LEADERSHIP BY TERROR 191bility to form attachments, his incapacity to connect with others, were
transformed by hardship into a desire to destroy others. By institutional-
izing that desire, Shaka destroyed the moral fi ber of a formerly relatively
benign society. And as we can see in other totalitarian societies — like
Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Ukraine — it takes a long time to rebuild
a civic society.
By the end of his reign, not only his warriors, but also his subjects,
were willing to kill others ruthlessly — even women and children, close
friends and family members — if the king desired. Thoroughly socialized
to violence, they cognitively and emotionally restructured the moral
value of killing, absolving themselves of any wrongdoing. Loyalty to the
system created by their leader took precedence over all other considera-
tions, and loyalty protected them from moral liability for actions exe-
cuted in the line of duty. But when morally abhorrent conduct is enacted
by what seem to be decent people in the name of a leader or a secular
or theocratic ideology, the absolution of conscience is generally only
superfi cial and temporary; the emotional cost is itself often deadly.
Although Shaka never had a formal day of reckoning, he was locked
in a psychic prison of his own making. Though unrestrained physi-
cally — with no boundaries to constrain him, no countervailing powers
to control him — he was never able to combat the psychological forces
of narcissism and paranoia. Eventually those forces sent him across moral
boundaries from which he could not return. His craving for admiration,
affi rmation, and power prompted such extremes of cruelty that he even-
tually overreached himself, destroying his own power base. By the time
of his assassination, the Zulu nation had been transformed into a military
parasite terrorizing outlying clans.
Because of Shaka ’ s endeavors, or despite them, southern Africa was
left with several powerful nations, including the Matabele, the Basuto,
and the Swazi. But the most powerful of them all, for a long time, was
the Zulu. Notwithstanding all his shortcomings, Shaka established a
state system robust enough to last a further 50 years, in spite of the rule
of two incompetent successors. Shaka ’ s Zulu kingdom became his monu-
ment, and it has continued to be a source of pride for the Zulu since his
death.
Endnote
My account of Shaka ’ s life is based on the writings of two European traders,
Henry Francis Fynn and Nathaniel Isaacs, who were both in close contact
with Shaka (Fynn, 1950 ; Isaacs, 1836 ). Other source material about Shaka ’ s