Wednesday, April 9, 2014



Scandalising the courts, otherwise legally known as Contempt of Court was the buzz phrase that not so long ago had Nation Magazine editor, Bheki Makhubu, being thrown hither and thither as the Swazi Judicial Cabal once more turned Swaziland into a kangaroo court in session. It was a case that once again took another jibe at the integrity of the Swazi Judiciary, and piled more doubt to the quality of the justice that Swaziland offers.

Not so long ago Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi, Justice Bheki Maphalala, and Mumcy Dlamini, issued a joint public statement threatening all manner of reprisal to those that dared to, “scandalise the courts”. Judging from the freeing or rather the, “setting aside”, of Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko's shame of a case, it might seem like the arm of the Swazi Judicial Cabal has been twisted a tit bit too painfully, otherwise it wouldn’t voluntarily sacrifice its bully street cred.


It would be wise for analysts, observers, political activists, and even the victims themselves, to put caution on hastily garlanding Judge Mumcy Dlamini because she apparently, finally, out of the blue, “found justice” and applied it “fairly”. If there is anything further from the truth it is this readily available line of reasoning.

 There is no way that Judge Mumcy Dlamini will “find Jesus” and start shouting, “let Mphandlana Shongwe enjoy justice”. Such is normally a gradual occurrence and it follows the logic of “growing”, and not the miracle that is presently purported.

What happened at the Swazi courts during the victimisation of Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko was an historical event which is a good sign of a coming of age of a people.

The filling of the courts by Swazi and foreign people, the condemnation from a good number of well respected, local, regional and international organisations, and the constant toyi toying would be a bit much for even the most resolute stooges of Tinkhundla system. So basically, something had to give, and fortunately in this instance it was Judge Mumcy Dlamini's nerve. That more nerves will pop this year and beyond is a reality contained within the resolve and the coming of age that Swazi people have shown and left no one in doubt that those that have taken the liberty to treat Swaziland as their personal farm are in for a surprise.

That the action of Justice Mumcy Dlamini of going against cabal protocol, will get her into the proscribed kind of trouble is almost a fact. So instead of rushing to buy thank-you cards for the “brave” judge, rather we prepare to stand by her side in defence of her action of releasing Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko and not to indiscriminately declare her the champion of justice when in the near future she would be slapping all manner of dodgy sentences on democracy activists, that is, if she is not fired.

A cabal in conflict with itself is not necessarily a cabal in agreement with the people. The Lesotho national was bound to entangle the long rope he was given, and sooner or later his immediate subjects were bound to feel the heat and a couple of nerves would pop. This is normally the logic around the exploits of corrupt cliques. It might not be surprising that the hand that pays the paper might be rather perplexed on which song to order the piper to play next because it seems like the medley that the Chief Justice is belting out is a personal compilation and there is no agreed upon playlist; even though there is that overarching agreement that the piper must play.


There isn't anything that should be keeping the Chief Justice in Swaziland, now that he has lost his appeal in Lesotho. It would prudent for those that pay the gentlemen to release him because it is clear that, in what appears as the height of irony, he is is trying to dodge Justice in his native country; and releasing him from his engagements in Swaziland would help him to adequately focus on the whirlwind he has been creating in Lesotho. He must go home and face his impeachment.

The absence of the judge in Swaziland would help Swazi people to focus on more constructive issues than attending to his tantrums. For a while he has been a frustrating waste of time. Instead of the people of Swaziland focusing on real issues of condemning Mswati III's repressive regime. and planning on how to sustainably launch Swaziland into the future, now and again the country has to focus on this attention seeking grown delinquent whose ego is gangrened with selfishness, and a blatant attempt to keep Swazi people as repressed as possible. Judging from the trouble following him, it is clear that he is a serial home wrecker. The gentleman has obviously overstayed his welcome and it is time that he heads back home.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014


CULT OF PERSONALITY!! Deputy Prime minister finds
nothing wrong with approaching Mswati III on his fours.
There are some, especially beneficiaries of the Tinkhundla system, that the word dictator still hold some bitter taste when labelled at Mswati III, Africa’s last absolute monarch. Some prefer to acknowledge that his rule would do with more adherence to Human Rights, and the odd tweaking of the law here and there, but feel it is a sensationalist exaggeration to unreservedly say that Mswati III is a dictator. They would rather prefer to view Tinkhundla system as, “not undemocratic”, rather than to view its head as an autocrat.

Due to a mixture of Monarchist nostalgia, and the odd misplaced “expert opinion”, it becomes quite hard for some Swazi people to come out the closet and say, “we have a dictator in our midst”. Much blame is heaped upon an advisory council considered uneducated and unsophisticated. If there are still traits of a dictatorship thereafter, that  residue is quickly packaged either culturally or diplomatically and neatly placed at the door of the government.

The victims of Tinkhundla system on the other hand use the word dictator unreservedly clearly showing a feeling of lacking a stronger word. But there are also cases where even democracy proponents find the word dictator quite “disrespectful”, because there is also that naiveté of defining respect outside of the ideal, where all manner of individuals are undeservedly given "respect" regardless of their conduct in society,.

Dictatorships are often characterised by some of the following traits: suspension of elections and of civil liberties; proclamation of a state of emergency; rule by decree; repression of political opponents without abiding by rule of law procedures; these include single-party state, and cult of personality.

The curtailing of civil liberties is almost a daily occurrence in Swaziland. It can be repressed from a group of slogan chanting political activists, right up to a group of women protesting the beating of another woman by a man. Any kind of dissent that has to do with people coming together to package their grievance is discouraged with the use of force and violence.

Moving onto the issue of the suspension of elections and observing that the dictatorship in Swaziland has tried to act clever in trying to avoid to be labelled with this characteristic by conducting election that are meaningless. A good number of international bodies have condemned the elections as a pointless exercise as the prerequisite of allowing unhindered participation is non-existent as political parties are banned in Swaziland.  The pointlessness of the election hasn't gone unnoticed by the people as in the previous elections, less than 50% of eligible voters actually voted, and even those that voted snubbed Mswati III favourites to the point that he had to appoint some of them in order to get them back into the dictatorial system. It is pretty clear that the suspension of elections  characteristic of a dictator fits Mswati III like hand to glove.

When Sobhuza II as the head of Imbokodvo National Movement banned political parties in 1973, he then declared a state of emergency which is still in operation up to present day, making it the longest running state of emergency in the world.

In 2005, Mswati III through pressure from political activists and the international community, introduced a constitution authored in his palace which paradoxically took away his rights to rule by decree and set him above the constitution. It was pretty obvious from the beginning that removing the ruling by decree was just to appease the international community, with the constitution itself being a bevy of contradictions. Since 2005, it has been disobeyed a number of times by high king-appointed government officials and Mswati III himself. The reality on the ground is that Mswati III still rules by decree because it is either he rules through the constitution or by decree. Clearly he has proved that he is not ruling by the dictates of the constitution.

The characteristic of repressing political opponents has been Mswati III’s main focus since he ascended the throne in 1986. Starting from the treason trial of political activists and unionists in the early 90s to the incident as resent as the case of the Human Right Lawyer Thulani Maseko who is presently remanded in custody to next week Tuesday for writing an article, which the Swazi justice system has labelled as, “contempt of court”. 

The justice system of Swaziland is run by Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi, a gentleman roped in by Mswati III, who calls himself makhulu baas (a title meaning Big Boss which was very popular in apartheid South Africa), who at present is in trouble with the law in his home country Lesotho. Alongside Thulani Maseko in custody is Bheki Makhubu, editor of The Nation Magazine, who not so long ago was slapped with an impoverishing R200 000.00 fine for contempt of court by “scandalizing the court”, through an article in the same Nation Magazine that has landed Maseko in his Majesty’s Correctional System.

When Imbokodvo National Movement, which was a party headed by Swaziland’s previous dictator named Sobhuza II, could not tolerate a mere three elected members of parliament from the opposition, it, under the leadership of Sobhuza II banned political parties and installed Sobhuza II as absolute ruler. So from then, either Imbokodvo has operated incognito as the only party, or the royal Dlamini clan has operated as the only political body “contesting” for state power. So it can be said either Swaziland has been ruled by one political party since 1973, or it has been ruled by one political family. But regardless if the label is family or party, the fact of the matter is that state power is not contested in Swaziland. So this characteristic too sticks like glue to Mswati III.

Many a journalist has entered Swaziland and left with quite the heart-warming story of a people who, “love the king”. Were the journalists to probe further they would actually find quite an interesting story of a cult of personality so interwoven in myth and witchcraft that it would make for quite the compelling story. But it is also reasonable to observe that a foreign journalist never has it easy in Swaziland with the regular sight of the bare breasted maiden, it becomes quite hard to focus the mind on the story. Cult of personality is the fabric upon which the Swazi Monarch designs his dictatorship. The disability of Mswati III is the lack of the ability to spit analogy after analogy which is the Swazi royals' recipe for manufacturing the cult of personality. His lack in articulation does not necessarily mean he hasn't enjoyed the protection of the cult of personality because his father Sobhuza II left quite a rich mist of deception on the people's minds to start him off.

Mswati III is what could be termed as a textbook Dictator. He ticks all the characteristics of a Dictator. So it can be said without fear of contradiction that Mswati III is a Dictator.........through and through.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014


As if to further drag democracy on a parade of shame, the Swaziland Royal judiciary finally admitted that what took Swazi political activists a few minutes to figure out through basic reasoning, has taken the Swazi judiciary well over three years to conclude. 
Some of Swazi political prisoners
The line of reason of the reasonable at the time was that for Bheki Dlamini, the President of the Youth wing of the biggest Political Party in Swaziland, to have been able to be at the scene of the crimes, he would have needed to be in possession of a helicopter or a faster mode of transport because on the said days he had reported to his work at 8 in the morning.
But justice is never the pursuit when political activists are thrown into the injustice system of Swaziland. Mary da Silva, Bheki Dlamini’s lawyer, once remarked that the Swazi judiciary treats political activists worse than hardened criminals.
By acquitting Bheki Dlamini of all the charges and finding Zonke Dlamini, the co-accused, guilty, will always be viewed in the only reasonable sense that Zonke was to stay behind so that the judiciary could grasp onto some form of legitimacy, as if there was a case to prosecute from the beginning.
If the Injustice System of Swaziland could knowingly keep an innocent man behind bars for well over three years, it comes without question that it wouldn’t think twice on keeping another man locked up for more years in order to lay claim to the existence of guilt for an obvious case of conspiring and framing of political activists just because the monarch and his cabal does not tolerate dissenting views.
Such can be proven on a number of cases whereby political activists walk around with bail conditions that ensure that dare they say a word in disagreement to the Monarch and the Tinkhundla regime, they would be dragged back into the abyss of confinement and torture in the shortest time possible. One such victim is a young Maxwell Dlamini, who on top of having been on the receiving end of a near impossible to pay bail amount, has been denied a scholarship to further his education and has had to be a regular visitor at a given police station in order to meet the bail conditions which are used as a tool to maintain some form of semi-incarceration of political activists. The idea is to maintain a sustained fear of hell among the political activists, through the almost official torture practice, the frequent arbitrary arrests, and the murders that are committed with impunity by Mswati III’s security forces.
 It is also logical that the system has to provide evidence for the propaganda that it punts to the Swazi people, that PUDEMO and its auxiliaries is hard at work trying to turn the country into a warzone, even though the war has not been forthcoming. So when a good number of Swazis start turning the attention to the real problem which is the poverty that is caused by the plundering of state resources by the royal family and the elite, the Nation is given another victim from the PUDEMO camp to parade around the royal judicial spaces, and for a while it seems like political parties are the problem when it is actually the greed of the royal family and the unworkable Tinkhundla political system that is the root cause of a country in the constant verge of economic collapse.  If it wasn’t for the annual SACU receipts which are guaranteed through a development component which comes out of the pocket of poor South Africans, Swaziland would have long approached South Africa so it could be annexed as a province of the latter.
The curious matter is that Zonke Dlamini who has been found guilty under the Suppression of Terrorism Act which very recently America said the Act needs to be totally annulled if Swaziland wants to hold on to the duty free AGOA arrangement that insures the salary – even though at mostly a slavery rate - of about 30 000 Swazis. It must be a genuine concern that America with its own questionable policy on terrorism, should question the justness of the Swazi Law. The question then remains that if this draconian law is repealed, will the scales of injustice still hold in Chief Justice Michael Mathealira Ramodibedi’s fiefdom?  
Again Mswati III and his judicial circus has put a not-so-stand-up show in ridiculing the very core of democratic values by making a mockery of judicial processes. There continues to be an undeniable rope as thick as a ship anchor’s chain, all the way from the palace, that yanks the gavel and wobbles the defence. Cheatham House says, “it is not undemocratic”, Buckingham Palace invites it to royal functions, it spends its blood money in Vegas, and when it is called to account it sees visions of Monarchical Democracies in the middle of electric storms and cries, “sovereignty!” Many say it is ignorant and dub it, “A Swazi problem”, but the reality is that it mocks every man woman and child who has ever stood to defend democracy.
The Swazi regime is adamant on continuing with criminalising abortion while statistics point to alarming backroom, or rather filthy toilet abortions by young girls and the mortalities thereof, while the system itself aborts its children in prison cells and torture dungeons. It has employed a Sotho national to conduct the Symphony of Judicial Misery where honourable productive citizens like Bheki Dlamini and Zonke Dlamini are criminalised for seeking justice and security forces are rewarded handsomely for replenishing the abattoir of the abettors.  The only upside to this is that Zonke Dlamini and the other political prisoners will not be alone for much longer, but will be joined by more PUDEMO and SWAYOCO members in prison.
As time passes it becomes clear that Mswati III and his tinkhundla regime will not be able to sustain the repression for too much longer. There are clear signs, like the undeniable that the system has outlived its limited vision and there need to be a system that can usher Swazi people into a humane future; the question is no more “if”, but’ “when”. If the SACU receipts can fall just once, it would be back to the begging bowl for Swaziland, and who knows the patience of South Africa when Swaziland has publicly declared itself as having taught South Africa the values of democracy, and its entire attitude towards the latter being that of arrogance and the show of empty pride.

Sunday, February 9, 2014


An issue that seem to elude Swazis, especially Swazi democracy activists is that what ZANU PF is pursuing at present might be an antithesis of what Swazi “progressives” are supposedly pursuing; or rather, that ZANU PF’s rhetoric is in disagreement with the obtaining reality in Zimbabwe.
President Robert Mugabe
Maybe to question the wisdom in cheering President Robert Mugabe, and that if it is not cheering for one’s very jeer.

Not to single out President Robert Mugabe, but to adopt the premise that all he articulates in office is ZANU PF’s pursuit and therefore its policy or maybe it’s intended policy.
To mention that Robert Mugabe is not the first African leader and surely not the last to stand up to Western Imperialists.  That there have been more daring stances by African leaders, like the move by Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1956 - whose administration nationalised the British and French owned Suez Canal - in retaliation to the United States’ bullying tendencies.
 It beats reason why Robert Mugabe should receive such specialised applause when such should be the expected resolve from African leaders and not the exception. It is more or less the case of applauding the father’s child for paying child-maintenance.
To say Zimbabwe is democratic just because it is democratic on paper would be like saying Swaziland is constitutional just because it has a constitution.
Maybe trying to count the cost of “The fight against the imperialist” by ZANU PF would reveal who has been the biggest loser in ‘the war against the West”. And that ZANU won the previous elections because of its years of influence, and because of MDC’s tendencies of overly bedding “the enemy” might be more the reality than the insinuation that it is loved by the people; it is more the case of the lesser evil, and that there is a fear among Zimbabweans that if ZANU PF might lose any elections, harsh might be the retaliation from the “people’s party”, as ZANU has previously let loose the violent tendencies of its rogue youth on the populace.
That ZANU PF won the previous elections is something that the West should accustom itself to because it is actually the mostly likely outcome in appreciation of the complacency that the MDC fell into after the Government of National Unity and its disillusionment within its own ranks.
The exodus of Zimbabweans into South Africa caused by the destabilisation of Zimbabwe by the proxy war-on-Britain, (otherwise known as the Land Reform Programme) is staggering. Such reality can be appreciated if one were to see the length of the line of Zimbabweans queuing on Pritchard Street in Johannesburg trying to partake of the overwhelmingly inadequate charity that the Methodist Church has offered to the mostly displaced Zimbabwean people, while the South African government has mostly watched in disinterest. Or maybe to visit Diepsloot that has absorbed Zimbabweans to such saturation that the conditions have regressed to a point where there are sporadic Shona/Ndebele feuds.
Appreciating the sheer number of Zimbabweans in South Africa and how establishments like Steers, Checkers, Debonairs, BP filling station and many other retailers, have come to generously employ the affordable, hassle-free Zimbabwean labour, maybe it wouldn’t be an untruth to insinuate that the-war-on-the-Britain (otherwise known as Counter Colonial Therapy) should shoulder the bigger blame for the Xenophobic attacks that began in Alexander township, and continue to be a constant  bubbling-under time-bomb that threatens to go off every time any establishment retrenches employees in South Africa.

The propaganda is that Zimbabweans now own land and the food production is growing by leaps and bounds, year on year. Maybe so, but the reality is that there is a reluctance of the expatriates to repatriate and logic has it that where one is reluctant to return, the conditions are not conducive for progressive habitation.
The question still remains that, if the war was on the Britain (otherwise known as Show Them The Appropriate Finger) or the fight against the residue of the West that missed the wagon “home”, why is it that that it is mostly black Zimbabweans that have absorbed the greater part of the onslaught? Has anyone ever bothered to compare the number of affected black Zimbabweans in relation to white Zimbabweans because I am sure that main stream media hasn’t?
I guess the biggest question would be to ask if ZANU PF is pursuing a better life for Zimbabweans or if it is on some vengeance mission to show the West if it is “my Zimbabwe” or “your Britain” that has more natural minerals under the ground. Because many are the “African Heroes” within ZANU PF and much is the shoulder-patting for a job well done on unequivocally informing the imperialist on exactly where to shove it, and such ego trips are the prime suspect on the main reason for the sometimes counter-productive policies at the expense of the welfare of the people. 
It then becomes an issue of intrigue as to where Swazis - especially Swazi democracy activists - find space to unashamedly sing praises of Robert Mugabe in a narrative splattered all over the abuse of human rights. Is it not human rights abuses that are perpetrated in Swaziland that Swazi democracy activists should applaud such in Zimbabwe just because the human rights abuser has shown the middle finger to the Imperialist? That because my enemy is your enemy, then we should be friends even though you perpetrate that which I fight against? …because there are well over two million walking talking and suffering reasons in South Africa why that which is happening in Zimbabwe is abuse on fellow humans, on ZANU PF’s watch.
 Not to insinuate that ZANU PF or Robert Mugabe is devoid of virtue, but to question the wisdom to applaud one human being or a grouping of human beings when millions have been uprooted with an uncertain future, in a foreign land, while their leaders back home claim it is them they fight for. If political activist are cheering the few, then who is mourning the millions that have suffered for years and continue to suffer? It comes across as a counterintuitive case of verbal ill of politicians and political activists because common sense would have it that if the Land Reform Project was to have collateral, it would have been white Zimbabweans, but the reality is that those that have suffered the most have been black Zimbabweans, and thereafter it was a standing ovation for the perpetrators of the suffering.
It may seem like we applaud those with the prerequisite rhetoric without really taking stock of the impact they have made to human development.
The Human Development Index (HDI) measures the quality of life-experience people in a given country experience overall in areas such as how long people live, access to education; and how much money individuals make in a year. Even though it is not a watertight method but it gives a more or less reasonably reliable pointer on a given country’s direction of development.
The much sold level of education even though having grown steadily since 1980 (the Human Development Index (HDI) in income was worse off in 2012 than it was in 1980) shows that the education has not resulted in a better standard of living and more money in the pocket of the average Zimbabwean. And that ZANU PF might not have earned the hero status after-all, because even life expectancy of the average Zimbabwean was lower in 2012 than it was in 1980.
The curious thing is that even the education that is lauded as one of the best in Africa is what could be considered as average globally, because when compared with the HDI in education of countries like Finland, then Zimbabwe’s education is left wanting and when further compared in income (GDP per capita) and health, it fades into insignificance.
The question is what has ZANU PF done that political activists should whistle in hearty cheer when President Mugabe stands up? Are we now going to be a continent that cheer the most for those who throw the best insults at Western Imperialists? Are we to be a continent that award and honour those that pursue vengeful policies instead of Human Development policies?
That ZANU PF has been shamefully quiet on the dictatorship obtaining in Swaziland is a reality we ponder on when we try to reason the role of ruling former liberation movements in Africa. And that ZANU PF is a cause for the suffering of a lot of Zimbabweans should shame any Swazi political activist who even ponders on the act of cheering that shame that is taking place in Zimbabwe, because there is a similar shame taking place in Swaziland.
That  the then ZANU is yet to give humane reasons why the death of twenty thousand in Matabeleland was the better option because it would be curious to know if the leaders at ZANU had so run out of ideas at the time, and that wholesale murder of civilians was really the last option.
 It may seem like we are cheering our very demise, but didn’t we cheer to the point of hoarse voices when a boy of eighteen years was crowned to be a leader of one of the most developmentally challenged countries in the world. It may seem that we never learn.


Wednesday, December 25, 2013


What has, over the years, somehow eluded public scrutiny is the difference between the Institution of the Monarchy and the Monarch. To adequately understand the difference between the two would maybe help people like the “representative” of the ANC who was in Swaziland and apparently was talking on behalf of the ANC. Articulation of the said gentleman as reported by the times of Swaziland exposes his ignorance on the Swazi matter and ignorance on the stand that the ANC has taken in regard to the Swazi issue.

Wise royals who chose to exit the political space to preserve
dignity of the Institution of the Monarchy 
Had the gentleman appreciated that the ANC does not regard Swaziland as democratic, he wouldn’t have uttered the words that, “You have elected your choice of MPs and some are ministers. If there are any problems one feels need to be addressed, these are the people who need to be confronted not the royal family. People should just learn to leave the King alone.”

If the ANC, in one of its resolutions, is calling for the democratisation of Swaziland, then it means that it does not recognise the government which part of is elected through sham elections and most of, through appointment by Mswati III. For Johannes Sibiya - who according to the times of Swaziland was representing the ANC - to refer the people of Swaziland to a government that is undemocratic as a solution, is clearly in contradiction of the ideals of the organisation he claims to represent. If Mr Johannes Sibiya would like to comment on the Swazi issue, he is very welcome, but should appreciate the facts of the matter, and familiarise himself with the Swazi narrative because he might end up embarrassing his political party by contradicting its views on the its official stand on Swaziland.

But to bring clarity on the issue of discussing issues of the monarch in public and how it has come about that the Monarch and even the Institution of the monarchy has become content for public discourse and at times even inexcusable vulgar public discourse.

Sobhuza II against counsel to the contrary, submerged both the Monarch and the Institution of the Monarchy into active politics. It is a given that politics are an undertaking of mudslinging and name-calling. In showing his back to culture of the Monarch taking counsel from the people, Sobhuza II decided to rather take the advice of an individual who was part and parcel of the South African Apartheid State, hence we find the Monarch of Swaziland and the people of Swaziland in the public domain exchanging insults, mudslinging, and name-calling, where Mswati III has gone as far as uttering threats of “choking” some Swazis, and his police officers have taken his advice and standardised the use of “the tube” in interrogation, especially interrogations of political activists.

One of the major requests of pro-democratic forces has been to ask the royal family as a whole to remove the Monarch and the Institution of the Monarchy from active politics. That it was a big mistake that Sobhuza II should have exposed the Monarch and the Institution of the Monarchy to the ridicule of public politics, because, either we like it or not, politics do get  slimy, slippery and at times vulgar. What is considered as heritage and dear to the people should be removed from the political space because it might end up losing value and become a thing of international ridicule as the Swazi Monarch has become.

Judging from Sobhuza II’s undertakings from the early 1920’s it becomes clear that when he finally decided to offer the head of the Monarch to the gallows of politics when he insisted on installing it as head of a political party, the prime motive was to control both the governing tool and the purse strings, as is evidenced on how the royal family controls the majority of business in Swaziland and how on top of that it further places an extra burden on the taxpayer by demanding that the latter must provide for the upkeep of the entire royal family.

Quoting the observation of an academic from the book When the Sleeping Grass Awakens by Richard Levine that, “In Swaziland extra-economic coercion takes the form of forced labour, forced contributions and forced removals. These lie at the heart of a repressive regime of accumulation which characterises comprador bourgeois power. Furthermore, these forms of repression are inconsistent with democracy and are central to an understanding of why there can be no democracy under the royal regime in Swaziland. Accumulation by the royal ruling class is dependent on state control and/or state connection, so that an attack on royal state power becomes an assault on the mechanisms of accumulation itself. At the same time, it must be asserted that there can be no democratic organisation of the state where direct producers are subject to extra-economic forms of coercion.”

It becomes clear that while the royal family remains within the political space, and not the ceremonial one, where the people contest for the provision of goods and services which the royal family is working day and night to monopolise, the Monarch and the Institution of the Monarchy will continue to be subjected to extensive scrutiny and ridicule, and at times to the point of emotional outbursts and rightfully so.

It is not hard to imagine how the Monarch and the Institution of the Monarchy is portrayed when it has removed itself or has been removed from politics. King Zwelithini of the Zulu rarely becomes the content for harsh political wrangling because he is not involved in politics, but only serves as a ceremonial figure. The only time when his name has been portrayed negatively was when he intended marrying an underage girl of fourteen, his habit of excessive spending, and the issue concerning the cruelty to the ritual bull during one of the annual Zulu rituals, otherwise king Zwelithini cannot claim to be subject to the extensive name-calling that king Mswati III has to endure, because he is not involved in day-to-day-politics.

 The sooner we have Mswati III remove himself or be removed from day-to-day politics, the sooner we will have an Institution of the Monarchy with integrity where people like Johannes Sibiya won’t need to make uninformed pleas for respect of the Institution of the Monarchy or the Monarch. Otherwise, in all honesty it is Sobhuza II that opened the prevailing ridicule on the Swazi Institution of the Monarchy, and it is like Mswati III is in full agreement with his father that it should be dragged in the mud until it loses even the last titbits of the remaining cultural credibility that Mswati’s traditionalists are trying to obliterate by involving the reed maidens in name-calling politics and by hurling the regular insult at the nation.

But to finally mention that, that which is the tool of the people is the Institution of the Monarchy, and that the Monarch is like a chief representative of this Institution and that his task is to serve as an errand boy for the nation, hence the king being referred to as a child because a child can be sent anywhere the parent feels is appropriate. That, “the king is the sun”, and all the other butt kissing that the praise singers embark on is just that, butt-kissing and has nothing to do on how the king is supposed to be culturally viewed.

That Mr Sibiya should appreciate that we say, “a king is a king because of the people”, and NOT that, “the people are people because of the king”. Maybe on digesting that Swazi expression he might appreciate that the people are never wrong even if the people are wrong. It is the people that are “the sun”, and the king derives his rays from the shine of the people. Actually the king is like the moon which reflects the shine of the sun; when there is no sun the moon is as cold and dark as non-existence itself. So it is quite unwise to ask the sun to stop scrutinising the moon because it is the sun’s shine that the moon becomes visible, otherwise it would be as invisible as a microscopic organism.  And to enlighten Mr Sibiya that the Swazi Nation as a collective is considered a thing sacred, and not a prop to stabilise the podium.

Tuesday, December 10, 2013


The misconception is to think that Incwala is uniquely Swazi when this ritual is practiced by a good number of organisations of the Satanic Order. The difference is that other organisations are secretive as this practice is not tolerated and mostly feared by citizens of the world.  In Swaziland the ruling order sells this ill as culture and the people follow like sheep to the slaughter because culture has been uniquely defined in order to sell the sick ideology that power can be maintained through cruelty and indecency when it is dominance and not power that is manufactured through such means.
Swazi Warriors dancing Incwala

It is well known that that those whose goal is to accumulate as much negative polarity as possible use sexual rituals and at times rituals of bestiality to achieve that end. Especially in the satanic circles, it is known that energy can be harvested if it is performed at particular lunar cycles and that the harvesting party should embark on such sexual rituals in a dominating manner in order to maximize the harvest.  Not that it is an alien practice really because all human being mostly unconsciously harvest energy either out of the self or into the self.  The difference is that in the negative world the knowledge of harvesting energy is shared and energy harvesting is practiced in order to sharpen the skill. 

As the topic of energy harvesting is not a common topic maybe to give an idea of energy harvesting. A typical energy harvest would be a man of the house finding the family in a happy mood when coming back from work and because he is bursting at the seams with fury soon the family will be in a bitter mood because the latter has harvested the negative energy, especially because humankind has unconsciously mastered the harvesting of anger. The antithesis of that would be for the same bitter man to walk into a church of singing born-again Christians, the possibility is that he will come out of that church in a much happier mood than he entered; the same concept applies in the negative world but it is a conscious, intentional, and informed harvesting. Of cause as the need for dominance grows, murder rituals and indiscriminate murder become the tools of choice to accumulate negative energy of even higher quality and quantity.

Christianity being the dominant global religion and having shut itself from knowing and understanding Satanism and similar practices because of preaching fear of this aspect of human life, has contributed to the prevailing global ignorance on this subject. To be more correct, this subject falls more under the heading "Negative Polarity" and less on the heading "Satanism" as is widely believed.

There are those whose purpose is to accumulate negative energy and it is those people that gravitate towards the practice of these sick rituals. The fact that Christianity has packaged sex and put it under lock and key in the holy of holies has prevented most of the knowledge that sex can also be used to increase positive polarity if embarked on in a non-dominating and harmonised manner, hence the strategy by the Negatives has always been to keep the feminine energy supressed in order to maintain the imbalance that they need in order to maximise dominance hence a negative energy harvest of a higher quality.

The irony is that a good number of the males secretly support patriarchy when patriarchies only benefit those whose purpose is to harvest negatively. If a male’s purpose is to harvest positively, he is just an equal looser as the female because patriarchy reinforces dominance and the exploits of dominance manufacture negative energy.

Even though we now know that civilisation was not imported from Europe but that there has been rises and falls of civilisations all over the globe, we still secretly and not so secretly believe that civilisation is a European import. Such beliefs are what makes us Swazis staunch believers that the Ndwandwe are the originators of Incwala and that there is no way that there could have been global network in previous generations where the knowledge of such rituals was shared because the prevalence of sex rituals in the negative world suggest a global commonality in these practices.

So we can claim that Incwala is not as African as we would have liked to believe because the signature rituals are practiced in Europe and other parts of the world too. But what we are clear about is that these rituals are practiced by negative entities and benefit mostly them and the royal family wants to delude us into thinking that there is something positive concerning the dark rituals of incwala by tagging the “first fruit” gimmick in the dark contraption because they know the sentiments we hold where livelihood and survival is concerned.

For a while we have been willing to play willing audience to this dark ritual. Maybe out of ignorance or the yearning to somehow belong to the “uniquely” medieval brand called “being Swazi”, or maybe we were even compelled by the wellbeing of the “first fruit”, but as time passes it becomes clear that Lozithe’hlezi  is a midday horror show  that more and more of us are realising that we do not wish to be a willing audience anymore; and that there are more constructive things to be achieved than the an annual cruel beating up of a black bull. That, coming to think of it, we do not know the origins of this ritual; maybe it was imported from elsewhere, generations ago, because it is not a culture born of either climate or geography, or any other norms of everyday living.

All we know is that we have watched the show and all its rituals which have all the signs of the dark negative world and we are refusing to buy any more tickets to this freak show and advise those that are still spellbound by it to take a much closer look and do some reflective thinking because a culture of a people is normally practiced by the people and not a few individuals while the rest of the people serve as cheerleaders to a ritual which is shrouded in secrecy where the people, like mindless livestock, sing and dance to entities they know not of. And the reality that Mswati and his inner circle cannot absorb all the energy generated in that setting so those in attendance will actually absorb the residue energy, because as surely as the body absorbs lightning, in like manner will it absorb any other energy, even though invisible to the naked eye.
Most of us have been caught up in the legitimacy of fact, science, reason, and logic that we have totally forgotten to be simply rational. Where has ever the cruel beating up of an animal resulted in anything positive? Why do the “ancestors” always insist on secrecy; what is there to hide?

What doesn’t make sense will always stick out like a sore thumb but our affinity to gullibility always insists that we stick around as the fool’s audience. It is not hard to find positives in the reed dance. As much as this pure culture has been hijacked by the royal family and its traditionalists by turning it into an anti-multi-party parade and a tourist’s freak show, its place as a means to safeguard and maintain the virginity of the girl-child is invaluable. It is not hard to imagine that even in a new Swaziland it can be revived to its pure intentions and it would serve the people well.  On the other hand though, to see the harassment and terrorism of the Bemanti (water-party) meted on the people just shows that it is an entourage of dominance. They are sent by the royal family to collect energy frequencies that are recorded within the items they collect, all over the country, so that the traditional scientists can ascertain the quality and the quantity of the energy levels in the country and while at it they remind the nation “who dominates” by instilling the fear of hell in especially the women who are rudely reminded of “cultural codes” that they are supposed to adhere to.

The intention is not to advice against attending Incwala; by all means do attend in numbers so that the residue negative energy can have enough hosts. The intention is to again catalyse reflective thinking and independent questioning. How does Incwala help in the development of Swaziland? Why does there have to be a beating of an animal if it is such a good thing? Is a beating a good thing? What has the black bull done that it should be subjected to such a harsh beating? Does the king really indulge in sexual dominance over the bull after it has been beaten into submission by young men who transfer their youthful pure energy into the bull when beating it? If the king does really have sex with the bull after it has been beaten, is he really having sex with the bull or harvesting the pure youthful energy of the young men? If the king doesn’t have sex with the bull, what does he really do and why? If the king doesn’t have sex with the bull, why is the praise singing of, “ejaculating into a human being and ejaculating into a cow” given to him?

If we are to be a self-determining people who will be equal caretakers of the Swazi Nation surely it is time we ask ourselves hard questions, even those that “trespass” into the domain of the ancestors that we are “supposed to fear”. Why do we have to fear the ancestor if they have our best interests at heart? The plea is that now is the time more than ever that every Swazi need to think independently of the stigmas, the prejudices and the stereotypes. It is time to think beyond tradition and culture; because surely, the country is burning under the present leadership whose other tasks are to serve other powers that we know not of. 

Saturday, November 16, 2013


welfare-state is a "concept of government in which the state plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the economic and social well-being of its citizens. It is based on the principles of equality of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, and public responsibility for those unable to avail themselves of the minimal provisions for a good life.

Transportation in Norway
Modern welfare states include the Nordic countries, such as IcelandSwedenNorwayDenmark, and Finland which employ a system known as the Nordic model.

A friend recently asked me how “workable” is the idea of a welfare state because in his understanding you can’t empower anybody by giving him the fish. Since he is a believer in the “fishing rod” way of doing things, I told him that what welfare states do is to avail a huge fishing boat that hauls in thousands of fish at a time. In the meanwhile the state keeps giving the individual the fish with the knowledge that sooner rather than later s/he will jump in the boat to go fishing because the temptation of enjoying the fruits of the boat load are much more compelling than the incentives of sitting around and enjoying the benefits of rationed fish. The boat in this instance signifying the high quality education and all the social well-being benefits offered in Nordic welfare states which rank as one of the best in the world.

Vito Laterza in his article written for Al Jazeera argues that the indigenous economies and social systems of Southern Africa in general and Swaziland in particular haven’t been given enough space and time to prove their case as tangible economies and social structures that could actually serve as alternative economies especially for the areas in question. He later argues in a Blog that such suppression of the local way of doing things is partly due to the democracy imported from the north. He further argues that the reason that people in Swaziland are not decisively calling for multi-party democracy is because they have seen the unworkability of the system and they feel safer with the, “old time religion”.

The structuring of democratic institutions might differ and also it might be a product of academia, but democracy in its essence is contained within the idea of fairness, so it is not unequivocally true that it can be imported. The fact that the call for multi-party democracy has been long in coming is because there has been a state sponsored campaign since the time of king Sobhuza II, which has worked day and night to demonise plurality, the schools have been used as propaganda institutions, and all the media in Swaziland is state controlled. So to say Swazis have not been heeding the call for democracy because they see value in the present Tinkhundla system is not an honest assertion.

However much I have tried to look at it, I have never really understood the concept of, “African solutions for African problems”. But such a statement has come to enjoy more legitimacy as the witch-hunt for the “imperialist” intensifies, and multinational corporations are trotting the globe under the protection of sovereign flags. We have been divided and ruled so many times that we too advocate for division as a way of dealing with the colonial post traumatic side effects that present themselves as hate rhetoric that is sold as self-assertion when in reality it is the lessons that  we have learned from master that, “the only way to gain control is by setting up, racial, religious, national, continental, and sexual groups”, which can then be asserted as exceptional entities thereafter the philosophy  that hold one man superior and another inferior rages like wild fire. When will we ever identify and assert ourselves as purely human beings and not the schisms that we have limited ourselves to? We have been hijacked and exploited by the global industrial complex and our search and rescue efforts have been almost exclusively focused on Western governments and not the multinational corporations that, in ignorant support we have - on our way to the witch hunt - bought one commodity or the other sold by one or the other of their myriad appendages.

The article by Vito Laterza seems to suggest that there must be, “Swazi solutions for Swazi problem”.  Not to isolate the article because there are those who believe that Swaziland will be liberated in a bubble, oblivious of the global context, some of which being well-meaning political activists. I am sure that Vito enjoys the security of a title deed or the comfort of a lease agreement wherever he is dwelling, but he then suggests that such comfort should not be enjoyed by Swazi people but that the latter should be grateful for the privilege of occupying space at a “minimal” fee.  It is clear that this twisted “freedom for the Nobles” and “freedom for the commoners” still lays latent within collective thought, and now and again it presents itself as the, “more equal, and less equal”, commodity that it is.

The article, at arriving at this “gratitude” that Swazis should feel, bypasses an integral part of the debate, which is that of Swazis being given back the land they were disposed of by the royal family, the colonial administration and foreign capital. As there is no credible documentation of who was disposed of what, that an equal redistribution of certain portions of land to those willing to work the land should be the first order of business. After such redress and an informed stocktaking, after which it is then that the issue of welfare and the extent thereof can be debated. The misconception has always been the assumption that throwing wholesale charity at the problem will solve it. Well, it has been done from the sixties by the West and clearly it is not working so the idea that direct involvement in the economy must be the solution must be a correct one because the throwing of the scraps in the direction of “the poor” is obviously having an opposite effect of the desired result.

Having commented on the article previously, I’m again compelled - by the author’s blog which still maintains  the claim that kukhonta (land tenure where the chief gives of land in exchange for a lifetime of unquestioning loyal indenture) has legitimacy in the future of Swaziland. To argue that kukhonta system is not only not similar to a welfare-state system but that it is an antithesis of the system, especially the Nordic Model.

Even though the article goes a long way into outlining the state of affairs in Swaziland, it falls short of selling its thrust point which is that of presenting the kukhonta tenure system as some form of welfare-state system. What the article misses is that the welfare state system ‘s main selling point is not grounded in charity but providing means to fall back onto before, in between, and after productive involvement in the economy of any given individual and how the social structures ensures that such an individual does not disintegrate into a statistic. The fact that the kukhonta system with its allocation of limited land barely addresses sustenance production which is not even a whisper of the real welfare-state system which goes beyond the economical need and addresses the myriad aspects of social well-being.

Actually to insinuate that any aspect of the Tinkhundla system somehow resembles a welfare-state system, especially the Nordic Model, comes across as an insult to real welfare if we consider that even the meagre elderly grant was historically founded as a tool to enforce loyalty and not a genuine means to address the plight of the elderly, which is evidenced in uncaring manner in which the initiative has been handled by the Tinkhundla regime where the initial value of the grant has drastically decreased even after an increase of 10%.

In my opinion Finland is one of the countries that serve as an example of a welfare system gone fantastically right, or rather a welfare state system that has been excellently managed and administered. The Finns make sure that all children get fed by providing free meals at school. They subsidize student travel, which they feel is a major part of the education process. 93% of Finns graduate from high school. All teachers in Finland must have a masters degree, which is fully subsidized. The United Nations World Happiness Report 2013 shows that the happiest nations are concentrated in Northern Europe, with Denmark topping the list. The Nordics ranked highest on the metrics of real GDP per capita, healthy life expectancy, having someone to count on, perceived freedom to make life choices, freedom from corruption, and generosity.

For the author of the article to put the Tinkhundla regime and the word “welfare” in one sentence took me aback, and for him to further rally on a claim he hasn’t conclusively argued, is in my opinion irresponsible because the reality is that we are dealing with the livelihoods of people who on a daily basis have to undergo one of the most poor living conditions seen on the globe today. It is my hope that the author of the article can write a paper that conclusively argues the claim that the kukhonta system carries any qualities of a welfare system or retract his claims. Having grown up under the system and having endured the nuances of its cruelty,  it is my opinion that his claims that the kukhonta system resembles a welfare-state system are unfounded and cannot be substantiated but as debate is such a free commodity, the author is more than welcome to argue his beliefs.

Just to state the obvious that if the article written by Vito for Al Jazeera was to be written by a Swazi activist and if such an activist were to find himself at arm’s length of the Royal Swaziland Police, surely that wretched soul would be strapped with handcuffs, slapped with a sedition charge and thrown into a filthy holding cell; and that is a fact which is a regular occurrence in Swaziland, and the only “welfare” given in Swazi prisons is meagre food rations, intimidation and torture.