Churches And Rhodesia

Press, Volume CV, Issue 31018, 25 March 1966, Page 12

Churches And Rhodesia

Sir, —I am mystified as to Mr Dawson’s statement on African education in Rhodesia and would like to know where he gets his figures of £lO spent on European for every £1 on African children? Enclosed is an extract from a current copy of “Rhodesian Commentary”.—Yoiirs, etc, D. VICARS.

March 22, 1966. [The Rev. Selwyn Dawson replies: “I quote from the World Council of Churches' report on the Consultation on Human Relations, sponsored by the Christian Council of Southern Rhodesia, and held in August, 1965: The figures for expenditure in the Government vote on education for 1965 were as follows: African education, £6,450,000 for 643,592 pupils, or approximately £lO a head; non-Afri-can education, £6,120,000 for 58,769 pupils, or approximately £lO4 a head.’ (Page 26.) If these figures are correct (and’ I see no reason to doubt them) they substantiate my contention that in Rhodesia the white minority spends £lO in educating each white child for every pound spent educating each African child.”]

Sir, —I know of at least nine black-governed countries in Africa in which majority rule does not apply any more than in Rhodesia. Nkrumah gaoled hundreds of his political opponents and ruled much as a dictator. Tanzania massacred some 8000 Arabs during the coup in Zanzibar. In the recent Nigerian coup three Ministers and several supporters were murdered. Yet I do not remember the churches or the United Nations, raising the slightest objection to these actions. In fact, we all fell over ourselves to recognise these bloodstained governments, in comparison with which Mr Smith appears incredibly mild. Why do the churches and other “do-good-ers” have a double standard? If a government is black it can virtually do anything and they’ll support it. If white? Oh no; that is different! They seem to be fair to every side except their own.—Yours, etc., J. L. CLARK HALL. Hawarden, March 22, 1966.

Sir,—ls not the Aid Rhodesia Movement dangerously deluding itself in referring to Rhodesia as a “prosperous and contented country”? Who are prosperous? The Europeans. Who are contented? The Europeans. The churches urge that the prosperity is too narrowly based, and the contentment illusory, since police state methods have denied it outlet. They do not ask for an immediate and total transfer to power, but only for an orderly and guaranteed movement towards true multiracial government In all conscience, what else can they do, if they take their gospel seriously? The churches are not anti-European. Those who wort in Africa, from their collective experience of African life, see no future for privileged and entrenched white enclaves. They foresee only a build-up of such terrible forces of hatred and reprisal as will eventually engulf both white and black. Mr Smith’s Government if successful in its present policies, can only postpone the evil day and make its coming more certain. —Yours, etc, SELWYN DAWSON. March 24, 1966.

Sir,—Mr Dawson appears to know even less about Kenya than he does about African education in Rhodesia. Out of 1780 European farming

families who were in Kenya when independence was granted, 780 have. left. Farming has now become impossible through stock thefts, crop pilfering, and a gigantic squatter problem against which the police refuse to act, possibly under orders, mainly because they are now inefficient and corrupt. A deputation representing 930 farming families who now wish to leave recently flew to London to request the promised compensation, as otherwise they face ruin. They were told funds were available for only 400, and the balance would have to stay to bolster up the country’s economy, now on the verge of bankruptcy. Settlers are now leaving with a loss of half their life savings rather than stay on.—Yours, etc., THE WALRUS. March 23, 1966.