present Rhodesian Government. The dilemma of the white Rhodesian Can we afford to be constitutional? HIS article introduces a new argument not previously used when discussing the vote and it draws a line of distinction between Africans who (a) use their vote as we do in a civilised way to express an opinion, and (b) as an offensive weapon — one which is far more deadly and dangerous than a rifle to overthrow the white regime and conquer the country for exploitation by the Communist Bloc. Points that can be used All our politics revolve around the African vote. 1 Should he be given more? 2 Should he keep those he has? 3 Should all'those he has be taken away? Any argument is inconclusive because an argument for can be countered by an argument against, But the facts are that: 1 An African armed with a vote is more dangerous than an African armed with a rifle; 2 That you cannot shoot a vote with a rifle; 3 That a white man armed with a rifle cannot protect himself against an African armed with a vote. The vote is mighter than the Rifle I don’t think everyone realises that our country is really at war today— and that just at the moment with today’s peculiar values an African armed with a vote is a far greater menace and more dangerous to us than one armed with a rifle.
To illustrate — the Afro-Asian Committee bloc demanded that the African be given the vote and Britain France and Belgium, three powerfully armed nations agreed. Within a few years a wave of Black Nationalism, armed only with a vote and with out firing a shot has conquered the whole of Africa north of the Zambezi — in the sense that _ the control of the country has passed from white to black. And make no mistake — the white man today in Kenya has been completely defeated. He is losing his civil rights, is entirely at the mercy of his conquerors, cannot appeal against injustice, and can be deported at 24 hours’ notice. History will refer to this as ‘The African War of Black Nationalism’. It is a modern type of war, a cold war fought with new weapons — the vote. It has also been one of the cheapest and most successful wars ever fought whereby the Communists have conquered nearly the whole African Continent. The white man has been knocked out and defeated and he still does not know what really hit him. And now, with interest-free, no strings attached loans, they are forging a new kind of control that will effectively enslave the African. Every white person today fears the future — what no one person can understand. is how, a hundred years ago, a handful of Boers armed with old fashioned guns could decisively defeat the powerful Zulu army, yet now we, a nation armed with modern rifles appear powerless to withstand against the unarmed African of today. In a civilised community a vote is a privilege given to an adult person to enable him to express his wish. But if the opposition abuse this privilege, exploit it, and the African actually uses his vote as a weapon with which to fight and overcome us, then surely we must acknowledge that a state of war exists and use our vote as a weapon too — to fight with, to defend ourselves and keep control.
Can it be denied that the white
of today is —
t Daily being deprived of more
civil rights and possessions.
2 In danger if he in any way
opposes the Government.
3 Is today, in practical terms, a
captive of the Blacks.
4 Can it be denied that China is
taking over Kenya and that the
white man may soon find himself
a prisoner of the Chinese.
It would be interesting to ask the
whites today what they think of their
oath of allegiance to the Queen and
their loyalty to Britain.
If they were given a second chance
would they again let their loyalties
encompass their ruin or would they
fight. :
Brain washing and the Cold War
We have all read about the effects
of brain washing and all heard about
a new warfare called a cold war.
We are also inclined to dismiss the
whole thing as being too nebulous
and a widely held view is expressed
by the words “If it comes to trouble
give me rifle and I will take on a
hundred Africans any day.”
The fallacy of this argument is
that while you can shoot an African
with a rifle, you can’t shoot a vote
with a rifle.
How much of the following argu-
ment is true and how much fantasy?
The Communists wished to conquer
Africa which was controlled by four
powerful nations: Britain, France,
Belgium and Portugal.
To conquer they must wage war
and they have two alternatives:
1 A hot war with modern weapons.
2 Acold war in which the African
was armed with a vote.
Remember too, that a victory in
war is not measured by the number
of the enemy killed, but by the
nature of the peace terms the victor
is able to dictate.
Deciding on a cold war with the
use of wireless, propaganda, and brain
washing at UNO, the whole world
and Africa in particular, they sold
the idea that:
1 The African is enslaved and must
be freed.
2 The only hope for the whites to
avoid a blood bath is to come to
terms with the African before it
is too late.
This has generated the wave of
Black Nationalism which has swept
through Africa replacing white con-
trol by black.
from Julian Atkinson
THE WEEK — March 10, 1965
Against
Apartheid
Glasgow Anti-apartheid movement Conference HE inaugural meeting of the Glasgow Anti-Apartheid Movement will take place in the form of delegate conference at the Highlanders’ Institute, 34 Berkeley Street, Glasgow, C3, on Saturday, April toth. The meeting will start at 2.15 p-m., and among the speakers will be Councillor William Taylor, leader of the Labour Group Glasgow Council; Cecil Williams, a South African exile; Rev. Max Magee; Frank Stephen, DATA District Secretary; and S. Abdul, Secretary of the British Anti- Apartheid Committee. Applications for delegates’ credentials should be made to The Glasgow Anti-Apartheid Movement, 5 Whittingehame Court, Glasgow W2. A fee of 2/6 per delegate is being charged. It is hoped that all Week readers in the Glasgow region will do their utmost to ensure that this meeting is as representative and well-attended as possible. from Tony Southall