Some Reflections On Zulu Independence

There is nothing stopping AmaZulu from forming their own voluntary associations to build wealth and institutions for themselves.

A piece of this nature has been long overdue.

There comes a point in the life of any scholar, particularly one on a path of intellectual growth, when they must define themselves intellectually for the twin purposes of self-orientation and providing clarity to those who engage with their ideas.

While there is much to learn, I believe I’m at a point where I can define myself intellectually and provide clarity to those who engage with my ideas on this platform. To do this, I believe it will be helpful to reflect on how my views regarding the topic of Zulu independence have shifted in recent months.

Earlier this year, with the exuberance of a child, I threw my weight behind Zulu independence. I had an idealised vision in my mind, and I was drawn to it emotionally because I could see a future for AmaZulu outside the paradigm of centralisation. A future rooted in pride, independence, and institution building.

I found myself in serious discussions with certain people regarding it who advised me to create an organisation that would eventually push for independence through the Zulu monarchy. I took this advice seriously, and I was ready to become an enthusiastic advocate for Zulu independence, as one individual jokingly noted.

In hindsight, my attraction to Zulu independence did not just stem from naivety or the confusion that one faces when they are still trying to establish themselves in a different ideological tradition. It also stemmed from dishonest posturing and a desire to solidify a certain image of myself that some people I interact with on X[DS1] have.

It wasn’t until I began engaging deeply with classical liberal discourse that some serious questions naturally emerged and prompted me to question the whole idea of Zulu independence. The exuberance evaporated, and I had to come to terms with the implications of what I was supporting, away from the idealism.

Classical liberals value the freedom of the individual above all, and they are committed to safeguarding it. This doesn’t mean that they are against community - as critics often strawman them - but rather that they see communities as voluntary associations of individuals who can choose to enter and leave at any point.

AmaZulu are largely conservative (not in the American sense), and they place great importance on community, preserving culture, traditions, and the like. This is not inherently bad, but it is easy to see how their positions on a range of social issues, in the context of a hypothetical independent Zulu state, could conflict with individual freedom. It is also easy to see how belonging to the community could be compulsory rather than voluntary.

Furthermore, aside from the exceptions, AmaZulu are largely statists who believe that the state should play a key role in economic life, or at the very least, be directly involved in people’s economic affairs. Here again, it is easy to see how a hypothetical independent state under the monarch could lead not to freedom, but to a different kind of serfdom than that of the ANC. I must also mention property rights, as there is no guarantee they would be secure in such a state.

Having said all this, does this mean I am no longer umZulu, or that I do not care about the well-being and prosperity of other Zulus? Have I turned on my own community, so to speak?

Certainly not. I remain proud of my history, culture, and what distinguishes AmaZulu from other groups. What has changed is that I now realise I value individual freedom above all, and thus naturally have a healthy scepticism towards anything that poses a threat to it.

If this hypothetical independent Zulu state could somehow safeguard individual freedom, I could be open to it again. But as I’ve said, there is no guarantee that it would. This is what compels me to reconsider progress within the framework of individual freedom.

If one sets aside the hypothetical state, what does progress look like for AmaZulu?

While I am no expert on these matters, there are many good models of voluntary association in civil society that AmaZulu could replicate to address their challenges. In this regard, Afrikaner organisations such as Solidariteit and Afriforum come to mind as instructive examples.

These are voluntary associations that are focused on not just protecting their communities from overreach, but also on building wealth and institutions for their children and future generations. Importantly, all of this aligns with classical liberalism, which is worth highlighting here.

Classical liberalism champions self reliance and personal responsibility. It views civil society, rather than the state, as the primary engine of change and progress in society.

There is nothing stopping AmaZulu from forming their own voluntary associations to build wealth and institutions for themselves. AmaZulu are already organised in many ways, and perhaps all that needs to change is how this organisation is channelled. The potential for remarkable achievements is clearly there.

And this is precisely what I have realised. That AmaZulu have it in them to build the kind of society they want and deserve. They do not need to rely on the state or wait for another messiah to capture it. Instead, they must think about how they can become the masters of their own destiny.

As for me, I will remain a proud Zulu who is committed to the well-being and prosperity of other Zulus. But above all, a classically liberal Zulu who values individual freedom and believes that progress can be achieved through it.

Ayanda Sakhile Zulu holds a BSocSci in Political Studies from the University of Pretoria and is an intern at the Free Market Foundation.