Zulu Industry

The KwaZulu-Natal province in South Africa was structurally set up to be an independent Zulu country only for it to be denied sovereignty on the eve of the 1994 national elections. The quest for the independence of "Natal" goes back further in recent history when British colonizers sought for independence from the Union of South Africa when South Africa became a republic through referendum & obtained complete independence from British rule in 1961. I suppose the British South Africans of Natal felt that a nationalist state by Dutch descendants wouldn't be in their favour. 

Greater Zululand (KwaZulu): The entirety of the Zulu-speaking region & regions historically under Zulu rule. 

Today, I just wanted to show you all the institutions the Buthelezian Zulu State (Bantustan) established perhaps to just inspire other nations & remind people of what could've been. 

Established by the KwaZulu Bantustan government: 

• Ithala Development Finance Corporation: Or simply Ithala Bank, was established to offer financial services to the rural & urban Zulu masses. This included savings, loans & insurance. Unfortunately, it is now defunct as a bank from 2025 because Ithala SOC Limited was allegedly said to have no banking license. 

Ithala became the last black-owned bank to become defunct in 2025.

• University of Zululand: UniZulu was founded as a way to offer tertiary education for the mostly rural Zulu youth of then Natal. It's a very modern university boasting a library, computer lab, student residences & various sporting facilities. 

• Ingonyama Trust: Ingonyama Trust was established in the twilight of Apartheid as a board which would manage matters of land tenure, land use & finances. The sole trustee of land administered by the Ingonyama Trust Board is the Zulu king. 

Personally established by Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi: 

• Mangosuthu University of Technology: Is a university founded in Umlazi Township in the year 1979. It focuses on mainly technical degrees such as construction, chemistry and electrical & mechanical engineering. 

M. U. T. : The Mangosuthu University of Technology.

• Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi Airport in Ulundi: It's service area includes Ulundi, Melmoth & Nongoma. It accommodates aircraft up to the size of a Boeing 737 on its' main runway. It has hangar space, vehicle & aircraft parking, a fuel depot & radio navigational approach systems. It's used for regional charters & local connections, such as flights linking to Pietermaritzburg. 

Ulundi Airport also know as Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi Airport.

Other national institutions of the Zulu people include: 

• Ukhozi FM: A variety radio station, primarily in Zulu established in 1960. It is the largest radio station in South Africa & Africa by listenership. 

• AmaZulu FC: A Zulu football team initially created to represent the Zulu people in 1932 as a national team with the blessing of King Phumuz'uZulu kaDinizulu but evolved into a football club which;  

- won the South African League in 1972, 

- South African interleague cup in 1992, 

- won two second division titles in 2001 & 2003 then 

- participated in the CAF Champions League in 2022 after qualifying as South African league runners-up in 2021. 

• KZN TV: A variety satellite TV channel in the Zulu language which features traditional music, updates on the royalty & chiefs of the land as well as national news. 

• Newspapers Ilanga, Bayede & Isolezwe are sold weekly. 

I imagine if there were a Zulu state, these institutions would be central in the runnings of that state among other Zulu-made businesses & franchises.  

ZULU MEDIA 

Why a country is not always a nation...

I often hear people calling South Africa a nation & I cringe because while South Africa is under a single political structure, it is very diverse linguistically & genetically so most certainly is not a nation. A country is not exactly a nation, below are reasons why.

A NATION 

A nation is a settlement of homogeneous clans which originated as families. I assume as clans used to roam about, they would encounter ethnic territories or lands where they would settle among. The roving clans may intermarry within the larger nation & become part of it. Multiethnic "nations" or empires are typically a Eurasian ideal than an African one & came with increased population & improved modes of travel. What centralises a nation is usually feudal chiefs, a monarch, a faith/belief system or simply physical features of an individual (genetics) & language. A nation, by default, is a usually - at best - a country because it's land & thus it's borders are typically known by other regional clans & nations. A nation with no land typically become roving clans among other nations or are constantly in conflict with the imperial power that aims to annex their land. 

A COUNTRY 

A country is a state with centralised or consolidated authority. An empire made of many other nations & states can be an country. What centralises a country is politics or documents. A country's land (or borders) are commonly demarcated on a map. A country cannot exist without land it can defend or exist on. 

Example of how an empire can simultaneously be a nation.

In brief; a diverse country (linguistically or ethnically) is more commonly referred to as a "state", "country" or "empire" & a more ethnically homogeneous country is often called a "nation" 

(N. B.: A homogeneous empire is still a nation.) 

A nation is more a homogeneous people regardless of which political structure they are under & a country is more often a political structure governing a land. So while you can call the USA, South Africa, Belgium, Nigeria, DRC, Kenya, Australia & India "countries", they are not nations. 

This may or may not be associated with the above but here's something interesting to know: 

Country in Zulu is "izwe" & inhabitants of an izwe are "isizwe" (a nation). Nation & country having the same etymological origin in the language. Indicating that in the Zulu world a nation & country used to be one & the same thing. 

In Latin languages, peace & country seem to have a similar etymological origin indicating a country is a land where citizens can live in peace. The assumption then is if people can't live with each other in peace, it's not a country. 

National Unity

Overpopulation.

Seeing that the Earth's population is over 8 billion people, I went to ask A. I. what the limit for human population on Earth could be. The answer is 10 billion people, a population count that is estimated to be reached by 2050. The only solution is to limit women to having only one child birth from 2037 onwards until there are only 3 billion people on Earth. My research in the images below.

IN BRIEF: The Earth is estimated to be capable of sustaining a maximum of 8 billion to 10 billion people. The Earth's population has already reached 8 billion people and at current trends, the Earth's population is estimated to reach 9 billion people by 2037 giving us 11 years from now to act before overpopulation reaches a critical limit. At the calculated population growth, the point of no return will be 2050 where Earth's resources will become overexploited by overpopulation. 

CHINA'S ONE-CHILD POLICY 

This blog entry on YouTube.

Xenophobia vs Indigenization

Intro: This is me, a while back. I mention rejecting some foreigner's application to live in a country because I understand that some societies may be resentful of immigrants. And if your land has xenophobic individuals, I suggest there be an anti-xenophobia campaign or simply not allow immigrants to enter your country as a foreign policy. 

I am not very xenophobic, I just don't have the time. Sure, I believe that a country's resources can be strained by mass influx of immigrants but that's what refugee camps are for. I believe that a land should simply have refugee camps by borders & process foreigners on the borders, seas & airports. I do not believe that South Africa is bursting at the seams, brimful of foreigners & I wouldn't want it to be. If a country is suffering from an influx of foreigners, it simply means the border management systems are not up to scratch or they did not plan for the population growth they allowed. 

My solutions would be:

1) Constantly guarded & double-fenced (with barbed wire) borders. 

2) Large refugee camps for undocumented/illegal immigrants on the land's borders. 

3) Indigenization of naturalised citizens.

I believe that a country can plan for it's population by building high-rise flats & building infrastructure (by even using it's massive population as builders) for it's growing population. 

The reason we should indigenize naturalised citizens from foreign lands comes from the ancient African custom of unhostile foreigners being seen as a potential extension of a nation & them becoming part of a national heritage rather than being chased away from go. For example, Zulu people come from many places in Africa & came together to build a nation over the centuries & millenia. If we apply the same concept of indigenizing foreign names & allowing foreigners to learn the national language, we simply strengthen a nation (see blog on National Unity).

There are lands far more densely populated than South Africa but built systems to accommodate their population. I'd understand the complaint of strained resources if South Africa was one of the Top 10 most densely populated countries in the world but it is not. So, affordable high-rise flats, more educational institutions, more agricultural produce & strengthened border corps should more than accommodate a growing population as well as create jobs. We simply need some population planning strategies & systems to accommodate a national population so we don't have people who feel a foreigner took his/her job somehow. 

The Jews...

Because of the constant obsession with "the Jews", I felt that they are a race of Semitic people that needed to be studied. By analysing their creation stories, they can be traced to originate from modern-day southern Iraq. How & when they separated from other Semitic people (i. e. Arabs), I don't know. But at some time along their history they settled in Egypt because of a drought & because of growing numbers of the Israelites coming to Egypt, they were decisively enslaved. The Israelites became slaves of the Hamitic people of Ancient Egypt, cousins of Semitic people through biblical accounts. Jews (a name they got after going to Canaan/Israel) were originally called Hebrews or Israelites & Hebrew (Habiru) being a derogatory term in ancient Egyptian meaning "outcasts" fell away in favour of "Israelites'. 

Escaping slavery, they fled Egypt led by Moses & settled on the land of the Canaanites. There they forged their own kingdom. But over the years, they would be conquered by the Greeks, Persians, Romans & others. The last Israelite dynasty to rule Israel/Judaea were the Hasmoneans if I'm not mistaken. At one point, Israelites were brought to Babylon to become slaves once again. 

They were virtually a nation with no state for a large part of their history until the founding of modern Israel, being most famous as slaves & subjects of other empires in their history. Being that they were scattered by the many nations who conquered the Levant, they ended up in Morocco, Britain, Russia, Italy, Germany etc. where they were persecuted on several occasions throughout European history. Now, some of the richest people in the world & some of South Africa's richest billionaires are of Jewish origin. What is so special about Jews other than the fact that the world has bought into a sect of their faith in Christianity? I think the fact that their fatherland is so close to three continents - Israel & Israelites have had a history in all three Old World continents of Asia, Africa & Europe so become some sort of reference point for all humanity & not East Africans / Ethiopians / the Turkana people of Lake Turkana. 

Now, we find that a lot of the vessels that shipped Africans to the New World in the Transatlantic Slave Trade were Jewish owned. I've read that the colonisation of the Americas was to prevent the spread of Islam as a latter-day effort of the European Crusades to defend the "Holy Land" against Persians/Muslims. Knowing that the first slaves used by the Portuguese on an island off the west coast of Africa were Jews who all died there, why were Jewish-owned vessels used in the Transatlantic Slave Trade? 

I feel that the obsession of Europe with "the Jews" has led them to perpetrate unnecessary & outrageous crimes against humanity. Jews are no more human than any other group in the world. If they are given special treatment for merely having an unfortunate history why isn't the same done for the victims of the Transatlantic Slave Trade & victims of colonisation in general? 

The piece of history that allowed me to trace Jewish origin to Mesopotamia: 

Yes, Utnapishtim is Noah. 

Why Africa seems to lag so behind when compared to the rest of the world.

I've always felt that Africa is given an unfair spotlight in certain fields, primarily technology & quality of life. The thing is, technology is often made in one part of the world then spreads across the region before spreading worldwide. While the wheel is commonplace today, it was made in Persia before spreading across the world. Austronesians, Australasians, trans-Saharan Africans & Native American tribes did not use the wheel until they learnt the technology from someone else. This goes for other technologies such as the firearm & electricity. In fact, neither the wheel, electricity or the firearm were invented or discovered in Europe. These three essential technologies of the modern world were all Asian. Technology spreads depending on it's usefulness. 

Why we did not develop our own technology in Africa despite seeing it from other peoples is because in sub-Saharan Africa we rejected a lot of developments due to simple complacency among other things. We almost didn't believe anything was greater than our way of life. Some African nations called the gun, the "coward's weapon" just to show how disdainful Africans were of Western technology. So even if we did see many modern technologies on journeys & from colonisers, we didn't think that they were better than our way of life on most occasions & technologies we saw as better or superior, we - obviously - quickly adopted. This was the southeast African mentality. 

I can quote two lectures online of people more educated than myself on why Africa didn't develop the same technologies that Eurasia managed to develop, one cites simple geography & the other cites modern misunderstandings of ancient Africa but I'm going to note that culture & the accepted ideas of a given people played a role in many African nations remaining unaccepting of foreign technology. In some regions, colonisers might have caused so much damage that anything they came up with from their clothes, food & technology may have been rejected. It was not lack of intellectual capacity that made Africa lag behind Europe & Asia but more culture, environment & geography coming together to prevent the adoption of new technologies. 

The quality of life in Africa correlates with our experiences; Africa is a large, hot, hostile continent... we have the common idea that possessions are not permanent so we often didn't bother in making non-permanent items, especially in southeast Africa. This was the same for Australasians & Native Americans as well. The only reason it seems like the southern African way of life is unique & exotic may be simply due to our skin colour. There is no other way to put it because on other continents they lived lifestyles that focused less on possessions as well. There are "uncontacted tribes" today in modern America & Asia who have not discovered the wheel & might be considered less developed than most African countries. 

Despite all this; the destabilisation of our nations, way of life & hostile environments - Africa has made a lot of contributions towards the development of the modern world. Comparing African countries to China by claiming that China was one of the poorest countries in the world thirty years ago works in humiliating Africa. Sure. But putting into context that China's massive population shares one language & national ideal while Africa's nations were forced into ethnic conflicts through European-made national borders & dealt with unfair deals in terms of land & mining since the 1800s will make you understand that China had a sociocultural advantage & was given a further economic advantage when the world (i. e. USA & associates) made China a giant manufacturing plant. There's no reason an African nation focused on agriculture, shelter, industry & defence couldn't be successful even if that African nation never reaches the heights of China & Europe. 

Our quality of life in Africa needs to be a priority or we'll forever be just the struggling, malnourished, corrupt Dark Continent. We cannot compare ourselves to other continents when we were clearly dealt a different set of cards. 

AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MODERN WORLD 

The price we pay for Africa's development.

National Unity.

I am an admirer of the concept of "national unity" as I have seen how much a lack of national unity has harmed South Africa. Were South Africa as unified as China or Sweden, we'd be near a first world country but we are so divided, the stark ideological & cultural differences within South Africa have consistently proven to us that we are forcing a united country in vain on many occasions. So I propose this (more conservative) branch of Kwatuism to deal decisively with disunity in nations. I studied global politics to reach this conclusion so I cannot give this political concept an African name. Instead, it's based on Old World-ist tried & tested methods of national unity. 

• The state language: I don't understand how a land does not embrace the concept of a national language more often. In South Africa we insisted on having a full eleven official languages rather than simply choosing English as the medium of instruction in schools, language of the media, language of communication & our lingua franca. This could've avoided a lot of problems nationwide. Instead now, we have remained divided in islands of indigenous languages which find it difficult to integrate with the larger land. The most spoken & understood language being Zulu will not be learnt by tribalists of Xhosa, Sotho, Tswana, Pedi & other groups. When whites, Tsonga, Swazi, Ndebeles & even Vendas don't find a problem with the Zulu language - we find tribalists truly loathe the concept of Zuluness nevermind learning the language. A national language likely provides unity more than anything else. If South Africa is to unite, we may need to consider adopting the European languages of English or Dutch/Afrikaans as the national language in all media (TV, radio, internet & print) & daily life because learning any of our indigenous languages will simply increase tribal hatred. 

• The state religion: A state's faith provides a moral foundation of a people & ensures all the people in a land understand the land's concept of wrong & right. The state religion should naturally bleed into the nation's legal frameworks with the religion of the land being the foundation of the law of the land. While living in a land that has laws that oppose an individual's religion today is the norm, it is what causes religious extremism. I imagine that the Ethiopian Orthodox Church could gain ground in Africa instead of Roman Catholicism, Protestantism & other Christian sects which were founded in Europe. If not, Africans could resurrect their ancient faiths which would ultimately be both their faith & law. 

• Integration of foreign names: I'm a studier of languages i. e. linguist & study how languages define culture. I understand how the Anglophone, Lusophone, Francophone & the Castillian-speaking world integrates & understand how foreign names can cause confusion in a land. So for this I propose, domestication of foreign names into the local language. Everything from provincial names, city names, river names, mountain names & even the names of individuals in the land. I'm of the belief that a rich & vibrant language is vital in maintaining a successful nation. Using my native indigenous/vernacular language as a reference base: Biblical names could be indigenized (e. g. Eve ~ Eva, Michael ~ Mayikheli, Jacob - Yakobe, Thomas ~ Tomasi etc.) while foreign names could be translated into local names (e. g. Thomas ~ Wele, Harold ~ Mbusi/Mholi, Henry ~ Mzuziwendlu, Paul ~ Mphansi etc.) This could be done by default for anyone on the national database who has citizenship in the land. They would need, at least, one name in the indigenous language to obtain citizenship & perhaps prevent ridicule of individuals in intolerant communities.

• The head of the state: Ideally, the head of state could be a leader elected with open ballot elections but this causes problems in time & lacks consistency. Whereas a monarch & the elected ministers could provide long-term consistency, a minister under a monarchy could stay twenty years & grow to understand his portfolio better than the five-year ministers of our democratic elections. A monarch is often a descendant of the ancient rulers of the land so provides a link from the land's past into the future which serves in legitimising a land & it's institutions. 

Many of the readers of this blog entry are going to ask where any of this has worked in the world or in Africa particularly. You're in luck as I have plenty examples: Imperial Ethiopia, Japan, Thailand, England, the Netherlands, Spain & the entire Scandinavian world (Denmark, Sweden, Norway & Iceland somewhat). Germany & France have a state language even though they no longer have a monarchy & have a more secular society today. The same secularism that is now proving a problem in Western Europe with the influx of Islamic extremists. Eswatini loosely employs two of the four above-mentioned points in unifying their land but they are less insistent on using Swazi as the absolute language of the land, I suspect that they are more tolerant of different faiths as well as foreign names so only have their monarch & partly their language as unifying factors in their land. Another example of language creating unity would be the East African bloc where language unity through the Swahili language has made it possible for them to seamlessly work together across different countries. A state religion works in unifying lands especially in Islamic lands, where their faith is their culture & often their law which often indirectly accelerates development of a nation (e. g. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, & the UAE). So the above-mentioned four points have genuine real-world examples of their success & are not just fabrications of this blog post writer. 

The above-mentioned four points may seem unimportant but become defining factors in divided lands to forge unity. This could be the early stages of an index measuring a country's national unity in place of using economic or financial equality as measures of a country's unity.

Maps that can stop wars...

After European colonialism, three continents were left with newly-imposed borders: Africa, Australia & America. None of these continents have their indigenous name & they still have incorrect ethnic borders to this day. These borders cause ethnic wars & ethnic tensions but little has been done to address the problems they cause. As Europe & Fareast Asia are already divided into their respective ethnic regions, only South Asia, Africa, Australia & America are left to be "fixed". 

 Africa (or Kwatu). 

The east of Asia has it's ethnic borders aligned with it's political borders. From India going west, it looks like a bit of a jumble. 

Australia. | N. B. Aborigines of Australia, New Zealand & Oceania are not black i.e. "not from Africa". 

The Americas: North & South America in their natural state.

The United Nations, African Union & the South African constitution recognises that indigenous communities exist & has legislature preventing ethnic discrimination & it's associated traits. Secession of indigenous lands is even promoted in the African Charter on Human & People's Rights as well as legally allowed in the legislation of South Africa.

The global order & Africa.

In our world there are developed lands which are mainly in the northern hemisphere who set the tone for how the world lives their lives & then there's the "Global South" i. e. Latin American, south Asia & Africa. No one takes us in the global south seriously. We're expected to live in disfunctional lands & be victims of the elements & environments we live in. And, I think, something tickles the West about keeping us this way & pretending to play saviour. They understand that a developed Africa & global south would mean Africans staying in Africa,& not fleeing to Europe but maybe a perverse narcissism comes in knowing the poor are kept poor. When, in truth, it is bad for the world & it's economy in general. 

Should Africa develop to the level of Europe twenty years ago, it would only banish the wild-African-man-roaming-in-the-wilderness-for-food stereotype & replace it with a people, black people, that are capable of governing their lands. Since the West seems to be less interested in this, the only group outside of Africa that Africans can depend on is BRICS. USA & Europe are not interested in equal partnerships with Africa, they want puppets & raw materials. 

If we're being honest about BRICS, it's an alliance but how effective it is has not really been tested. BRICS countries don't have a common political ideology, just a common disdain for the current unipolar world. BRICS has been mocked as a "dictators alliance" & a "poor man's alliance". They're not being harsh because what if Belgium or Canada, for example, wants to join BRICS? Could they join? The best BRICS could be is a trading alliance, if BRICS becomes a military alliance - NATO will definitely feel threatened & act on that fear. 

A less centralised or multipolar world could bring unexpected consequences. In a post-US dollar multipolar world - which currency are the people of the world expected to trade with? Any African currency is virtually gambling with your money & the Russian ruble & Chinese yuan will always be targets if the West feels threatened. We're left with just the Euro & cryptocurrencies. And I don't think any serious world powers would relegate themselves to using cryptocurrencies. Unless BRICS can create a new currency or use some sort of bartering system, they'll be forced to use the Euro or perhaps gold. 

I think the leaders of Brazil, Russia, Indian & South Africa are under seige by a multitude of problems both in their countries & on a global scale. So while BRICS may be a great alliance to be part of for developing countries, I do not believe it can reach the level of more developed alliances in the world; especially since the USA sees BRICS as directly opposed to the USA. Lula, Putin & Modi need to know that they are the David in a David vs. Goliath (BRICS vs. the West) stare down. And outside the Bible, the weaker alliances are often crushed. South Africa can only watch being the smallest economy & the weakest military of the original BRICS member countries. The USA alone could mess South Africa up, without needing to call their European allies. So our membership in BRICS as South Africa requires us to be doubly cautious because by joining BRICS, we may have made some enemies in the West. 

I don't know what vision the leaders of Africa & the African Union have for Africa but what I know for certain is that the West needs to worry less about Africa developing because I've seen some European legistature. Europe is so advanced & ahead of Africa in it's institutions that I don't think Africa would ever reach Europe's level even after Africa sorts out it's colonial borders.