How to deal with disgruntled people and uphold good governance

This term “disaffected” members became popular in the run-up to the 2001 general election. It was used to refer to members of the National Resistance Movement, who complained and opposed the party, especially in reference to broken promises, changing the national constitution to suit the plans of the ruling political party, infighting among political party members to curry favor with the main political party leadership and influencing their own interests, as well as the struggle for power and government positions.

Political party members, who were unable to enjoy the national cake or challenged weak internal democracy, went out and ran for political office without political party backing and continued to operate outside political party structures. Some of the members moved, joined other political parties or founded new ones.

Discontent is widely understood as an angry and dissatisfied person. This is also applicable in the context of political parties, where, unsurprisingly, conflicts arise as a result of different ideas and courses of action that require sacrificing others to consider what best suits the future of the organization. When political parties failed to comply with the party’s principles of governance and internal democracy, some members became agitated because the restoration of democracy was the very cause they championed. Therefore, discontent occurs more than can be imagined and can trigger direct violence, injuries and deaths from the violent application of an unpopular vision.

It should be remembered that half a million people died as a result of the war that brought the government of the National Resistance Movement to power, after the disputed national elections held in 1980, although it was also clear that the leader of this movement wanted power long before the elections. Many lost property in the name of restoring democracy in Uganda. Hundreds of people have also died trying to oppose the current government.

Since 1986, the country has branded extreme violence as a communication and negotiation tool to deal with growing discontent over how the country is run. In recent years, we have witnessed an increase in violence, high crime rates, and a greater disorientation of leaders, who preferred a top-down approach to leadership over a bottom-up approach. This alienated them from the people they claimed to represent or lead, and they ended up performing poorly in leadership. For a long time, the bottom-up approach has proven to be more sustainable for leaders and the people they serve, although lobbying and advocating for better service delivery remained a top-down strategic approach to bringing services to market. the people who needed them most.

The growing discontent has overwhelmed the government to the point of forcing it to rely on violence to calm protesters. Unfortunately, the measure is short-term, unless actions are taken to address the discontent, which often occurs simultaneously in key sectors of the economy, such as education, health, commerce, transportation, etc. Otherwise, endless discontent is not what anyone would like to see, or wait until full-blown violence occurs.

It is unfortunate that the elderly of this beautiful country, now over 65 years old, feel ashamed and humiliated that people their age can act dishonestly to undermine the aspirations of Ugandans. The elderly can no longer rely on remittances from their sons and daughters who work in the cities, due to high levels of unemployment and bankrupt businesses. Young people feel confused because they lack the support, trust and guidance of older people who live in poverty and have not fulfilled their responsibility as parents. They have limited national pride and respect, do not easily trust others, and act at their own risk, regardless of the consequences. Of course, the traditions no longer exist.

Disaffected members in political parties, strategic development associations, and grassroots movements, which also extend deep into communities, will definitely only grow in number to reflect the same situation among citizens. It is these scenarios that will eventually consume, destroy, and lead to the demise of political parties, including the one in power. The achievements once obtained will be forgotten so that the political parties only carry negative experiences. In fact, political parties will disappear from the memory of citizens.

In a broader perspective, Ugandans today feel disenfranchised to the country’s development and resources. They feel marginalized and abandoned, whose destiny is only in their hands and destiny. They choose to travel abroad in risky environments to work and meet their growth and development goals. They think of wealth as exogenously obtainable, beyond the borders of their country. Those who stay in the country choose to join the armed forces or gangs, while the rest simply hang out, absorbing drugs and alcohol. These are the people that political parties and leaders want to transform in vain to be better, productive and responsible citizens. The transformation has proven effective with them at the top of political business or as leaders. P

People in all sectors experience discontent. Imagine a disgruntled member of the armed forces, who pursued a military career to improve his quality of life, but his situation worsened as his family members died without the means to support them. How much violence can a person trained to be violent on himself and others exhibit when she is equipped with advanced weaponry, or if she is driven by a mere sense of danger? They can be worse than ordinary citizens, whose violence manifests itself in the dire need to survive violence, both directly and indirectly. Being active participants in ruling politics brings political opponents and dissenting citizens even closer to danger. They can be tricky as reasoning is often secondary to shooting.

Members of the armed forces themselves are dangerous to violent commanders, due to the unfortunate circumstances in which they joined the army. More so, as hopes fade of making a meaningful career in the military to redeem his people from poverty. They are a ticking time bomb and trigger for revolution, waiting for a triggering moment to cause chaos or use force to acquire wealth.

Unfortunately, being unhappy is something to be laughed at and belittled by a class of people who are happy and comfortable with the status quo. The happy are the best associates of those in power.

Anything is possible with a strategic government partnership, but sustainability is always the challenge. They must do everything in their power to defend their status, primarily through lethal violence. In return, this attracts revenge at some point and the destruction or redistribution of wrongfully acquired wealth. Therefore, this discontent should not be taken for granted. It is a potent root for mass violence.

resolving discontent

It is a simple but painful decision, action and process. We have to bring the leadership of political parties, strategic development associations, civil society movements and the country back to the correct path of progress; the path of constitutionalism, free and fair elections, rule of law, introduction of internal democracy of political parties or good corporate governance, uniform distribution of national resources and opportunities for development, strong and dependent government institutions, change and replacement from the corrupt crop of leaders within the political parties and the government, and return to popular democratic governance.

Unfortunately, resolving discontent among members of political parties or the civilian population is more of a dream than a reality, due to the normalized culture of corruption and violence that we have today. The reality is far from real for the government to avoid more than can be imagined.

Therefore, the decline, the disintegration of political parties, the government and the subsequent collapse is most likely the most real, easy to see and most expected. This happens more than not. But it is never too late to turn the tide towards the collapse of political parties, the government or its institutions.

However, we can act optimistically and continue walking for the change we want to see until the intended change takes shape and shows results of political and socio-economic justice, enriched by principles of good governance.

Ugandans only need to prepare by taking positions oriented towards national development, where everyone benefits from them, which improves livelihoods and good governance impacts on a massive scale for each decade of the regime in power. While this is happening, however, citizens must guard against historical wrongs and structure our society in a way that puts the nation above selfish interests, nurtures leaders to truly serve their country, develops a decision-making mechanism Consensus decision making, ensure accountability and leadership. are accountable to the people served, guarantees the responsiveness of leaders with fairness in actions to satisfy the wishes of the country’s citizens, whose collective decisions reign supreme and are protected by the constitution.

Otherwise, it is ridiculous to say that the constitution was changed to promote discontent because the majority of the people accepted and voted that way (discontent). How can someone vote against their own future, for someone else’s selfishness or for one person’s own good, and still call it a Ugandan people’s constitution? The constitution ceases to be one of the people of Uganda. Instead, he becomes one person’s guide to control Ugandans for personal gain. When the army does the same defending such a constitution, it ceases to be a force of the people. In such a country, the people never have the power to influence decisions and the future in their favor or for the national good.

Thus, we continually notice that discontent in political parties or among leaders mirrors discontent in the civilian population, characterized by injustices, long-term and unresolved grievances, poor service delivery, poverty, and unmeaning leadership. Correcting this situation also entails resistance. Also, deadly. In other words, either way, it is lethal to lead the country through corruption, bad leadership, or return it to the path of good governance. However, it is better to be remembered for just and good causes than as a roguish person, a rogue leader, a parasitic relationship of Inna with the people led, or as someone who encourages injustices and misrule.

Ugandans must embrace and work towards good governance, involving consensus, participatory democracy, rule of law, accountable leadership, transparency, responsiveness, fairness and effective leadership. First of all, they must look for natural leaders, who can be trusted for the new course of management. Otherwise, no one should feel disappointed or dissatisfied when our actions serve us in terms of the short, medium and long term national good, or in Uganda. In this way, Ugandans will be able to create conditions that make leaders servants of the people so that together they work to survive socio-economic difficulties, improve quality of life, enjoy prosperity and ensure sustainable well-being and development.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.