This is clearly a deliberate misinformation from Bukenya, singing his master’s voice. Where and who asked for absolute monarchism? Certainly, not Mengo. People understand the difference between monarchism and federalism. Secondly, the government does not give power – people give power. Anyway, why did Bukenya’s refuse to abide by the referenda about federalism? I am sorry to ask – who are Bukenya’s parents? (Following on the news article having had the trouble to mention that Bukenya is a Muganda).
I sometimes find cause to indulge into analysing some of the sweeping paradigms, which eventually become beliefs. One such is democracy. One definition: democracy is a political system in which all the members of the society have an equal share of formal political power. How does federalism fail this definition? Instead, we see what is called Ugandan centralism so far (from Obote I, Amin, Obote II, and now Museveni) failing democratic principles by degenerating into oligarchies – the political, economic and military power in Ugandan governments have so far effectively rested upon those elite, who are royal to the presidency (not to the people of Uganda – so, for example, they could remove presidential term limits). Indeed, these families prepare their children to be heirs of the power of the Ugandan oligarchy; wait to see Gabonese succession in Uganda. The kingdom of Buganda and the demand for federalism is simply standing against that centralist oligarchy.
Nonetheless, Bukenya’s assertion that once there is one person one vote is democracy is also terribly misleading. Not only have we seen that votes are bought and stolen, particularly in Uganda, but also that it is really financial capacity, which determines the votes in most countries. Absolute democracy (just like absolute monarchism) is currently a myth. On the other hand, federalism brings democracy and political power closer to the people. Federalism differs from Bukenya’s decentralisation in that federalism renders political power to federal states – decentralisation simply gives (Bukenya’s own words!) some responsibilities to districts, while the central oligarchy holds the political power. The current centralists simply fear to lose their controlling position to loot from the centre.
Moreover, while democracy is bears some desirable attributes, it has been thus desirable in some so called democratic countries for some other hidden interests. In some of the Western democracies, there were fears of community or tribal, often indigenous groups, which the conquering powers, looking for resources to support their economies, deliberately had to obliterate. In the USA, were the Red Indians and one way of liquidating their legitimate claim over the USA was to introduce one person one vote, as soon as the Whites became the majority. So was the case in Australia, as a British extension. In both these cases the aboriginals were killed en mass and rounded up into camps, while at the same time the powers encouraged immigration, not of any other race but Europeans – so as to increase their majorities. THEN they introduced one person one vote. To some extent, this has happened in Buganda – killing, immigration of other tribes, and a demand for one man one vote about the Kingdom of Buganda.
My prediction is that the one person one vote format will change as soon as Whites become minorities in the USA and Australia. In fact, the voices supporting power and representation of minority groups have become louder. The point I am raising is that the one reason for the one vote philosophy is that it has benefitted immigrant majorities – it has enabled control by immigrant majorities. I think this is clearly demonstrated in Bunyoro and Buganda where Bafuruki win elections, and traditional institutions are deliberately being weakened.
Extrapolate my hypothesis to Uganda – some of the people most vocal against federalism are those who enjoy control and plunder of ‘national’ resources. In similar light, the East African community will help some dispersed ethnic groups like Banyarwanda to simply disappear as a group, while controlling federal governments.