It is Uganda’s culture that we are trading in the liberal market

NATIONAL DECEPTION

As a country, we have become accustomed to deception as a gateway to success. The target of the extortion is the developed western countries and donors who are paying for decisions that should be made voluntarily. The payment, though, is not in vain. It serves an imperialist or patronage purpose. In that case, the deception and patronage feed off each other in an atypical predatory-cum-symbiotic relationship in the liberal marketplace.

The level of deception in Uganda is stupefying. As a society, we have reached a point where we desire for privileges but never accept its responsibilities. To evade responsibility, we employ deception. But, the more succeeded through deception, the more we become powerless.

Ugandans have learned to put up faces under this phony Museveni-orchestrated liberal market which is full of duplicitous vendors but “empty stalls”. It is in the context of this market that Europeans, Americans, Russians, and Chinese buy our bad cultures and we sell to them our willingness to transform or abandon our “risky”, “outdated” or “primitive” traditions, cultures, identities, even faith.

Over the last decades, the west has been buying us out on many fronts, and we have been selling our cultures, traditions, and identities in that liberal market. Their goal is to speed us up on advances in Eurocentric and pan American type liberalism.

It is not hard to understand why America and Europe are keenly paying us out of our cultures, traditions, beliefs, and autonomy. The West has always acted as the patron of our civilization. If they can pay to sustain their imperialist agenda, then why not? The irony is that every sociocultural item that they buy us out of, and we sell, these people carefully repackaged and preserve at home.

For instance, America pays for us to end cultural practices that are deemed risk averse such as female genital mutilation, the same practice they would call surgical vaginal design. Do we need Americans to bribe us to stop hurting women in a place most sensitive? Well, the trend has been consistent. Once they pay, we immediately end the practice. They have been paying for us to dig and use pit latrines, bury our dead ones, treat our ailments, and many have even been paid to visit a health center!

There is a danger of dependence on this harmful cultural purchase melee. American pay us to plan our families, to use condoms, to take HIV medications, to make clean water available. We have reached a point where the whole country is paid to live or die, how to live and how to die; and what we should do when still alive.

It is comprehensible that liberalism strives to undermine the state to privilege market dynamism. The Ugandan case, however, is a new phenomenon because even the state is now paid to undermine itself. The state itself is captive to an illegitimate government that is constituted by a sham democracy that is paid for by the donor. The so-called experts who validate and legitimize the government are also donor-funded.  

Why should USAID, UKAID or EU pay our people to stop mutilating or pulling their labia? For them, women are “vajazzling”, undergoing vaginal rejuvenation or labiaplasty and others. I get it. It is the procedure and the practice that are risky.

It is not surprising that the recent government intervention to stop over pulling or elongating young women's labia is also donor-funded. The donor also funds our men so that they stop beating their wives (gender-based violence), pay men to begin taking care of their children and to send their children to donor-funded schools.

The more they pay, the more we slip backward and become helpless. Yet, those who engineer this social helplessness judge their success by how much their deceptive or folly enterprises have paid off. These are elites in small private sector agencies, and some linked to the discredited state functionaries in their folly to bring every aspect of social life in Uganda into the liberal market.

I am not even sure whether such a labial maneuver is a popular culture with serious sexual value, but it is on the market stall for selling to a donor. 

Unfortunately, you will not find a lot of manufactured goods on the “stalls” of our liberal market. It is our cultures, traditions, identities, and autonomy that we are trading. We have lagged in every competitive aspect of the global liberal agenda. We have no industries, lag in scientific and technological innovations, lack control over our natural resources and environment; we cannot produce or add value to our agricultural produces enough to access North American, European, Asian and other markets. We have retreated to our quarters to wait for the market spoils to reach us. Even our begging hands have retracted at the elbow.

The sad part is, in the west, liberalism has made it possible for individuals to circumcise, mutilate, elongate, design and sell their bodies or body parts, redesign their private parts, change their sexes, deliver in tubes or through surrogates, die and get cremated.

The Europeans and Americans are already preserving our historical artifacts in their museums, holding our history and knowledge at ransom. In every Zoo, you find more tropical animals indigenous to Africa than you could find in some national parks in Africa.

In our deceptive ways, it is our indigeneity, the very essence of our “Africanness”, that we are trading in the liberal market.

End.

UPDF must remain nonpartisan during elections

MILITARISM

As we enter the year of electioneering, members of the high command of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces have launched their threats to the population with talks of potential insecurity. UPDF must strive to be professional despite the force’s history which adheres them to their founder and the incumbent, who is also a likely candidate in the same elections of 2021.

State Minister for security, Gen Elly Tumwine, Commander of Land Forces, Brig. Peter Elwelu and recently a Capt. Sula Serunjogi has vowed that Presidential hopeful, Hon. Robert S. Kyagulanyi aka Bobi Wine will never be the commander-in-chief of the UPDF (meaning President of Uganda).

Elsewhere, active army commanders skirt the country to campaign for the incumbent, Mr. Museveni using military facilitation and security apparatuses to intimidate, illegally detain and threaten voters. 

On the village paths, the regime pours its military adorned in full war gears and armed to the teeth to scare the population from voting for any other candidates than Mr. Museveni.

This militarization of every aspect of the state and state functions is the distinguishing feature of this military dictatorship. While it is hard to pinpoint any one specific activity of the UPDF which is professional, the population understands clearly that the UPDF is a personal outfit for protecting Mr. Museveni’s power.

Ironically, the NRM should have been very proud of Ugandans coming out in large numbers to participate and vote in elections peacefully. They have always pointed at the 1980 elections as one that deprived people of their true voices in a messy election. Instead, the UPDF makes voting and elections very traumatic by creating violence. It is mainly during elections (and riots) when the army comes out in full war mode to intimidate, shoot, kill, abduct, torture, mime or abuse civilians. Sometimes we come to think that the UPDF is a redundant army of sorts.

Professionalism is a key aspect of every profession which permits safeguards in its functions and a minimum expectation upon which its public image is branded. In the case of the UPDF, like their sister cadre institutions, the Police and Judiciary, they appear blunt when dealing with other threats such as floods, landslides, terrorism, but sharp and firm when dealing with any political circumstances that threaten the status quo.

With 2021 general elections coming up, many military officers will continue to remind us that only Museveni will remain commander-in-chief of the UPDF. This revelation is important to us given the history of the force and the rank files of its key officers. Like the armies before it, the UPDF has demonstrated a great propensity for ethnocentrism, something they will quickly deny and accuse whoever points it out as practicing sectarianism.

Ugandans should worry because by the UPDF ring-fencing the Presidency for Mr. Museveni after 34 years, our democracy becomes stale – meaningless. Such statements also undermine any pretense that Uganda is a democracy and that Mr. Museveni is elected regularly to retain his seat.

The chaotic nature of the elections in which the militarized police conjure up with paramilitary and security operatives to coerce the population already brings little hope for democracy. The unfortunate implication is that UPDF is constantly reminding Ugandans that the only way to access power is by launching a war. Clever enough, they have cut down the bushes, appropriated or sold the land into sugar cane and tea estates making it difficult to find a bush.

Given the level of peace that the UPDF claims to have established in Uganda, a professional force should remain nonpartisan and keep out of civil affairs. The force should withdraw its members from Parliament, embark on professionalizing and nationalizing its force ranks, and where possible, focus its attention on protecting the integrity of the state and territory from people who are deformed by power.

End.

Effect Reforms in Electoral laws

ELECTIONS 2021

Uganda will hold a general election in February 2021. These elections require urgent reforms in its laws before it happens.

An election year in Uganda is usually full of tragedies. The military regime in power has made elections synonymous with brutality, violence, intimidation, torture, hate propaganda and fearmongering such that the average Ugandan sincerely dread the fatigue of these elections.

Mr. Museveni does not actually depend on elections or needs one to stay in power. They only use violent and meaningless elections as a ritual to renew, validate and legitimize their dictatorship.

The irony is that Ugandans know that an event of the election alone does not define democracy. Democracy is a function of liberalism that comes with a full set of requisites rights and freedoms - a free press, liberty, freedoms of expression, association, worship and innovation and respect for human rights and rule of law. Most of these have been constrained under a tight leash by the regime. Without these rights and freedoms, the Museveni-type democracy is rightfully a total mockery.

In addition, a democratic society must have functioning democratic institutions and a supporting democratic culture of accountability, transparency, and consultation as its defining marks. In Uganda, Mr. Museveni is the defining institution of the state and the state is him. In this case, democracy precludes him or his position at the helm of the nation.

A dictatorship is not hard to identify. There is that one dominant leader who refuses to go away controls the ruling party and the country’s assets. His government controls all aspects of the state and often controls, bans or tightly monitors opposing groups and their meetings. The disregard for individual citizens' rights and the displacement of indigenous citizen's rights for loyal foreigners prevails. Mr. Museveni's use of archaic, colonial and unjust laws, policies, torture and spies to control every aspect of people's lives looms large over every mode of cultural expression - radio, cinema, newspapers, and television.

The potential showdown in a violent election makes many of Ugandans disinterested in the politics and leadership of Uganda.

Further, utterances from the military, the main constituency of the ruling dictatorship, have already pre-determined the 2021 election outcomes.

Ugandans can vie and win elections at every level except the Presidency. This position is ring-fenced for Mr. Museveni.

Somehow, The US, UK, and EU are satisfied that Uganda is a democracy. This double standard has lowered the passing grade for Uganda so low such that it has eroded the value of human rights and fundamental freedoms as a quid pro quo for their interests in the region.

In the meantime, Mr. Museveni's opponents are not having it easy. They have faced the full brutality of the militarized Police. Many are now garrisoned, their businesses disabled, and sources of income placed under strict regime's sanctions.

  

The consistent conduct of Uganda Police removes any pretense of impartiality as a legitimate authority over law and order. The Police are overtly disruptive - serve to constrain and humiliate opposition elements.

The story is the same as the so-called "Independent" Electoral Commission. Its ranks and rung are filled with biased cadre officers of the ruling party.

These circumstances are dire and make elections in Uganda an embarrassment. Unfortunately, the "meal card" politics within the opposition compels some to legitimize this tragicomedy by participating in it.

The most respectable thing to do is for opposition to boycott any violent and irregular elections. The first major step is for the Opposition to demand comprehensive reforms in the electoral laws.

These reforms should specify the role of the Police, the Army, and Paramilitary groups during these elections. Most importantly, the Electoral Commissioners should comprise representatives from all Parties elected to Parliament.

 End.

To succeed as President, Kyagulanyi needs competent young Ugandans

CHANGE 2021

There is an upsurge of the People Power movement especially among the 78% of the youthful Ugandan population across Uganda and the diaspora. There are people everywhere who are motivated by the prospects of change through the People Power movement because it brings fresh untainted faces to a saturated political sphere of corruption, deceit, impunity, sectarianism, violence, arrogance, theft, among others.

The Hon. Robert Ssentamu Kyagulanyi's rights and efforts to oust from or replace Mr. Museveni as President must be supported as required by the constitution. The adulterated 1995 Constitution recommends that any 35 years old Ugandan by birth who qualifies to be in Parliament could become President of Uganda.

The challenge with any hegemony is that it illuminates other possibilities by overwhelming those it rules. I am sure Fidel Castro was dismissed by his contemporaries before his 1953 attempt to bring change to Cuba; biblical David was probably dissuaded from taking on mightier Goliath, and Obote promised to meet and leave Museveni in the Luwero bushes. The success stories emerging out of these encounters show that destiny has its unique path and direction once it begins to roll.

More importantly, Ugandans should have faith in change as a good thing. Until recently, no one would have imagined that Adama Barrow in Gambia could wrestle a mad man out of power! Nayib Amarndo Bukele succeeded in El Salvador against odds. In the US, the little-known Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Abdullahi Omar broke glass ceilings to become notable public figures with incredible performances in the Senate. Unless we put our citizens to a test of excellence, we shall never know what potential a country of 40 million people offers!

I would like to point out that age, inexperience, discipline, and determination are the very strengths that Hon. Kyagulanyi presents in his bid to become President. Ugandans need a new face that embodies their hopes but also people they can connect with, to lead them. The bush-war class of 1986 has outgrown their time and each effort they make to cling on to power, they just keep recreating an old future for the younger generation.

The question of Hon. Kyagulanyi's inexperience should be more enticing than scaring because Kyagulanyi has demonstrated the impeccable qualities of a great leader. The youthful legislator has illustrated in private, his management and entrepreneurial skills that have become an inspiration for the youthful population to participate in the economy.

Besides, there are millions of competent young Ugandan women and men with an impeccable reputation and CVs whose services are readily available to Hon. Kyagulanyi to succeed once President. The idea that Kyagulanyi will work irregularly like Mr. Museveni should be out of the question in a democratic government.

 We have also learned that the military or the bushes do not train Presidents. They make self-absorbing tyrants who claim and cling onto power where they are never accountable to the people. A good leader for Uganda should, therefore, be bred through rigorous public scrutiny and a fair election. Definitely, there are no Universities or colleges where Ugandan Presidents are prepared.

 The facets to future success for Hon. Kyagulanyi will lie in him trying and moving towards restoring the rule of law, demilitarizing and de-corrupting society through establishing order, respect for human rights, a functional democracy, restoring integrity in government and promoting an equitable process for national reintegration. These are inevitable steps that are needed for Uganda to enjoy meaningful peace that is good for social and economic investments.

 The fear of change among Ugandans only highlight Mr. Museveni's questionable democratic credentials and lack of leadership must be challenged.

  This myth that Mr. Museveni or his anointed successor are the only ones suited to govern Uganda reaffirms a hindrance in democratic practice and paranoia typical among insecure criminals. People who cling on Museveni are probably those who have also stolen the most, committed regime crimes and want to protect their loot, prestige and false freedoms.

 Uganda should have moved beyond fear of celebrating the change of government through a tested democratic process after 35 years. 

End. 

Titles, accolades and power abuse kills us more that disease

SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

There seems to be titles and accolades epidemic in Uganda. The tendency to unnecessarily stratify society into classes based on titles, accolades and celebrity stature among Africans has reached a new crescendo.

The command and demand for titles in Uganda needs to be examined. Titles are earned and well deserved, alright. However, when titles and accolades begin to define us and who we should hang out with, then it becomes socially problematic. A sudden exuberance for meeting acquaintances could easily descend into a title race of sort. People lavish in their professions, office positions, or association memberships as a sign of class accomplishment, or achievement.

The excessive prominence accorded titles and status may be telling us something more about us than we know already. The desire to climb to prominence, and to shun the stark ugliness of failure have generated a society of duplicitous generation studded with often trust-deficit relations. Perhaps, only Libyans under Gadhafi might have had the humility to present themselves as Libyans, and not a distort identities derived from membership in trades, social club, academic and other advantages that confer upon us power and privileges.

I recently realised that interpersonal relationships have generally declined substantially among Ugandans, both in value and practice. There is low level of social capital’s basic elements of trust and reciprocity. Everyone seems to be in a competition for an invisible crown. At least some Americans chased that illusion and decidedly called it a dream – The American Dream!

Naturally, we should be conscious of our privileges or even the power that we hold and how these may harm others. Titles and superimposition come with certain prices. More of our peers have become materialistic to show accomplishment, others bullish and yet many have turned rogues and predatorily callous.

Naturally, a society deprived of trust also project distrust and suspicion. Everyone in Uganda seemed to be a suspect. There are many types of suspects, political double dealers, money-bags and scallywags, carpetbaggers and then the everyday guy who is the object of scorn. Each has a title and name of fame which affords them a membership in certain social classes.

Then the overly priced and insecure celebrity status that undeserved individuals confer upon themselves. There are very famous guys called Gearbox, Small-pin, Vunja-Migumba, etc!

Outside the spheres of the unwashed, a typical socialization moment is more of an interprofessional meeting. Everyone smiles gleefully and is introduced by their professions, academic qualifications, job titles, political connections, filial prestige or those dangerous things they do for the connected. Ironically, once the titles are mentioned, no serious exploration of what these titles mean, actually take place. The silence that follows is the definitive sign of approval into the social circle. 

These titles and command of social situatedness have taken over the names, esteem, pedigree and identities of the real people that we once knew. This must concern us because people are no longer afraid to hunt for glory, either by faking it or perpetuating class divisions to be accommodated. The real victim is social inclusion here. The criteria for social inclusion has increased in value while social capital has depreciated.

 Often such stratification has a profound exclusory effect on women and other vulnerable groups who are left at the bottom of social rungs for a fault not of their own. If women must belong to such groups, they are accepted for their attachment to an acceptable titled or privileged member of such a group or are there as sex toys for their polished flawless skins and contours.

Uganda has become an extremely stratified and indifferent society. There are those who have done extremely well for themselves – acquiring education locally and abroad, set in good jobs and connected to the right people in the right spheres of power. These are not afraid to swing their power at you.  Then there are those who have grassed as providence deemed – mostly for belonging to a wrong ethnic group, age category, history of conflict and you know, lack of titled background. To overcome the class divisions, one must lie, pretend, or project self above their real means.

At the bottom of it all, you begin to uncover a bunch of insecure, uninformed and self-absorbed social class seekers. Most appear clueless about the health impact of social stratification and the value or oversight of the powers that they hold by the virtue of these titles. Titles and social stratification are as dangerous as disease causing organisms - bacteria, viruses and fungi. Social stratification is unnecessary, avoidable, and remediable irrespective of one’s social class or location. The World Health Organization warns that societal stratification causes social inequities that kills more people than disease.

End.

Opposition unity lies in envisioning a post-Museveni possibilities - PART 2

POST-MUSEVENISM 

Uganda's opposition has concentrated in in-fighting for social space in protracted bickering which is counterproductive. This territoriality and the inconsequential flag-bearer fight distracts us from organizing for the bigger trophy of liberating Uganda. Under pluralist dispensation, parties ally for strategic reasons before or after elections, mostly to leverage their resources, consolidate their grip where they are present, and to focus on winning new territories. These alliances are usually strategic, principled and mutually beneficial, not antagonistic.

I theorize that our inability to envision a post-Museveni regime is at the center of this squabble.

Mr. Museveni's regime is definitely hegemonic. After 33 uninterrupted years in power, Mr. Museveni has galvanized himself within the state. Museveni is the state of Uganda. Opposition groups have under-developed capacity to imagine how to dismantle this hegemony. Scholars and theorists of politics have offered some insights into the hegemonic nature of authoritarian regimes and factors for their durability.

Tina Rosenberg, for instance, discusses the challenge of tackling and managing a post despotic regime and why most opposition fears to think beyond these regimes. Rosenberg observes that the post despotic regime offers its own challenges that need proper handling to avoid the rise of residual elements of the pas tyranny from regaining power and influence. First, post-despotic actors must grapple with the question of overcoming the legacy of the deposed dictatorship. Whether to investigate a tyranny's legacy and whether such endeavors take the shape of criminal investigations is one. There is also the option of trying those past leaders, liquidating their ill-begotten assets at home and abroad, or pursuing traditional methods such as purging the old regime with their entire power base, collapsing their economic bases or pursuing a secret intelligence agenda to bring the atrocious elements from the past to justice. According to Rosenberg, each one of these actions and the thought of it, whether by opposition groups or elements within the dictatorship needs caution.

The caution is necessary since post-dictatorship democracy tends to be weak if the dictatorship did not collapse in its entirety. That is if the pillars of the tyrannical regime or state were not smashed. Some dictators are clever enough to negotiate for a gradual transition, such that they retain some or all of their privileges like in the case of Mugabe. However, most dictators are so self-absorbed that they will wait until their organization is completely collapsed with them, like in the case of Gadhafi, Saddam, and Bashir.

  

Levitsky and Way of the University of Toronto, have studied trends and factors of durability among dictators in Eastern Europe. They surmised that authoritarian regimes often enhance elite cohesion upon which authoritarianism is entrenched. The elite are mobilized by providing institutionalized access to the spoils of power. In Uganda, Museveni has used corruption, sectarianism, and patronage to mobilize the elite. Levitsky and Way, however, cautions that while dictators spend time and resources to mobilize elite, they do not actually rely on elite cohesion which tends to be unprincipled and dissociates rather unpredictably. Dictators thus depend largely on identities, norms and organizational structures forged during sustained violence and ideologically driven conflicts to cling on to power.

 Andras Bozoki (2013) illuminates the incongruousness in depending on democracy to challenge authoritarian regimes. Bozoki argues that economic growth is not conducive to authoritarianism and therefore tyrants subvert any meaningful economic empowerment of the people by skewing the distribution of social and economic resources; second, dictators do not guarantee the growth of democracy since authoritarian systems run behind electioneering veil. Thus, dictators use the concept of democracy as a smokescreen for building a ruthless regime antithetical to the spirit of real democracy.

But, dictators do not exist in one country like a vacuum. Dictators have friends and where they have none, they create some. Political scientists, Kevin Koehler and Alexander Schmots writing in the Washington Observer opines that dictators associate and develop linkages with one another. The durability of a dictator thus depends on the density of these linkages to facilitate transnational diffusion and cooperation.

In sum, the Ugandan opposition has to rethink the meaning of pluralism as a place beyond Museveni's dictatorship. Pluralism encourages diversity and does not forge the unification of ideas for the sake of unity. Our old political parties seem to exude the internalization of Mr. Museveni's repressive approaches to subvert the proliferation of plurality. These individuals are too pre-occupied with thinking within the existence of repression. When generation elections are called, the opposition will have generated sufficient apathy against their own interests, eroded the credibility of each other and shaken the faith in a post-Museveni reality. To overcome the infantile pettiness, the opposition is guided to embrace and respect plurality, focus attention away from each other by target regime's support pillars at local and central government. Thinking of a post-Museveni era, a possibility of probability may unite us.

Distrust as a tool of creating a paradoxical society - part 1

Paradoxicals

The amount of time we spend protecting our integrity and reputation in a paradoxical society, is testimony of a crisis.

 Liberalism has taught us well, to detach from every social and adhere to a pursuit of materialism. To dismiss the public for private, and the social for individual. Incidentally, we attempt to adhere to traditions while denying that these changes have shifted power bases away from traditional power brokers.

 As a people, we build our public profiles over years and hope to cash in on it as social capital. Integrity and reputation are about consistency, but also about how the public value it. These values , as currency for procuring social capital, are validated through socialization.

 Social capital as a concept has been in circulation since 1890 and used in social sciences until about 2000 when American political scientist, Robert D Putnam popularized it in his nonfiction book: Bowling Alone: The Collapse and revival of America and has since been used widely in health studies to explicate social inclusion as a prerequisite for health. The book highlights the perils of neoliberalism in perpetrating social isolation and exclusion.

 Basically, social capital are the networks and relationships among individuals who work and live together. These relationship are the drivers of social cooperation needed for proper function and efficient functioning of society.

Aspects of social capital are everyday values such as trust, reciprocity, information sharing and cooperation that are associated with cohesive social networks and societal harmony.

 A strong social capital highlights strong social inclusion factors – that people trust each other and make deliberate effort to do good or less harm to each other. Information they generate is intended for the good of society, inclusively. We anticipate that low levels of distrust, for instance, would make a community confident and trusting with each other to accept reciprocation. A cooperative society is a progressive and often healthy society.

The reverse is true – Putnam demonstrates scenes of social isolation among seniors in respect of low levels of social capital. In addition, distrust for one another and apathy towards social institutions engenders apathy, leading to social isolation. Distrust is a potent chalice for killing cooperation in society.

 Cooperation is diminished further when information is subverted, concealed, distorted or apportioned to manipulate society for the good of a few.

 Information is the string that coordinates society, communities, families and relationships at every level. Without a clear information sharing system, distrust and anxiety fetters, and that can collapse a society (crime, war, discrimination, xenophobia etc).

 This is the case for Uganda – low levels of social capital – distrust for one another that has stifled cooperation at every level of society leading to pervasive corruption, theft and impunity.  

 Everyone in Uganda is a suspect by default.

You do not have to do anything. Just show up in any social gathering or town looking different or speaking with a unique tongue - you are a suspect. Everyone in an office is precisely a suspect of corruption; anyone doing better than the other is a suspected mole of the regime.

 This mole labeling affords this regime a right of hegemony and unnecessary credit accorded to greedy politicians who scheme for opportunities to benefit individually out of public efforts.

 Distrust is most intense among those in opposition. Besigye, Mao, Bwanika, Muntu and everyone underneath their ladders are all painted with the mole brash to stir public distrust against their efforts at challenging status quo.

 What is the purpose of this labeling, and who benefits? What is the basis of this charge, anyway?

 Uganda’s society is where Police officers are also the highway robbers, exhibits thieves, illegal gun traders; where bank tellers steal customers' deposits; teachers de-school students by defilement and a sitting president is an exhibit in another country!

This is a paradoxical society where everyone is distrusted. Ironically, even with sch distrust levels, business goes on as usual.  

 Distrust is an ideological device being used artfully to prevent opposition from organizing at any level of society. Students of political science could interest themselves with this phenomenon - distrust that creates a paradoxical society like Uganda!  

End