Mr Kipenji:
Your reply is flawed to the point of being inconsistent with very idea of what federalism is (or what federal principles are).
In my understanding, federal governance involves a union of states -- which are treated as political equals no matter what their physical, population or economic sizes are -- that have mutually and freely agreed to subordinate their governmental powers to a central authority -- the federal government -- in certain specified common affairs. As such, uncommon affairs are rightly the business of the states. I'll expand on this (federo) a bit next week.
Even Buganda's nemesis number one, Obote's UPC, seem to have finally (publicly) come around to some of the above tenets. Evidence of this can be detected in the rambling essay that one of their mouthpieces recently posted on the net entitled, funny enough, "What Will UPC Do to the Opposition?". In a section on, of all things, "Exhortation" they say:
" If, however, we feel that Uganda is an encumbrance and it cannot be sustained, then let us have no pretences, lets mutually agree so that each community goes its way. There is no point and its a waste of valuable time if some communities of the union feel cheated, marginalized, discriminated against and being deliberately left out, and others feeling strongly that they are being held back whereas they can go it alone."
Now, except the simultaneously deaf, mute and blind, it is no secret that Uganda is composed of communities that are different culturally, socially, linguistically, and just about any dimension one cares to think about.
Given this acknowledged diversity, it seems to me that only long-term solution to the question of governance is federalism. Under that arrangement, our Northern compatriots who have time and again, on the net, an innate fear that their balls would fall off if they postrated themselves before a king, would live happily ever after in their own state where they would not such an affront. Likewise, we the Baganda, would be free to do and behave in whatever manner we want with our Kabaka. In otherwords: each state or nation would be free to do as its cultural development allows and/or expects, without infringing upon anyone else.
I'd imagine that anyone familiar with Uganda's recent history would surely know that, at least in Buganda, we have had a CONSTITUTIONAL manarchy since circa 1955. Even if that were not the case, it'd be OUR (we the Baganda) business alone, what kind of kingship WE, the Baganda, want -- knowing fully well that OUR Kabaka does not have ANY influence WHATSOEVER, even ONE MILLIMETRE OUTSIDE of the Kingdom of Buganda.
Similary, we the Baganda, have absolutely NO right whatsoever in deciding whether the people of Lango or Madi or have a King or a Pope or an Emperor, or Governor, or a Rwot, or an Emir, a Sultan, a Primier, or whatever desigination they so choose to run affairs WITHIN THEIR society. In otherwords, the internal affairs of any community are that communities's business.
Thus, I disagree that monarchism and federalism are mutually exclusive.
The Baganda have no need to "market" federalism outside Buganda. I'd hope that the advantanges of federalism TO EVERY COMMUNITY are self-evident and need no special ''marketing" efforts. The inevitable alternative for Uganda given our socio-politico realities, I fear, is total disintegration at some point in time -- or perhaps a perpetual dictatorship.
It should be obvious to all that we are stronger together than each on our own. So let us work on finding ways in which we all not only benefit from our union, but also know exactly what those benefits are and how we benefit.
ssemakula
----Original Message Follows----
Mwaami Ssemakula,thanks for your question.From the start I do not think I said Federalism that I verystrongly support is incompartible with Monarchism, but from what most Federalist agitators in and withinBuganda appear to be gunning for,they are more interested in Monarchism than Federalism and thismakes the issue of Federalism thus harder to market outside Buganda because all the discussants appear not to be discussing from the same page.If you remember in a different fora the issue of a Karamojong being elected a Prime Minister in the Federal State of Busoga was raised and that "mu mbujjuvu" actually revealed what Federalism meant to most pe!
ople.Bundesrepublik Deutschland is a Federal State,so is Switzerland,Canada and to a certain extent the so called United Kingdom,this very much contrasts with the Monarchism that is practiced in Swaziland not very far from Uganda.Monarchism is more closely related to the totalitarian governance that we have had shoved downourb throats in Uganda for eon years.The only difference with this centrist totalitarianism is thatthe politicians at the centre of it all claim they got the mandate of the people to do whatever they havealways done. In Monarchism however leadership is not contested by all and saundry because geneologypredetermines who the leader should or should not be. In this respect therefore M!
onarchism and Federalism may afterall be mutually exclusive. Thanks. Kipenji.===========================================================--- J Ssemakula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mr. Owor Kipenji:
Do you think that Federalism and Monarchism are incompatable or mutually exclusive? Is so, why?
From: Owor Kipenji
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ugnet_: Go slow on federo says Kabaka Mutebi-Monitor 25/11/2002
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:05:50 +0000 (GMT)
Are we in Buganda for Federalism or Monarchism?. That is the issue I would like all peace loving Baganda whose "Ekitiibwa kyava da" to discuss with the rest of Ugandans for I am an ardent supporter of Federalism.
Thanks.
Kipenji.
--- jonah kasangwawo wrote:
Kipenji,
what issues do you have exactly in mind ?
> Kasangwawo
From: Owor Kipenji
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ugnet_: Go slow on federo says Kabaka Mutebi-Monitor 25/11/2002
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:15:03 +0000 (GMT)
I hear you loud and clear!.Could we then start addressing the real issues other than misreading what the other may have meant or not meant to say?.
Thanks.
Kipenji.
>=====================================================
--- jonah kasangwawo wrote:
Well, if you understood, you didn't seem to differentiate between what the Kabaka said and what others said. I was specifically addressing Kabaka's statements when I said there were no contradictions, remember ?
But before we continue talking past each other, let me stress that I, for one, don't view the restoration of the monarchy as a favour. It is a right of the people of Buganda to have their monarchy and, lest you forget, they also spilt their blood for it.
> Kasangwawo
From: Owor Kipenji
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ugnet_: Go slow on federo says Kabaka Mutebi-Monitor 25/11/2002
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 14:33:43 +0000 (GMT)
Thanks for your apologist attitudes and posturing as if to say I never understood that the lady you now want to disenfranchise from Buganda said it. If all these types of statements are considered in their totality the fact still remains that restoration or giving of the monarch should not be seen as a favour for which a people whose livelihood and hence culture revolve around should forever be grateful.We have to reach a stage when we have to differentiate rights from previledges in order to be able not to cheerlead dictators calling them benovalent.That would indeed be an oxymoron.
That is what I wanted to pass and I still stand by it.
Thanks.
Emirembe gibe nawe.
Kipenji.
======================================================================
--- jonah kasangwawo wrote:
Kipenji,
it is necessary to understand the language of Ugandans. When they say that Mu7 gave us the monarchy, what they actually mean is that it was restored under his government (although I'm sure he had a hand in the decision and through negotiations). It is similar to when they say that Obote killed us.
This doesn't mean the man himself actually took the gun and shot people. That said, I'd hate to think that you are attributing the statement, which you found demeaning, to the Kabaka. He never said it. And before I hear shouts from all sorts of corners, let me stress that the lady MP who said it is not even an ethnic Muganda. But she has a right to her opinions.
> Kasangwawo
From: Owor Kipenji
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ugnet_: Go slow on federo says Kabaka Mutebi-Monitor 25/11/2002
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:56:07 +0000 (GMT)
I want to believe there is no contradictions in these statements.That granted what I find demeaning is the statement that Mu7 gave us the monarchy and since we are not sure whether his successor will be pro monarchism we have to start or should we continue negotiating for it?.I have all along thought and known that the Monarch was there even before the colonial times and to read this type of statements is to say the least very mind boggling.What Mu7 has done is actually to undermine the Monarchy so that it becomes subservient to him and hence this type of statements.
B4 1966 everybody who cares to know, knows what the monarchy was about and if that is what we want under the aegesis of Federalism then we can hide under these nefarious statements.
Thank you.
Kipenji.
jonah kasangwawo wrote:
I don't see any contradiction between what the Kabaka said previously and what is reported in the article below.
All he is stressing is that federo needs to be negotiated (and not achieved by other means). This in no way
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
