Agree to Agree! The Hidden Democracy of One Party Rule

We, the United States, spend billions of dollars each year on military, diplomatic, and humanitarian efforts trying to root out tyranny and undemocratic societies consisting of one-party rule. We champion the benefits of democracy, liberty, freedom, and justice and praise those that welcome these ideals.

We, the United States, seek to eliminate the despotism that is so pervasive in many countries throughout the globe. The citizens of these countries have only one choice on the ballot when they enter the voting booth. We fight this corrupt insanity with passion and might.

And how many choices do we (Americans) have when we go to our treasured voting booths, two! Essentially, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah, we have the independents, the greens, the yellows, and the prohibitionists. But two, ha!

This was a joke told on Colin Quinn's one man Broadway show, Long Story Short. A comedic retelling of the history of the world through Colin Quinn's eyes.

But this post isn't about the shortcomings of American democracy. It seeks to shed some light (though from an outside source) on Ugandan politics, and maybe even reveal something.

Here in Uganda, in its most basic form, one party controls the country. The NRM (National Resistance Movement) controls a majority in Parliament, the Presidency since 1986 (one man), the electoral commission, redistricting efforts, and virtually everything else. Uganda has many parties. Some of these parties even show some semblance of strength and durability. But it is essentially a one-party-rule type country and has been for a quite a few years.

I started to think about this for a moment and all these thoughts started running through my mind. I kept drawing comparisons to America and our system of governance. The US is a developed country. We have many issues of debate in the public forum. And of course, every issue has two sides, and many times even more approaches.

In Uganda, there are many issues of debate in the public forum also. But the issues are mainly surrounded and engrossed in the idea of "development". Uganda wants to develop. All Ugandans know this. They want to see progress. They want to see better roads, better schools, better health facilities, better jobs, a better life. The question then becomes, which party and their leading candidate is going to best provide the critical societal services to the country.

The NRM promises to do so. And to a large extent, they have. If you chart the progress of the country for the last 20 years, the improvements are many and substantial. Uganda has come a long way since the brutal dictatorship and mass murder of civilians that took place in the 1970's. Uganda is a safe, peaceful, rich, free, and politically tolerable country (in the eyes of this observer). A friend of mine wrote a blog post recently about how he thought that even in the freest and fairest of elections, Museveni (current President and leader of the NRM) still would have won. And i have to agree with him, for the reasons mentioned earlier about what the NRM has done.

So the NRM has the support of the majority of voters on the development issues coupled with the fact that the NRM has not turned it guns on its own people. A big accomplishment in Africa. This makes it a popular party for the common man. And the common men are many. What is left to divide the electorate?

Social issues? Ugandans overwhelmingly agree with each other. There aren't two sides. There is the Ugandan side. Homosexuality - intolerable. Gun rights - what gun rights? Guns are bad. Capital punishment - I've heard stories of lethal reprisals against criminal acts carried out on the streets with no repercussions. Abortion - universally against. Religion - yes please, God will provide. Healthcare - we want improvements. Schools - we want improvements. Gay marriage - see homosexuality. Federal budget - bigger. Social security - yes.

What do Ugandans have to disagree over? Granted there are huge exceptions and caveats. But I'm simply trying to highlight a potential explanation to the one-party dynamic that originated so long ago. Uganda is a small country, roughly about the size of the state of Oregon. They are a small country with an incredibly homogenous population. Go anywhere in Uganda and the greeting is the same. "How are you? Thank you for the work!", just one example. They don't have near the amount of complexity and diversity the United States has, which can sometimes be a hindrance for government in a healthy sense, especially nowadays, but I digress.

Now, over time, I think this will change. As Ugandans become more and more educated, they will develop diverse and well informed opinions on political issues, and they are going to continue to crave big change. And, for the first time, be universally empowered to pursue it. I mean, the country just got their ducks in a row (sort of) on universal secondary education five years ago. Imagine what the country is going to look like 5, 10, 15 years from now when these educated masses are released into the real world of a struggling economy. I will be intrigued to observe the progress. Until then, "Thank you for reading. And thank you for the work!"

P.S. - Does anyone know if the federal government is going to shut down? Cuz if they are I'm kind of out of a job. Since Peace Corps is a USG agency. Any words of informed wisdom are appreciated. Vote Peace Corps!