A letter to the entire leadership of Acholi

Dear Acholi Leaders

I am writing for the very first time to you. Given the gravity of the subject, I humbly beg that you invest just few seconds of your rather busy schedule to scheme through this letter.

This letter comes at a time when the online newspaper AcholiTimes has reported a pending meeting between you, our esteemed elected leaders – notably, MPs, with Mr. Museveni, on yet to be named date, time and place. We anticipate that investments and acquisition, or rather bluntly put, expropriation of land for plantation will top the agenda of this meeting.

The land issue has refused to vacate the investment discursive space and invariably so for reasons. Without dispossessing Acholi of land, the Museveni anticipated promises of social transformation of our people from a free and self-sustaining state into perpetual slaves appears incomplete.

In the 1990s, Mr. Museveni promised many things. One of those is modernization of Uganda through industrialization and a social transformation of northerners from a backward chauvinism to whatever model he foresaw then. We interpret the two decades of genocide as the initial phase of this process. Land dispossession is the last phase in the spectrum.  We also know that he is being nice to the process. He could be forceful. However, Mr. Museveni should not subdue us on our land. His recent land reform policies and the speed at which the economy is liberalizing should concern us excessively. Needless to remind you that Acholi are deliberately excluded from this economy and the condition in which our reintegration is apparent resides on our land.

Land is the primary means of production, which is becoming very scarce and contested item in areas that this regime kept peaceful and productive. Those who exercise ownership over land have also exercised control over means of economic production. Most revolutions in the world, that I have studied, have happened and succeeded on the question of land expropriation. Landless state is associated with immense diminishing of human value and suffering in a life of absolute destitution – migrant labor and homelessness among others.

When we lose control over the land, the Acholi people will be no more. We shall become laborers like those we employed in the 1970s and 80s, to look after our cows. This time, with sophisticated technology, our people shall offer even cheap and degraded labor in precarious employment. The least you can do for Acholi now is to guarantee our inherent land rights.

The fate of a typical Acholi in the post conflict society is also ready dire as is. Many are failing miserably to cope with post war challenges. Homes have broken down and the typical Acholi household experiences have profoundly transformed, where children and women are now the household heads. Men are struggling to adjust and cope with helplessness, drunkenness, and violence in its broader sense.

What still holds all of us together, and confer upon us, and our children some semblance of sanity and dignity, or worth, is the fact of the land that we still own, communally. It is only on this land, that we find peace, consolation, and realization as a people. Elsewhere, we are fiercely problematised and alienated from the mainstream society and economy in concert with the grand scheme of Mr. Museveni’s sectarian politics.

Let me give you a glimpse of the implications of losing our rights to land. Take the instance of rapid rural to urban migration as landless people will get vacated by Mr. Museveni’s industrialists. Spaces and social services in urban centres are not planned, or evolving commensurately to contain lowly skilled migrants. This is a major problem for the near future. It is a clarion call to local district councils and urban centre administration to examine urgently. A radical housing policy is inevitable. Expansion of sewers, public spaces, social services, enterprises, transportation, and industries to absorb the landless people must top the metropolis economic agenda for the next 20-30 years because these people must find alternative economic activity for self-sustenance.

The idea is that we should not wait for the inevitable to befall us and then react. The responses may be too late and too little. We should foresee and plan ahead of time. Most importantly, we have to pay heed to the rate at which the economy is liberalizing. It may swallow us if we are unprepared.

In the event of your discussion with Mr. Museveni, please, consider the following;

Implore Mr. Museveni to abolish the idea of plantation investment in Northern Uganda. Plantations everywhere, are associated with a decline of society, and destruction of both social and physical environments. Each district should plan and locate industrial parks for lease to investors. No investor should buy and own land in Acholiland – they must lease and pay rent. We must, as a matter of policy, encourage our people to secure titles to their lands and to lease the land, so that they become landlords, not landless people, or mere laborers on their own land.

For improved agriculture, advocate for improved seeds that resist the adverse weather and pests, while giving high yield. Mr. Museveni should suspend import taxes on farm implements and generate more electricity to sustain agro-based industry. Plantation agriculture is a thing of the past; at least, sugarcane plantation is out dated.

End.

Hon. Mao, let the end justify the means

 STRATEGY

We learnt long ago that Political Parties are formed to vie for power, and capture it. Once in power, it must fight as much, to retain it. A success of a political Party is judged by its abilities in these regards, criticizing the strategies of the other, is only part of the game. Parties reflect an aggregation of ideas and convictions, which must contend to gain dominance of public space.  In Hon. Mao’s absolution of Andrew Mwenda’s blatant and cruel assault on the critical and monumental role that Dr. Kizza Besigye plays in changing the tempo and rhythm of politics in Uganda (read: The hazard of Besigyeism in the Opposition: Has Mwenda got a point? In DM of January 22, 2017), lies a conflicting perspective on Opposition strategies.

Hon. Mao claims that Dr. Besigye’s obsession with capturing power concentrates the energy of the NRM; engaging in the countryside, disperses the energy of the NRM and blunts its blows. Accordingly, Mao’s virile prescription is the attack from the flank.  Hon. Mao believes that when the Opposition succeeds in challenging the NRM from the flank, then the direct challenge focusing on the Presidency shall bear fruits.

This flank approach would have worked in 1980 where the government of the day was formed based on the number of Parliamentary seats a Party had won. Unfortunately, Museveni rules by the gun such that victory at the flank does not necessarily translate into defeat, or a reduction of his omnipresence over the army and thus, as President.

Hon. Mao’s prescription is therefore an under-dose from an expired medicine vial.  The limitation of flank approach is an over assumption that the NRM is rigid, lacks fluidity and would not be concerned with defeat at the grassroots. The struggle for liberation of Uganda needs both protracted and short-term goals, each with clear strategies and tactics.

Obviously, the flank approach is resource heavy, requiring money that all the traditional Parties and their followings do not have. Hon. Mao is aware that DP alone cannot field and fund candidates at every flank position in the country, not even in Buganda, or in Acholi. UPC, CP and whatever Party simply lacks the resource capacity to out-do the electioneering, bribery, and vote stealing machinery of the NRM.

To counter this challenge, the Opposition must emphasize on the implementation of the law that bans vote bribery.  Museveni has defended his flank and he will do so even at the forthcoming LC elections by bribery and coercion. To assume that Museveni is insensitive to his flank is a “strategy” suicide!

The strength of the flank approach is to reawaken the traditional support base of old Parties. Unfortunately, after 30 years of hegemonic Musevenism, most of the Party activists and enthusiasts in the countryside have died, aged beyond relevance, or disinterested themselves with politics of corruption. Yet, many in DP have lent their loyalties to Museveni.

Criticizing Dr. Kizza Besigye’s may be a past time because insects naturally eat each other when locked in a bottle. KB’s campaign is effective, albeit with some limitations. One of it is the treacherous Opposition members who double deal for breadcrumbs from the regime. KB has exposed the regime sufficiently. It would be fruitful if Opposition players like Hon. Mao and contemptuous critics like Andrew Mwenda harnessed the opportunities to finish the dictator off, rather than slam-dunk on KB.

Let KB and his Party focus on their agenda; DP and Mwenda should focus on theirs. To suggest that Besigye should first stop, such that you start, is like pygmies engrossing in a height contest.  To reclaim Uganda, we need multiple approaches and broader collaborations. After three decades, we now recognize that no one strategy is superior to the other. As long as such approaches fall outside of challenging the military might behind dictator Museveni. Whoever can liberate Uganda from dictatorship, will be the real hero. Hon. Mao should let the end justify the means.

End.

Liberal Economies require strong Labor Unions

Ugandan businesspersons are in awe as to why foreigners – Chinese, Indians and Nigerians, among many – have flooded the streets to sell petty goods such as razor blades, Mandazi, Chapatti, Sandals, Padlocks, Bicycle spokes, mingling sticks, and so forth. These, they contend, should be the enterprise, ring-fenced for indigenous traders. Locals feel, and have been conditioned to think, that foreigners are big time investors – bankers, industrialists, importers and exporters, Hoteliers, and so forth.

The New Vision of December 13, 2016 reported an explanation from Trade and Industry Minister, Hon. Amelia Kyambadde, stating that the presence of foreigners at every facet of the economy is because of the liberalization policy that Uganda has pursued since 1992. Ms Kyambadde needed not to explain further. One of my contentions is that as Ugandans, and more so, for our Uganda’s inattentive elites, learning and understanding the way our economy is organized and operationalized, is an utmost imperative.

Liberalization in Uganda has matured, and we can only ignore its hegemony at our own detriment. Uganda operates an open-ended capitalist economy where there is no definition of “investor” to start with. Further, there is no control of what comes in and go out of the economy. In that way, our economy is like a two-way open-ended pipe carrying floodwater of “investors”. Whatever can come in, comes in; whatever can get out, gets out. In between the entrance and exit, there are multiple holes through which leakages occur; corruption, manipulation, state mafia, obscurantist, and so forth.

Ugandans who do not strive to understand the way our economy is organized and operationalized will continue to blame government for not doing what it should do. They will blame the Parliament for extravagance, accuse the Judiciary and the Police of being corrupt; and blame the media for being a propaganda tool, devoid of objectivity and pursuit of “truth”; Blame public servants of apathetic performances, curse the high cost of services, kill each other of scarce resources, etc

By nature, neoliberalism is a dangerous stage of capitalism. Some clever economies have long established welfare system to counter the potential failures of the neoliberal markets. Here, strict measures are in place to ensure that leakages are minimized, “Investors” are defined, laws are adhered to, individualism prevails over community, individuals held strictly accountable, individual rights to partake in the economy is standardized, profits and spoils of the market are shared with the unfortunate, and that mechanisms of accountability is buttressed at the centre of existence of the nation. We have none of that!

By design, liberalization of the economy for Uganda means anyone, from any part of the world, can walk into Uganda and into our markets. Government scales back, so that it spends less on critical services, as we have seen the projection of 2017/2018 budget where both health and education will face budgetary reduction. Those are the most critical aspects of our economy and fundamental social services needed to prepare indigenous Ugandans to compete in the economy. In the wake of government retreating from funding these social services, it creates a market niche for “investors”, and calls for private-public partnership where possible to fill in that gap. Government creates these markets – or service gaps – by withdrawing funding. In the bigger picture of things, international philanthropists and NGOs have taken over a large percentage of health service delivery in such economies. The advantage is, people will see NGOs coming to issue them healthcare services, and private schools propping up everywhere. The danger is compromised quality of service, sustainability, and costs (access).

Traders are informed therefore that liberalization does not favour local traders and they must form a co-operation or Union to protect their interests in the market. Strong Labor Unions are very critical in this stage of our capitalist market development to lead and regulate the market, as well as protect the rights, privileges and interests of local traders by keeping away Chinese, Indians and Nigerians from vending in petty goods on our streets.

END

Mafias erodes hope for a meaningful democracy in Uganda

 MAFIOSO

The last couple of weeks, Uganda’s media space has been awash with controversies and scandals, one after the other. The storm created by the powerful Byanyiima family during the Kanyumunyu murder bail hearing, and Hon. Odonga Otto’s antics rivalled and suppress the topical “Presidential Handshake” involving pillaging 6 billion Shs for officials of the Uganda Revenue Authority and their corollaries.

All these events came at the heel of one another, and therefore, each missed its proper place for public scrutiny, given their relevance. The one event that remains unsurpassed in magnitude and impact is the scandalous Presidential handshake. Apparently, the President is in panic mode over it too. He has summoned the NRM MPs to discuss the matter with the probable aim of suppressing it.

Incidentally, my motive is not to scrutinize any of the aforementioned. Spending time scrutinizing each of these events only leads to a foregone conclusion – the curse of an illegitimate regime. I therefore thought it worthy to leave such inquiries to reductionist and flame fighters or experts of treating signs and symptoms with buckets of water, or aspirins.

The emergency of mafia networks we see in public service, governance, justice system, policy community, media, and so forth, all attest to the end of a meaningful democracy for us.

Not that we had any meaningful democracy to start with. However, in fairness of all things, the fundamental change promised over 30 years ago, had ingrained in us such a false hope. And, with a constitution upon which we are fluxed, one would imagine an orderly society. We can sit back now on our haunches and agree that such promises have faded and a new reality stares at us with an ugly face. Not only have we lost our civic, political, and economic rights to the mafias in the last 30 years, we lost our citizenship rights, too.

We learned that African regimes have the same tendencies played out by different characters. They start well and tapper off at some critical point, then degenerate. We need to study and catch that critical point when they tapper off. Maybe it will provide some scientific evidence in support of term limits.

 Clearly, few similarities tie together our post-colonial regimes; longevity, personalities, and legacy. All our post-colonial Presidents have espoused some fringe desire of ruling Uganda for life. All of them exhibited a degree of tyranny and episodes of turbulence, suffering, and insurgency in Uganda. All of them presided over remarkable corruption and nepotism – magendo, mafuta mingi, and now mafias. All of them were masters in intrigue and sectarianism, although Museveni has surpassed all of them!

The balancing act for Mr. Museveni is longevity. At 30 years, he has ruled twice the combined tenure of all post-colonial leaders before him. Having outlived each of his predecessors, Museveni is now a captive of state mafia that sustains him in power. At this point, Museveni is more afraid of the Mafia in his regime than a life in retirement.

With an entrenched mafia in every institution of the state, the Republic has dissociated into distinctive societies; the state, monopolized by a nexus of mafias, in the Army, Banks, Police, Judiciary, Parliament, Media, Statehouse, Border Services, Revenue Authority, telecommunication, Construction, Wildlife, Local Government, Foreign Missions, Oil, Minerals, Education, Finance, etc.

Everywhere you go, individuals with mystifying powers emerge at strategic and critical points of the economy, like shadows with long arms, to tap into every monies that comes into Uganda’s economy. They even plot apriori, what kind of capital and investment ventures should get lured into Uganda, and how they can use such entities to fleece off Ugandans.  Everyone has become a dealer, broker, and shark, all simultaneously.  

This complex network of mafiaso holds Museveni at ransom, and keeps his regime in place; therefore, they are one with yellow regalia. These Mafias have now emerged full-throat, in cahoots, and taken over our country, rights, and our citizenship.

The second Republic is you, and I, outside the shades of the state. The third Republic is their victims, deprived or resources to live a meaningful life.

End.

Contextualising Mwenda's Political Hogwash

MWENDAISM DEBUNKED

Uganda Diaspora Pten

In dramatically dispensing his unsolicited advice to the Opposition fraternity, Mr. Andrew Mwenda raised pertinent issues that actually exposed him and his kind of corrupted journalism and intellectualism. First, the deliberate target of Mr. Mwenda’s campaign is the person of Col (Rtd) Dr. Kizza Besigye (KB). The central premise of the message is that KB is the problem of the Opposition. He goes on to arrogate that Dr KB has failed to mobilise the masses effectively to defend his purported victories that have always been stolen by the dictator. Mwenda lavishes the tyrant with pleasantries such as a “master of intrigue, maneuver, and sabotage”. These frivolous qualities have suddenly fascinated Mwenda!

Issues 

Mwenda might have raised an issue or two in his diatribe, for instance, that the Opposition demonstrates a weak capacity to mobilize and pool resources, defend its interests, and ally on principle to challenge the over 30 years’ hegemony of Mr. Museveni. While these are noble observations, one must read Andrew Mwenda carefully and repeatedly between the lines not to miss the antithesis in his propaganda.

It is important to engage Mwenda in public debate even if he has already framed Pro-KB agents and sympathisers with some uncharitable names, while claiming moral superiority for himself. Most importantly, in positioning himself as an authority whose views must sway society, Mwenda needed to declare conflict of interests, and at the least, display some scintilla of honesty in his analysis of political developments, elucidating on historical drivers, and current exigencies, and then claim that Dr.KB is the problem.

Genesis

 To begin with, Mwenda needed to declare that his mission is not to do good to the Opposition. His mission is to exact public relations strategies intended to portray Dr Kizza Besigye as an incompetent leader; a power hungry person with a draconian personalityas much and or even worse than that of his nemesis, Museveni. Mwenda aims to shift KB’s public image, support base, and deflate KB’s political clout in totality. In doing this, Mwenda pursues two concurrent objectives; to legitimise the stolen Presidency of Mr. Museveni, and to frame KB as the enemy of economic development for donors and foreign investors to cooperate with a regime they despised and shunned since February 2016. If we let Mwenda go away with his travesties, as he has always, we shall have acted as if we are not privy to the slightest moments of the meetings that go on at the 6^th floor of Park Royal since February 15^th, 2016, and ends up with persistent media bash of KB.

Mwenda, the Authority

 In regards to the political posturing of Dr Kizza Besigye, Mwenda has no authority to dismiss KB as if it is Mwenda who determines who is effective in Opposition politics or not. Even in his dubious claims that KB should leave the scene for another performer, Mwenda fails to single out any Opposition figure who has the temerity, courage and charisma in the proportions of KB. Neither does Mwenda offer himself to take charge of the Opposition! In exposing his dishonesty, Mwenda fails to recognize that nobody quit the political scene for KB to enter and dominate the political landscape. Therefore, anyone better than KB must break the political ceiling set by KB solely on accounts of merit, and nothing other.

A snapshot of history

 In 1999 when KB released his famous Memo that catapulted him as an opposition leader, the actual Opposition was literally dying out. Dr Kawanga Ssemogerere had tried to unseat President Museveni in 1996 and was defeated by rigging. Thereafter, Dr. Ssemogerere’s leadership was wanting, and yet he was the best bet the Opposition had left. Like KB, and JPAM, Dr Ssemogerere also broke ranks with the dictator. In Ssemogerere, power started scattering to old Turks like Ssebaana Kizito and rogues like Nasser Ssebagala.  There was a vacuum and KB naturally filled that vacuum as we know that nature abhors vacuum. That kind of leadership and the ever-shrinking opposition is what Mr. Museveni thrived on to become increasingly indifferent to change demands. At least, KB came off from NRM with a sizeable force that later formed the Reform Agenda and morphed into FDC. At least, JPAM came alone.

Spontaneity

Even within DP, when Hon. Norbert Mao emerged as leader, he was not ordained into leadership as Mwenda suggests. Hon Mao Left Makerere University and contested in bitter and yet dramatic campaign against seasoned politician and DP stalwart, the late Andrew Adimola. The two contested against each other twice; for the CA and the subsequent Parliamentary seat. When Mao defeated Adimola, the latter conceded and retired. We have seen young talents emerge spontaneously to dislodge incumbents from constituencies without invitationfrom the incumbents. Everywhere one goes, political space has never been conceded willingly. It must be contested for, and the best candidates win. It is pressure, either internally or externally that forces an establishment to change. Mwenda represents only one such external pressures that is loaded with commercialization of political space – part of the Museveni intrigue to stifle opposition growth. To say with such infantile absurdity that KB must leave Opposition political space for others to emerge is indeed a dishonesty and betrayal of natural justice.

Critical historical factors

It is important to note that since the legal notice #1 of 1986, and the subsequent banning of political party activities in Uganda, outside of the Party Headquarters, using the draconian articles 269 and 270, political parties lost their roots in the countryside.  NRM unfairly inherited those. Opposition Politics remained active in Kampala where most Party headquarters were during those years, and still is. This pattern persists nearly two decades since restoration of multiparty politics, albeit with low confidence to engage the state. The dysfunction within Opposition groups therefore, is not the making of KB as a person. It has roots in the NRM’s design and galvanising effect on political space to sustain the tyrant in place.

New Styles for a new Nation

The KB kind of politics is a  new style that is reinventing grassroots political mobilisation through a non-violent defiance. People are responding since KB has exposed the true face of the dictatorship. People are now starting to relate to the mainstream politics after being reduced, and curtailed to the local council politics for decades. This is the very reason the state is rushing to reintroduce the LC systems, to replenish its stronghold on wanainchi in the countryside. The lack of civic engagement previously in National politics, partly explains the pervasive corruption and lack of political accountability in the country. Mwenda does not factor historical and social development of the last three decades in his strange advice, perhaps, to evade scrutiny. In his obscurantism, Mwenda evades explaining how historical forces outlined conjure up to shape the political space that KB and his FDC people dominate today. And, the challenges awaiting his miraculous KB replacement.

Militarism as a historical factor

An important aspect of our politics is its infatuation with militarism. Mwenda knows that President Museveni is rooted firmly in power because of his personalised army commanded by son, in-laws, and relatives. The 2016 Presidential elections demonstrated the discontent within the army itself where we saw a significant section of the army voting openly in defiance, against the dictator. The forces that shape politics within Uganda and in FDC have played out similarly along this historical fault line. When Muntu was elected to lead FDC against Mr. Nathan Nandala Mafabi in November of 2012, the main issues that favored Muntu were his military rank, history of service in the army, and reputation as an incorruptible leader. While Mafabi was the better choice to transition FDC from militarism to civilian leadership, another confounding factor played against Mafabi - Regionalism. In Uganda, the power center is firmly skewed, and planted in the West. The West is also the place where enormous national resources (wealth) have accumulated in the past three decades to influence economic and political power. A Mafabi win would have dislocated the FDC power centre from the West and rendered the Party ineffective financially and in human resource. FDC still faces this identity dissonance with their NRM roots and this is why it has been so easy for NRM spies to infiltrate the party.

The aforementioned forces make Besigye and Muntu formidable and appealing forces within the Ugandan political landscape. Had it been for traditions, one would expect that John Patrick Amama Mbabazi could have performed much better in 2016 to send KB into oblivion. Since1996, formidable forces that emerged to challenge the leadership of Mr. Museveni came from within his ranks like Ssemogerere, KB and JPAM. In fact, the whole essence of the TDA formation was to galvanise the political space to deny KB the support of traditional political forces that formed the bulk of “Opposition”. What we saw during and after the elections, should have taught Mwenda that KB is the nutty that holds the Opposition’s bolt in place. If Kb were a burden as such, JPAM and TDA could have been on top of things, not languishing in oblivion. This lack of honesty and simple deductive abilities are reasons enough to trash Mwenda's unsolicited advice asuspect.

Parting with tradition

One could explain that JPAM with his TDA vehicle gathered the old battered political forces that many Ugandans are have long moved away from. The nearly 20 years of NRM bashing and demonizing the traditional parties makes these parties unviable. There is deep distrust in these Parties as seen by dismal performances of their candidates during electins. The truth is, Ugandans have moved beyond the traditional Parties.A new ideological dispensation is long overdue. JPAM took then on and he collapsed with them. Therefore, KB remains a formidable bridge to a post Museveni future of non-violent, demilitarised politics and civilian rule. The other question that Mwenda never answers is why Besigye gets the votes that he always gets, and why the NRM always steals Besigye’s votes. It was established that 52% of the voters, including serving military officers, Police, and civil servants, voted for Dr Kizza Besigye. This is the basis of the demand for electoral and vote audit which Museveni cannot fathom. Why does the NRM become fidgety and nervous whenever we approach elections and organise rigging if KB is an ineffective inconsequential leader as Mwenda wants us to believe?

Giving credit where it is due

It is important to note, and rightly praise Dr. Kizza Besigye on two accounts. One such is being consistent; the second is choosing defiance, a non-violent civil disobedience campaign to challenge all facets of prevailing tyranny in Uganda. In comparing the zeal and motivation of KB and Mwenda's, one sees a contradicting mirror image of a measured character in the former, and a troubled soul in the latter. My readers ought to understand that KB stands between a potential genocide wall and a civil peaceful movement for change in governance. Dr. KB’s change formula does not entertain a thought of smashing the pillars of the state, a mindset prevalent among the tyrants. KB professes that Uganda has a political problem, not a military one and refuses to use military force to bring about a political solution. KB plans to systematically transform and revitalise the pillars of the state so they become subordinate to civilian rule and the rule of law.

Genocidal Intents

It is important to point that the UPDF and other armed state agents are configured under the command of Mr. Museveni to commit genocide beyond what was in Rwanda, DRC or elsewhere in the world should an opportunity occasion. Mwenda knows this well. Given Mwenda’s dishonesty, albeit deliberate spin-doctoring, Mwenda continues to provoke KB into touching a button that will obliterate Ugandans, if going by Kasese recently and 20 years of Northern Uganda are not lessons enough. Ugandans do not want war or another bloodbath.

We must be grateful to KB for his consistency, sharp mind, and courage to suffer on our behalf. I can tell you that even before his assassination; Martin Luther King, Jr was not a famous man, especially among those Negroes whose comfort he destabilised, and the dominant white, whose powers he challenged with the words of hope and endurance.

Concluding Remarks

In conclusion, Andrew Mwenda is a low-cut mercenary who deserves to be taken at face value. Mwenda is trying hard to obscure the wounds created in our conscience by the February 2016 fraudulent elections. If the political space in Uganda is ripe for contestation, Darwin’s, and not Mwenda’s law should suffice. A competent and highly organised person with a more robust organising idea will take dominance over the status quo on merit, without ordaining. Further, the kind of Mwenda journalism now popularised as Mwendaism signifies the rogue journalism bereft of objectivity and that, which panders to paid interests of the highest bidder. It is immoral. In as much as Mwenda would like us to believe that KB is a political problem, it is, in fact, the flip-flops, crooked, and avaricious clowns known for Statehouse-to-Statehouse-to-street bidding, who are the real problem. Let Mwenda volunteer himself to lead the Opposition, or at the least, form his own Party, even if a briefcase one to contest in 2021. Otherwise, many Ugandans are silently satisfied, confident and in complete solidarity with Dr. Col Kizza Besigye in this struggle. Talk is cheap!

End.