How to deal with disgruntled people and uphold good governance
This term “disgruntled” members became popular in the run-up to the 2001 general elections. It was used to refer to members of the National Resistance Movement, who complained and opposed the party, especially in reference to broken promises, change the national constitution to adapt to the plans of the ruling political party, infighting between members of the political party to win the favor of the top. the leadership of political parties and influence their own interests, as well as the struggle for power and positions in government.
Members of the political parties, who were unable to enjoy the national cake, or challenged the weak internal democracy, came out and ran for political office without the endorsement of the political parties and continued to operate outside of the political party structures. Some of the members went ahead, 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 occur as a result of different ideas and courses of action that require sacrificing others to consider what is best suited to the future of the organization. When the political parties did not comply with the principles of governance and internal democracy of the party, some members became agitated since the restoration of democracy was the same cause they defended. Therefore, discontent occurs more than can be imagined and can lead to direct violence, injuries and deaths from the violent application of an unpopular opinion.
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 controversial national elections held in 1980, although it was also clear that the leader of this movement wanted power more. 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 described extreme violence as a communication and negotiation tool to face growing discontent over how the country is run. In recent years, we have witnessed an increase in violence, high crime rates, and greater disorientation from leaders, who preferred a top-down approach to leadership than a bottom-up approach. This alienated them from the people they claimed to represent or lead, and they ended up underperforming in leadership. For a long time, the bottom-up approach has proven to be more sustainable for leaders and people served, although lobbying and advocating for better service delivery remained a strategic top-down approach to bringing services to people. the people who needed them most.
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 action is taken to address discontent, which tends to occur 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 for the elderly in this beautiful country, now over 65, who feel ashamed and humiliated that people their age can act dishonestly to undermine the aspirations of Ugandans. The elderly can no longer depend on remittances from their sons and daughters who work in the cities, due to high levels of unemployment and bankrupt businesses. Young people are confused because they lack the support, trust and guidance of the elderly living in poverty and did not fulfill their parental responsibility. 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.
Definitely, disgruntled members in political parties, strategic development associations and grassroots movements, which also extend deep into communities, will 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 have 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 in destiny. They choose to travel abroad in risky environments to work and meet their growth and development goals. They think of wealth as obtainable exogenously, beyond the borders of their country. Those who stay in the country choose to join the armed forces or gangs, while the rest simply depend on the passage of time, absorption in drugs and alcohol. These are the people that political parties and leaders want to transform to be better, productive, and responsible citizens to no avail. The transformation has proven effective with them at the top of political business or as leaders. P
People from all walks of life experience discontent. Imagine a disgruntled member of the armed forces, who pursued a military career to improve the quality of life, but his situation worsened, as a relative died without the means to support him. How much violence can a person trained to be violent towards himself and others, when equipped with advanced weaponry, or 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 danger even closer to political opponents and dissident citizens. They can be messy, as reasoning is usually second to shots.
Members of the armed force themselves are dangerous to violent commanders, due to the unfortunate circumstances in which they joined the army. More so, as hopes of making a meaningful career in the military to redeem his people from poverty fade. They are a time bomb and a trigger for revolution, waiting for a trigger moment to cause chaos or use force to acquire wealth.
Unfortunately, being unhappy is something to be laughed at and belittled by by a class of people who are happy and comfortable with the status quo. The happy are the main 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 deadly violence. In return, this attracts revenge at some point and the destruction or redistribution of wealth that was unfairly acquired. Therefore, this discontent should not be taken for granted. It is a powerful root of mass violence.
Resolving discontent
It is a simple but painful decision, action and process. We have to get the leadership of political parties, strategic development associations, civil society movements and the country back on the right path of progress; the path of constitutionalism, free and fair elections, the rule of law, the introduction of internal democracy of political parties or good corporate governance, including the distribution of national resources and opportunities for development, strong institutions of government and trustworthy, change and replacement of a crop of corrupt leaders within political parties and the government, and a 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 notice more than can be imagined.
So the decline, the disintegration of political parties, the government and the subsequent collapse is most likely to be more real, easier to see and more expected. This happens in most cases. But it is never too late to change the course towards the collapse of political parties, the government or its institutions.
However, we can act optimistically and continue to walk through the change we want to see until the envisioned change takes shape and shows results of political and socio-economic justice, enriched by the principles of good governance.
Ugandans only need to prepare for this by adopting positions geared towards national development, where everyone benefits from them, improving livelihoods and the impacts of good governance on a massive scale for each decade of the ruling regime. However, while this is happening, citizens must guard against historical errors and structure our society in a way that places the nation above selfish interests, educates leaders to truly serve their country, develops a mechanism for decision-making. By consensus, guarantee accountability and the leaders render accounts to the people served, guarantee the response capacity of the leaders with equity in the actions to satisfy the wishes of the citizens of the country, whose collective decisions reign supreme and 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 thus voted in favor (discontent). How can anyone vote against their own future, for someone else’s selfishness or someone else’s own good, and still call it a constitution of the people of Uganda? The constitution ceases to be one of the people of Uganda. Instead, it becomes a person’s guide to controlling Ugandans for personal purposes. When the army follows suit in defending such a constitution, it ceases to be a popular force. In such a country, the people never have the power to influence decisions and the future in their favor or for the national good.
Therefore, we continually observe that discontent in political parties or among leaders reflects discontent in the civilian population, characterized by injustices, long-term and unresolved grievances, poor service delivery, poverty, and senseless leadership. Correcting this situation also brings resistance. Also, deadly. In other words, either way, ruling the country through corruption, bad leadership, or putting it back on the path of good governance is deadly. However, it is better to be remembered for just and good causes than as a dishonest person, a dishonest leader, Inna’s parasitic relationship with those led, or as someone who encourages injustices and bad government.
Ugandans must embrace and work for good governance, involving consensus, participatory democracy, rule of law, responsible leadership, transparency, responsiveness, fairness and effective leadership. First, they must look for natural leaders who can be trusted for the new leadership course. Otherwise, no one should feel disappointed or dissatisfied when our actions serve us in terms of the national good in the short, medium and long term. Or in a Uganda like that. In this way, Ugandans will be able to create conditions that turn leaders into servants of the directed people to work together to survive socio-economic hardships, improve quality of life, enjoy prosperity, and ensure sustainable well-being and development.