Notebook
The Rastafarians have become a familiar sight in many English cities. They are YOung West Indians' who wear their hair in lOng ringlets known as 'dreadlocks'. They also wear bonnets striped gOld, green, and red. They play reggae music and they smoke marijuana. Their parents do not Understand them, and the police do not like them. This week, however, the Catholic ,. -(21filinission for Racial Justice declared: kastafarianism should be recognised as a valid religion . . . Christians and churches should relate to them and allow them to use church premises'. What is it that Christians are. suPPOsed to relate to? Rastafarianism Is, in fact, an anti-semitic sect dedicated to conflict between the black and white races, lid to racial segregation. The sect emerged 2.°111 a mixture of African religions, the "Linger for freedom of Jamaican ex-slaves, and the anti-establishment attitudes of new American pentecostalist movements. It got 801118 when a group in Jamaica took seriously the prophecy of the black con- sciousness pioneer Marcus Garvey (1887-1940) who said: 'Look to Africa, when a black king shallbe crowned, for the ,,`InY of deliverance is near.' They found that rlalle Selassie had been crowned Emperor tif Ethiopia in November 1930, so decided developed he was the living God. From this ‘4eveloPed a thoroughly racialist view of the world. The Rastafarians came to believe that Jesus was black; that Ethiopia was the true Zion; that the Israelites were a black nation; that they, the Rasta brethren exiled 1,11 Jamaica, were a remnant of these black Israelites. From this it followed that the Jews of Israel were false pretenders and that the white nations were 'Babylon'. Like 0.ther dissenters before them, they iden- tified the Church of Rome with the Whore of Babylon. It was Rome which had sup- Dhed the soldiers to crucify the black Christ alld, under Mussolini, to invade the Holy ',Id, Ethiopia. That the Catholic Com- Russion for Racial Justice — a body spon- sored , by this country's Catholic bishops — snould be feeling so indulgent towards these .reoPle is therefore somewhat bewildering. Their report even suggests that ganja (or Illartjuana) may be for Rastafarians a sacra- !tient comparable to the cup of Communion 1,n Christian worship. Good heavens. Are iheY suggesting that Catholic churches should be turned over to sacramental ganja styt0king? Here, fortunately, the Commis- srl°11's president, Bishop Leo McCartie, nall draws the line. But perhaps, he sug- gests, this might be possible in Church halls 1 Provided that nothing illegal took place. suppose he is just waiting for a change in the law.
'Ten years ago this week the treaty was
signed which took Britain into the European Common Market. The subse- quent decade has been an unhappy one for this country, and not a particularly happy one for the rest of Europe. The high hopes which in many circles accompanied our membership — that it would create a richer, more competitive and more influential Bri- tain as well as a more united Europe have faded and died. Boredom and dis- illusionment have taken their place. Even the Social Democrats, who are led by former EEC fanatics, give the impression of being now rather more interested in forging closer links with the United States than in cultivating our Common Market partners. The whole thing has been very un- exhilarating. But this is no reason to regret our membership; even less to argue, as An- drew Alexander did in Monday's Daily Mail, in favour of withdrawal. There is no evidence that membership of the EEC has been to blame for our pitiful economic per- formance, or, as Mr Alexander strangely implies, for our intractable trade union pro- blems (did not the European Court of Human Rights support the case of the British Rail employees sacked for refusing to join a union?),In the period leading up to the 1975 referendum on the Common Market, the Spectator campaigned vigorously, and almost alone among the press, in favour of leaving the EEC. I have looked back over our last editorial before the vote to see whether its warnings have been justified. The editorial made three main points: that continued membership would draw investment out of Britain into continental Europe; that because Britain for the future was likely to remain a net food-importing country, the EEC's high- priced agricultural structure would heavily favour net food exporters like France; and that loss of sovereignty would ensure the gradual extinction of British law. On the question of investment, no doubt British in- vestment in Europe has increased, but at the same time Britain receives nearly one third of all American overseas investment and over half of all Japanese investment in the Community. And the increase in British exports to the EEC has been colossal from £2.8 billion in 1970 to £20.4 billion in 1980, in which year our trade with the Cotn-
munity also moved for the first time into surplus (a fact which Mr Alexander fudges by saying that that 'the rest of the EEC usually exports more to Britain'). On agriculture, it should be pointed out that whatever disadvantages. the EEC agricultural system may have for the con- sumer, it has not damaged the output of British agriculture, which has increased enormously to a point at which we are ap- proaching self-sufficiency in temperate pro- ducts. As for sovereignty; it is absurd to talk about the extinction of British law. No member country need agree to new com- munity legislation if it does not want to. Any member country, as France has so often shown, can be as 'sovereign' as it chooses to be. To enjoy exaggerated expec- tations of the EEC would be folly, but to try to leave it would be even greater folly.
Ithink Mrs Thatcher is quite lucky in her family. She is not married to Margaret Trudeau, she does not have Billy Carter as a brother. Denis always behaves impeccably. Her children, even if they are not the children one would have chosen for oneself, are a lot better than many people's children. They are not drug addicts or criminals. They are, on the contrary, remarkably straightforward and devoted to their parents. This is something all parents should be grateful for. Mark is only 28 years old. He is full of energy, drive and other Thatcherite qualities, none of which are to be despised. His only problem is that he does not seem to be terribly clever. Clever people try to make money in rather cleverer ways. Clever people remember that their mother is prime minister and that they ought to make polite, diplomatic noises when they have been rescued from the desert at considerable effort and expense by a foreign government. But why should he be clever? He seems to be brave and amiable and determined to lead his own life. Let him get on with it. We did not elect the Thatcher family to run this country; we elected Margaret Thatcher. It is, I think, a very bad sign when politicians make their children behave in a manner which con- forms with the political image they are try- ing to promote. Mrs Thatcher has not been guilty of this. I was, however, a little depressed to see on the front page of Wednesday's Daily Express that little Miss Heseltine — Annabel to her friends — 'has backed out of a Deb of the Year contest because of the Government's record over unemployment.' According to the Express, she considers it 'wrong and embarrassing to take part in something like this in the pre- sent economic climate.' I think the em- phasis there should probably be on 'embar- rassing', for there was already a lot of unemployment last year when Annabel had her expensive 'coming out' party. Why does she not admit that the economic climate has nothing to do with it, but that no person with any self-respect would take part in a contest organised by Dai Llewellyn?
Alexander Chancellor
Previous page
