The Rorke's Drift VC Discussion Forum
(View Discussion Rules)

** IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO ALL USERS **

PLEASE NOTE: This forum is now inactive and is provided for reference purposes only. The live forum is available at www.rorkesdriftvc.com/forum

(Back To Topic List)

Date	Original Topic
27th January 2004	King Goodwill Zwelithini demands compensation from invaders. By John Young I must say I was surprised when I read a number of reports which confirmed that His Majesty King Goodwill has demanded compensation from, as one report put it, all the nations which have invaded KwaZulu. Frankly, I feel whoever wrote His Majecty's speech was ill-advised to include such a comment. I think I'll just pen a quick note to the German Government seeking compensation for the fact my eldest brother was born in an air-raid, and has never been the same since! If those of us who are concerned about the AmaZulu people, we can help them by supporting charities suchas the Helwel Trust & the Zisizeni Association for Development. Both these charities encourage self-help and community programmes within KwaZulu-Natal. If anyone is interested in supporting the work of these charities please contact me and I'll send out some details. Or conatct Helwel direct on the following e-mail address: [email protected] There is a war being fought in KwaZulu today - the war against HIV/AIDS, let us act together now; irrespective of the fact whether we are members of this society or that society or group, and try and win that war! Those of you with registered companies or tour operators & guides, who rake in your cash trading on the Zulu name, start putting some of it back! So let's wake-up, let's do something for the Zulu, before there no Zulu left to see. John Y.
Date	Replies
27th January 2004	Alan Critchley If the report is true, I find it very disappointing. There is much 'goodwill' between the Zulus and ourselves and I fear that this development may do much to harm that. As John suggests, where do you stop. Is there a time limit? Perhaps we should be seeking compensation from the Normans for invading us, but knowing the French, they wouldn't pay up anyway. What about the Romans? I personally feel that King Goodwill has been badly advised on this matter. Even if or when he fails, it can only leave a nasty taste in the mouth. Certainly in mine. Alan
29th January 2004	Peter Ewart John Reading the report, I think (hope!) that both the King & Buthelezi were both merely engaging in a bit of local electioneering at what was already a well publicised event in KZN, and that his words were intended for local consumption with the elections coming up. Polls have suggested that IFP may not even have a majority in KZN this time, which must be rather worrying for them, and Buthelezi's present anomalous (in many eyes) post-1994 constitutional position would be further undermined if that happened. Presumably the King's initial demands will be made to the remnants of the National Party, in view of some of the Boers' incursions taking place before many of those of the British? Peter
31st January 2004	Peter Ewart I don't seem to be alone in connecting these two speeches with the elections, going by this morning's piece in The Witness - although I didn't go quite as far as the writer does! Peter
31st January 2004	DereK Hogg Good on you John for publicising such worthy causes. However, I take my hat of to anyone who runs a tourist business in these times, wherever and whoever they are. I doubt they rake in cash as you say. As a seasoned business adviser, Ive met very few who make a fortune out of the industry. And if they do make money, I say good luck to them for they provide a vital marketing and awareness function for kwaZuluNatal. The more people they attract to go, the more people will get behind these wonderful people in South Africa. Those people who go inevitably pump a lot of money into the local economy. If the trip I went on was anything to go by, it is a lot. AND 10 out of 14 of us on that trip are going back. The more tours and trips organised means sustained employment for Zulus in the hotel industry. South African law dictates you have to employ local people. The people who tend the graves at Ulundi and of the Prince Imperial will get more tips and Zulu dancers who earn their sole source of income from entertaining tourists at say Isandlwana Lodge and Ncome Museum will be able to save more towards marraige dowries. Many tours include stays at Shakaland and Simunye Pioneer Village where people can experience Zulu life first hand. And let's not forget the wildlife which is as much a part of the African story as the Zulus and the 24th. Our group even gave a donation to the local school. So if tour operators and guides become stinking rich, I say that's fantastic news for it can only mean more people are getting into history, more people are crossing the cultural divide, and more people are being told ad nauseum about how wonderful Africa is when tourists return from trips of a lifetime.
31st January 2004	DereK Hogg Good on you John for publicising such worthy causes. However, I take my hat of to anyone who runs a tourist business in these times, wherever and whoever they are. I doubt they rake in cash as you say. As a seasoned business adviser, Ive met very few who make a fortune out of the industry. And if they do make money, I say good luck to them for they provide a vital marketing and awareness function for kwaZuluNatal. The more people they attract to go, the more people will get behind these wonderful people in South Africa. Those people who go inevitably pump a lot of money into the local economy. If the trip I went on was anything to go by, it is a lot. AND 10 out of 14 of us on that trip are going back. The more tours and trips organised means sustained employment for Zulus in the hotel industry. South African law dictates you have to employ local people. The people who tend the graves at Ulundi and of the Prince Imperial will get more tips and Zulu dancers who earn their sole source of income from entertaining tourists at say Isandlwana Lodge and Ncome Museum will be able to save more towards marraige dowries. Many tours include stays at Shakaland and Simunye Pioneer Village where people can experience Zulu life first hand. And let's not forget the wildlife which is as much a part of the African story as the Zulus and the 24th. Our group even gave a donation to the local school. So if tour operators and guides become stinking rich, I say that's fantastic news for it can only mean more people are getting into history, more people are crossing the cultural divide, and more people are being told ad nauseum about how wonderful Africa is when tourists return from trips of a lifetime.
1st February 2004	John Young Derek, How much of the �2,945 that one company is charging for a 9 1/2 days in country jaunt, will reach the pockets of your average Zulu in his umuzi? Not alot or nothing at all? I'd venture. Break that figure down, and I'm sure that you, as a seasoned business adviser, would agree someone is making a few bob, or I'm getting my figures wrong? I know for a fact that the same question is being asked by members of the Zulu Royal House, who were appalled when they saw the figure quoted. I applaud who are putting something back, but I decry those who use the Zulu name merely to line their own pockets. As to make donations to local schools, be warned back in 1999, for the 120th, our group made a like donation. Whether it ever had any benefit to the children of the school, I can't say. What I can say is the following year, the headmaster was arrested for pocketing school funds! It may well be that because of my lack of business acumen, that I share my knowledge of the Anglo-Zulu War & the AmaZulu, freely, through this forum or through events suchas the recent Anglo-Zulu War exhibition at Royal Engineers Museum. Perhaps if I'd demanded an admission fee to my two-daily lectures, held over the course of four days, I could well have afforded treat myself to the afore-mentioned tour. However, the taking part was payment enough for me, and satisfaction being thanked by descendants from both sides of the campaign far outweighs any financial reward. John Young, Chairman, Anglo-Zulu War Research Society, Committee Member of the Ntshingwayo kaMahole Education Trust.
4th February 2004	Derek Hogg John Forgive the lengthy reply. I wouldn’t have but the fact you used a title, unnecessarily in this instant other than for some effect, in my opinion, prompted me to scribe the following. I sincerely hope that the Zulu Royal House will take the figure mentioned in the proper context and look at the bigger picture. There are many other tour operators who are cheaper but who cater for markets with less spending power. It may be your personal opinion that tour operators or guides should pay for “using the Zulu name”, which would certainly break new ground in international copyright law, but if businesses in the UK or any other country were forced to pay a “social” tax when organising trips to kwaZuluNatal, then the consequences to South Africa as a whole could be dire indeed. Tour operators generally work on a low profit, high volume basis. Their fixed costs are higher than most due to transport, fuel, airport taxes and the post 9/11 fallout. Many specialised tour operators cancel trips, as they can’t get enough people to make it pay. Adding another fixed cost, which is what you I think are suggesting, will only add to the difficulties in a cutthroat industry. People go into business to make money. (Those that don’t are invariably charities.) They make money through profits from sales. The more profit, the higher the taxes, national insurance and VAT they pay to the Government. Never mind the spin-offs of employing people, who then pay taxes, etc. It is then the Government’s responsibility to ensure monies go to the right people via social enterprise initiatives. That is true here and it is the same for South Africa. I don’t have to tell you that tourism is vital to the South African economy. It is one of the few countries that have benefited post 9/11. Figures in 2003 show external tourism was up 18% and rising. By 2010, 1.2 million people are expected to be employed in that industry in South Africa. Many of those will be in kwaZuluNatal. This region already has 44% of the internal holiday market, but if you ask anyone in the South African Tourism industry or the South African Government which sector they want more of, they will, I’m sure, say external tourists whose spending power far exceeds the average South African. Adding more fixed costs will cause tour operators to pull out of the market or raise prices, which will put trips beyond all but the very affluent. Both will result in fewer people going to South Africa. There then follows the impact of fewer jobs in the tourism industry, less money to be made and spent by tourists in South Africa, fewer taxes, less investment and far less money for the South African Government to spend “social enterprises” of their own. How much profit UK business make from these trips is irrelevant and frankly nobody’s business but their own. What is relevant is that the more people who visit kwaZuluNatal, the more money is spent in the local economy. It makes far more economic sense to pursue increasing the number of visitors to South Africa rather than adding more costs to few businesses in the UK and making people in this country feel guilty for having the guts to run a business. All a small business is now is talent, with some guts behind it surrounded by Government red tape. Higher fixed costs will inevitably lead to job cuts here. Inevitably, those losses will impact on the people in Africa we admire. I am one of those who choose to “treat” myself to a trip to kwaZuluNatal. My partner and I (and 8 more of our friends) plan to go every two years for which we save like mad. If the cost goes up due to businesses having to pay extra, we will simply not go as often. And the losers will be the South African people. I do not donate to Zulu charities. For that, I choose charities here. I feel no guilt however as my holiday costs will go partially go to South African businesses as will the considerable amount of spending money we take. It is clear you have an issue with certain sectors over their dealing(s) in the Zulu sphere, which is fair enough. Everyone has an opinion. It is also clear you do a great deal of good via this site, which I applaud without reservation. However, if you push these views too far, you may alienate yourself from individuals and businesses that could help to advance the causes for which you generously and so admirably support. Sincerely Derek
4th February 2004	John Young Derek, I think you have missed my point entirely. But then I don't move in the business circles that you appear to do, so may be that's why. The only reason, I used a title, was that you appear to be a new name on the forum, and I think it is best that I declare my interest, rather than hiding it. Again, may be that's my problem, for being too open. If you had some particular interest in a subject you were commenting on wouldn't you declare your hand? Or am I naive, may be I am? As to copyrighting the name 'Zulu', look to Companies House, but I being down that road before on this forum. For all I know you may very well be a officer, member or shareholder of one of those companies that has already done so, may be that is why you have leapt to the defence of small businesses. I don't know, and to be frank I don't care. With regard to airing my views, again, that is another subject we have already discussed here at length. David Rattray put it well once, when he said, words to the effect, that every day he wakes up he thanks God for the Zulu, and he wondered if Michael Caine did the same? I consider myself someone who goes out of his way to promote both current & past issues affecting the Zulu Nation. In my own fashion I attempt to remember and reconcile the wrongs that my countrymen did to the Kingdom of KwaZulu in 1879, the effect of which is felt to this day within the modern South Africa. My outreach is to share my knowledge and my feelings, freely, to those who are prepared to listen. The reason I started this thread, was I found it hard believe what I'd read, that His Majesty Goodwill, my society's President, had sought reparation for the past invaders of his kingdom. What next will the San people claim the same from the AmaZulu? Or will those other Nguni people who were displaced by the martial ambitions of the AmaZulu in 19th Century likewise sue? Surely, His Majesty's comments might be counter-productive - what next a levy to be paid by each Briton entering the Kingdom of the Zulu? I make no apology for highlighting the fact, that we can help the AmaZulu through the efforts of certain charities. Unlike you the charities and people that I support, are not just UK-based, and nor are they all Zulu-based, either, I hasten to add. I think it safe to say we will agree to differ in our respective views of those benefiting, or not, from their share of the tourist industry of KwaZulu-Natal. My view is only that of a layman. John Y.
5th February 2004	Derek Hogg John As you say John we will agree to differ. For the recoerd I have no business interests in any of the areas we have mentioned. I just want to see as many people as possible visiting Africa. My first visit changed my life. I'd like many more to share that. regards Derek
5th February 2004	John Young Derek, If your first visit to KwaZulu-Natal, changed your life then why not write something in 'Your Stories' section of this site. John Y.
5th February 2004	Derek Hogg I may just do that John. Thank you
6th February 2004	Martin Everett Dear John, If you wish a copy of Buthelezi's speech on 24 January 2004, I can sent it to you. Much better than you quoting the often illinformed media. Martin
6th February 2004	John Young Martin, Not necessary, but thanks all the same, as H.R.H. Prince Joseph, my Vice-Chairman, is forwarding the transcripts of the speeches made both His Majesty King Goodwill Zwelithini & H.R.H. Prince M.G. Buthelezi, so that I can see for myself. John Y.
16th February 2004	Mike McCabe Having heard King Zwelithini's speech at first hand, it was a thoughtful and moderate one, that nevertheless drew as one of its main conclusions that 'perhaps the time had come' for the Zulu people to be compensated by the British people for the damaging consequences of the 1879 war to the Zulu people. This theme was brought out in the closing third of the speech, and was not developed in much detail. The King spoke emphatically at that stage, but with his usual dignity and composure. Prince Buthelezi, present and speaking in his capacity as traditional chief minister to the Zulu king, made a fairly short speech that did not contain overtly political themes though drew on the need to recognise the KIng's role and status as KIng of the Zulus, and the consitutional nature of his role. Prince Buthelezi also spoke with balance and composure, and his speech was a reasoned and (to overseas visitors) uncontentious one. Both King Zwelithini and Prince Buthelezi spoke in the presence of the DEputy President of the Republic, and the Deputy British High Commissioner, the latter's own speech being worded to suggest that he was not expecting the King to adopt any such stance. The local press coverage in South Africa should be seen in the context of the media's evident appetite for some piquant opening political preliminaries in the run up to the (then) yet to be announced date for thre RSA's general election. It was evident that King Zwelithini was deliberately limiting himself to comments appropriate to his respected position as the Zulu ethnarch, and was deliberately speaking to an English language and media audience. Such translation as there was of the King's remarks was simply too short to have covered their entire contents. MC McC
17th February 2004	Mike McCabe I should add that Prince Buthelezi's speech in English was quite short. He followed it with a longer, and evidently different, speech in Zulu - which included playing a tape recording of a song. Non-Zulu speakers were thus politely mystified. Anybody know what it was about?