This term “disgruntled” 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 ruling political party’s plans, infighting among political party members to curry favor with top political party leaders and influence their own interests, as well as fighting for power and government posts. .
Members of political parties, unable to enjoy the national pie or contesting weak internal democracy, came out and ran for political office without political party endorsement and continued to operate outside of 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, as expected, conflicts occur 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 did not 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 defended. Therefore, discontent occurs more than you can imagine 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 to Uganda. Hundreds of people have also died trying to oppose the current government.
Since 1986, the country has characterized 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 increased violence, high crime rates, and increased leadership disorientation, who preferred a top-down to bottom-up approach to leadership. This alienated them from the people they claimed to represent or lead, and they ended up underperforming in leadership. The bottom-up approach has long proven more sustainable for leaders and the people it serves, though lobbying and advocating for better service delivery remained a top-down strategic approach to getting services to 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 actions are taken to address discontent, which usually 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, 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 feel confused because they lack the support, trust and guidance of the elderly who live in poverty and have failed in 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.
Definitely, disgruntled members of political parties, strategic development associations, and grassroots movements, which also run 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 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 fate 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 remain in the country choose to join the armed forces or join gangs, while the rest simply pass the time, absorbing drugs and alcohol. These are the people that political parties and leaders want in vain to transform into better, productive and responsible citizens. The transformation has proven to be effective with them at the top of the political business or as leaders. P
People in all sectors experience discontent. Imagine a disgruntled member of the military, who pursued a military career to improve his quality of life, but his situation worsened as family members die with no means to support them. How much violence can a person trained to be violent exhibit on himself and others, when he is equipped with advanced weaponry, or if he 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 the danger even closer to political opponents and dissident citizens. They can be tricky as the reasoning is often secondary to the shooting.
The same members of the armed forces are dangerous to violent commanders, due to the unfortunate circumstances in which they joined the military. Even 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 discontent is something to be laughed at and put down 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 to achieve 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 unfairly 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 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, rule of law, introduction of internal party democracy or good corporate governance, equitable distribution of national resources and opportunities for development, strong and dependent government institutions, change and replacement of the corrupt crop of leaders within political parties and government, and a return to popular democratic governance.
Unfortunately, solving 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 most probable thing is that the decay, the disintegration of the political parties, the government and the subsequent collapse is the most real, easy to see and the 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 envisioned change takes shape and shows results of political and socio-economic justice, enriched by principles of good governance.
Ugandans just need to prepare by taking positions geared towards national development, where everyone benefits from them, improving livelihoods and good governance impacts on a massive scale for every decade of the regime in power. However, while this is happening, citizens must guard against mistakes and structure our society in a way that places the nation above selfish interests, nurtures leaders to truly serve their country, develops a consensus decision-making mechanism, ensures historical accountability and leaders accountable to the people they serve, ensures responsiveness of leaders with equity of action to meet the wishes of the nation’s citizens, whose collective decisions are paramount and protected. s 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 in favor (discontent) that way. How can someone vote against her own future, for someone else’s selfishness or someone’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 one person’s guide to control Ugandans for personal purposes. When the army does the same defending such a constitution, it ceases to be a force of the people. In such a country, 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 reflects discontent in the civilian population, characterized by injustices, unresolved and long-term grievances, poor service delivery, poverty, and meaningless leadership. Correcting this situation also entails resistance. Also, deadly. In other words, either way, it is lethal to steer the country through corruption, bad leadership, or back on the path of good governance. However, it is better to be remembered for just and good causes than as a mischievous person, a mischievous leader, Inna’s parasitic relationship with the led people, or as someone who encourages injustices and misrule.
Ugandans must embrace and work towards good governance, which involves consensus, participatory democracy, rule of law, accountable leadership, transparency, responsiveness, fairness and effective leadership. First, they must look for natural leaders, who can be trusted to guide the new course of direction. Otherwise, no one should be disappointed or disgruntled when our actions serve us in terms of the national good in the short, medium and long term, 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 hardship, improve quality of life, enjoy prosperity and ensure sustainable well-being and development.
