History
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing History by Author "Maphalala, S.J."
Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemA comparative study of the aims structure and strategies of the National Party and Inkatha National Cultural Liberation Movement in the decade 1975-1985(1991) Shamase, Maxwell Zakhele; Maphalala, S.J.; de Villiers, J.It is imperative to take cognizance of the fact that no study of this nature has ever been undertaken in the field of history in South Africa. This justifies the necessity of undertaking a comparative study of the aims, structure and strategies of the NP and Inkatha National Cultural Liberation Movement in the crucial decade 1975-1985. It was during that decade that these two political groupings moved closer to the political centre of gravity of South Africa. By this time the NP, in spite of preserving hegemonic principles on behalf of the White electorate and amid increased international isolation, had proved itself the invincible doyen in the body politic of South Africa. Inkatha cadres argued that their movement was born from the turbulent first half of the 1970's, spawned by Black resistance to apartheid and had authentic roots in the core of the liberation struggle. The principles and aims of the NP and Inkatha were devoid of discernible dissimilarities. One may assert, however, that it was enigmatic that such principles and aims could not compel the two groupings to solve the socio-economic and political problems facing South Africa in that decade. Such a dismal failure to seek solutions that would benefit all the people of South Africa reflected negatively on both the NP and Inkatha. In 1985 this emerged as a harbinger for the state of morass in South Africa's political scenario. The organisational structures of the NP and Inkatha remained by far the best organized in South Africa, capable of overwhelming any challenge mounted by other groups. In 1975 the NP as a party was organisationally functioning by means of the Congress, Head Council, Ward Councils, District Councils, Constituency Councils, Branches and Provincial leaders, while Inkatha had a bureaucratic structure from Branches, Regions, individual members to different conferences and decision-making bodies. The National Council (NC) was the policy-making body and represented all national leadership formations of Inkatha. It was not possible to stipulate how many members of Inkatha at any one time belonged to the NC. This was due to the fact that organizations were constantly affiliating to - the movement. The Congress was the supreme authority of the NP in each province. It discussed the draft resolutions submitted by the District Councils, the proposals submitted by the Head Council and the Federal Council, and motions submitted by members of the Congress. The organisational policies of the NP and Inkatha had vestiges of commonality. Both groupings accepted and respected the poly-ethnic nature of South Africa's population. They both endorsed the notion of a multi-party democracy, although the NP comprehended this in the context of separate development. Inkatha noted this as taking into account the fact that no single organisation, from whatever quarter, would be the sole determinant of the future of South Africa. Disinvestment, sanctions and violence were abhorred by both groupings as a strategy to dismantle apartheid. They favoured negotiation politics and non-violence both as objectives and strategies. Both groupings conveyed assurance to achievements of a political apparatus that could satisfy the political aspirations of all the country's communities through negotiations. The key to both the NP and Inkatha's organisational successes was their commitment to the traditions of constituency politics. They both believed that the ideal of constituency politics was best served by having a multiplicity of cross-cutting constituencies, each of which had its own specific objectives, but all of which had a basic common goal. It could be mentioned, however, that the different situations and platforms from which they operated, polarised them against each other. The NP and Inkatha's relations with both parliamentary and extra-parliamentary groupings created a hiatus in terms of their aims and strategies. This crippled the evolvement of consensus politics in South Africa. In the decade 1975-1985 the Parliamentary political groupings were the United Party (UP), the Progressive Reform Party (PRP), the Progressive Federal Party (PFP) , the New Republic Party (NRP) , the South African Party (SAP), the Conservative Party (CP), and the Herstigte Nasionale Party (HNP) . In principle, they agreed with the NP and Inkatha in standing for the just and equal treatment of all parts of South Africa and for the impartial maintenance of the rights and privileges of every section of the population, with due regard to the multi-ethnic reality and that of the existence of minorities in South Africa. The NP and Inkatha had unfavourable relations with the extra-parliamentary political formations. These were the African National Congress (ANC), the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), the Black People's Convention (BPC), the South African Students' Organisation (SASO), the Afrikaner weerstandsbeweging (AWB) or Afrikaner Resistance Movement, the Azanian People's Organisation (AZAPO), the Natal Indian Congress (NIC), the National Forum (NF), and the United Democratic Front (UDF). Their relations with both the NP and Inkatha in terms of their aims and strategies were marked by what one may convoke "timorous digressions." Most of them referred to the NP Government as illegitimate while viewing Inkatha as perpetrating political tribalism which to them was the greatest enemy of African freedom. By 1985 this intricate structure of political groupings and different aims and strategies, characterized a divided South Africa.
- ItemFaction fighting in Msinga District from 1874-1906(1994) Mthembu, Bhekuyise Isaac; Maphalala, S.J.Faction fighting in Msinga started because of the shortage of land in this division. The oldest residents of the valley, the Sithole, aMachunu and aBathembu lived together very peacefully. Trouble started after the Colonial Government's demarcation of the valley into a reserve. Hundreds of people driven away from various parts of Natal arrived. These people had been removed from their areas because the Government needed those areas for settling white colonists. This part of Natal is arid, hilly and rocky. As a result, subsistence economy in the form of agriculture declined to a very large extent. The Government had no economic policy for these people. Starvation soon made the izizwe of the valley restless. Their amakhosi could not help them in any way. Eventually, it was a question of everyone struggling for survival. It was, for instance, not possible for aMabaso to live in peace with aBathembu because their location was completely surrounded by that of aBathembu. Inkosi Mganu Mvelase of aBathembu was not a war-like ruler but his neighbour, Inkosi Thulwana Ndabezitha of aMabaso had many grievances regarding land. In the long run, these amakhosi became enemies. Their izizwe started trying to push each other out of the reserve. When the two izizwe were up in arms against each other, it was the beginning of a tragedy for the whole division. Faction fighting that broke out between the two izizwe gave birth to the rest of the wars and the lamentable system of alliances. The attitude of the white civil servants towards Inkosi Kula Majozi worsened the state of the reserve. The enmity between the Sithole and aMaqamu was further aggravated by the partition of aMaqamu location after the deposition and exile of Inkosi Kula. The Government also proved to be inconsiderate of the feelings of aMaqamu by putting some of them under Inkosi Sibindi of aMabomvu. The Government was fully aware of the enmity between the two izizwe. Some of aMaqamu found themselves under Inkosi Bhande Sithole. When Inkosi Kula was reinstated, these people made a lot of noise demanding to be under their own inkosi. Fighting subsided in 1906, but that did not mean that the Government had succeeded in stopping faction fighting in the reserve. This was proved by the outbreaks of devastating wars between aBathembu and aMachunu in 1922 and 1944. The main significance of faction fighting is that it affects all aspects of life of the people involved. It is still very difficult to develop these victims economically and even educationally. The easy availability of guns has made matters far worse, even in the absence of a faction fight. Young men, most of whom with no formal schooling, easily get trapped in hooliganism. ^Employment chances are always slim. There are absolutely no activities to keep these young people occupied. They openly live by crime. To most of them, stealing is the way of life. They are nsed as hired killers only to meet the same fate themselves eventually. Even those who have access to arable land, show no interest in v i cultivating the soil. These wasted children have no way of making themselves economically productive. They are a burden to themselves and to the Government. Their built-in culture of fighting, has taught them to look down upon any man who does not possess a gun. Such a man is derogatorily referred to as a woman. When a faction fight breaks out, schools are usually disturbed because boys are bound to join their ward male members. They remain in hiding, preparing for attack or counter-attack, until fighting is over. Should fighting intensify, schools stop functioning altogether. Many boys leave school in such circumstances The question that remains now is, who or what will stop the war in Msinga? Unless a solution is found, to remedy the situation and restore dignity to these people, the future of Msinga will remain bleak
- ItemJohn L. Dube, his Ilanga Lase Natali and the Natal African Administration, 1903-1910(1999) Gasa, Enoch Doctor; Maphalala, S.J.J.L. Dube is one of the Zulu Natalians who, being an African nationalist, involved himself in the affairs of his kith and kin. He is the founder of the first African established school in Natal, viz. Ohlange. He also succeeded to establish and publish ILANGA LASE NATAL as a medium of contact among the Africans who were economically, politically and socially acute. Dube set himself the task of revealing the failures of Shepstonism. He pointed out how it could have been utilised to promote acceptable administration of Africans. He even pinpointed the type of reforms that the Africans yearned for. When this was not heeded, he involved himself unflinchingly in politics. He organised fellow-Christian Africans with success. Dube was, however, an exponent of non-violent political change. He wished that in its dealings with the Africans, the government would be fair, objective and humane. Dube remonstrated against the subjugation of the Africans by the colonial government. He preferred that the Africans should be consulted, and elevated in the scale of civilization. For this to happen, he pressed that the attitudes of the whites towards blacks would have to change. The unwieldy officialdom, obscenely abusive party politics, and unequal treatment of whites and blacks at law would also have to be remedied or replaced. He advocated that land should be equitably distributed and Africans introduced to a new mode of land ownership. The whites would have to reduce then-excessive demands for land and African labour. He also demanded a worth¬while education system for the blacks that would promote all their human aspects. The government was urged to adequately financially provide for and control African education. It should not leave this to the lot of missionary societies. Dube also pressed for the enfranchisement and representation of Africans in the Natal legislature. It was only then that the government would quickly apprehend, comprehend, and redress problems that related to Africans. Subsequent to the 1906 rebellion, Dube was hopeful that there would be an end to maladministration of African affairs. He was highly expectant that the recommendations of NNAC, the drive of the new governor, the new direction of policy, though late, would put the colony on a new course. However, then the movement towards Union was afoot. It remained to be seen what would transpire.
- ItemThe Natal government's policy towards amakhosi in the former Kingdom of KwaZulu 1846-1910(2000) Ndhlovu, Bongani Cyprian; Maphalala, S.J.The policy of the Natal Colonial government towards amakhosi was overtly hostile. In 1843 the British forcefully took over a large territory, which formerly belonged to kwaZulu, from the Voortrekkers. They renamed their newly acquired land as Natal. Three years later a Boundary Commission was instituted with a clear mandate to demarcate boundaries. The results were very unfavourable to the African people in Natal. Fertile land was given to white people, while Africans were crowded into eight land barren magisterial districts. This meant that the Africans were deprived of land to live, plant and graze then-livestock. It also meant the introduction of foreign administration, customs and religion to amaZulu. Furthermore it meant that African people were converted into a cheap labour force for whites in the territory which historically belonged to them. This foreign rule greatly demolished amaZulu system of administration. Amakhosi, the institutions which formed the core of amaZulu bottom-up system of administration, were highly disregarded. In an attempt to run kwaZulu without any cost and responsibility, the British government implemented its indirect rule policy in the kingdom. Here hereditary leadership was replaced by the British appointed amakhosi. As the description points out, the latter paid allegiance to the colonial government. To ascertain that laws promulgated by the Natal government were implemented in kwaZulu, a hierarchy of white officials was introduced over these appointed amakhosi. These officials were granted powers to appoint and demote amakhosi. Furthermore they had powers to confiscate lands and to define and re-difine boundaries. Following the defeat of amaZulu in 1879 by the British government, kwaZulu was further divided into thirteen "Chiefdoms". The 1879 Settlement dealt a tremendous blow to hereditary amakhosi. The British tried to neutralize amakhosi who were loyal to the Royal House by exalting respected men in the former kingdom, abanumzane and complete strangers to the position of ubukhosi. The main objective was to divide and rule the kingdom. This policy successfully worked for the Natal Colonial Government. The results were civil wars and faction fights. The kingdom witnessed a prolonged civil war between the royalists, supporters of the Royal House, and the loyalists, supporters of the Natal Colonial Government. The loyalists strictly enforced their rule over the supporters of the Royal House, while the latter fiercely resisted the imposed order and were calling for the return of the hereditary and traditional amaZulu leadership. The government responded by supporting their appointed amakhosi against the supporters of the Royal House. As long as African people were fighting and killing each other, the Natal Colonial Government remained assured that a strong and united force against it would not be formed. It argued that if the African people in kwaZulu were divided, it would be easier to rule them. AmaZulu who were crowded in the reserves were also righting each other in endless wars in an attempt to get more land. In the process livestock, crops and property that belonged to their perceived enemies were severely damaged. The governor, who had powers to intervene, was not prepared to do this. Fighting and killings continued. In 1910 when the whites only Union Government was formed, the aspirations of the African people were ignored. Today the South African Government is still struggling with the inherited policies of the Natal government towards amakhosi. And the solution lies not only with the government but with all the role-players.
- ItemThe origin of the Mkhwanazi tribe under Mkhontokayise J. Mkhwanazi(University of Zululand, 1993) Simelane, Antonio L.; Maphalala, S.J.The History of the Mkhwanazi tribe between the UMhIathuze and the UMlalazi rivers in the east and west respectively and the Indian Ocean and the Ongoye moun tains in the South and North is an off shoot of the Mkhwanazi tribe of the chief Somkhele in the Hlabisa district • Its history can be clearly' understood by first looking at the history of the Mkhwanazi tribe in the Hlabisa district.