ABSTRACT
This chapter analyses the far right’s response to the constitutional crisis in Rhodesia before and after the colony’s unilateral declaration of independence in 1965. It will show that, as with Kenya and other African colonies, the far right remained steadfast in their belief that white rule should continue in the continent despite the emancipation of the majority of Africa due to the innate inferiority of blacks. Following the election of the hard-line Rhodesian Front Party in 1964, despite the weakness of the splintered far right in Britain, A. K. Chesterton was still able to utilise his contacts to gain access to elite politicians in Rhodesia, such as Prime Minister Ian Smith. When unilateral declaration of independence was declared, Chesterton claimed victory, believing that Smith’s ‘heroic’ actions had turned the tide of decolonisation. Yet, despite much in common with Smith, as well as other supportive right-wing groups in Britain such as the Monday Club, the far right soon turned on him, claiming his rhetorical suggestions of eventual majority rule showed him to be a sell-out. The National Front would continue in a similar vein, with John Tyndall using the Rhodesian Bush War to promote his own view of a global Jewish conspiracy and an embattled white race under siege. Rhodesia ultimately encapsulates many of the far right’s failures across the twentieth century: extreme and unrealistic stances which alienated public opinion as well as a confrontational approach to allies which left them isolated and ineffectual.
