How Besigye’s hold over FDC has undermined its pretence to
be a vehicle for democracy
“Follow an idea from its birth to its triumph,”
Bertrand de Jouvenel observed in his 1948 volume, On Power, “and it becomes
clear that it came to power at the price of an astounding degradation of
itself. The result is not reason which has found a guide but passion which has
found a flag.”
The defeat of the noble Mugisha Muntu in the race for the
presidency of the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) has put the last nail in
the coffin of decent politics in that party. It marks the final triumph of
Kizza Besigye’s brand of politics i.e. radical extremism as an organising
philosophy.
Two ideas have been in contention inside FDC – one
represented by the Muntu, the other by Besigye. Muntu believes that FDC should
build the party as an institution based on a set of values, principles and
policies around which members can be mobilised. These values must not only be
practiced but be seen by seen to be practiced; and must distinguish FDC from
NRM.
Besigye believes FDC should be a cult and build its politics
around his messianic self-image. Rather than build organisational structures
through which that party can function, Besigye believes FDC should stimulate
passion around him as a hero. This governing philosophy seeks to use character
instead of strategy and to build an individual instead of an institution.
Besigye’s governing philosophy won because it has the
support of the most passionate base of the FDC. Muntu’s vision never had a
chance even though it is supported by the most liberal and enlightened section
of that party. The vast majority of the FDC supporters do not care about
Muntu’s values and principles. All they care about is power. Muntu has been
unable to appreciate the fact – that most people in FDC are tired of President
Yoweri Museveni’s long rule and want him to go. Governance principles are for
the naive.
This is where Besigye beats Muntu. Besigye understands that
those opposed to Museveni are opposed to the president as a person, not his
governing strategy of corruption and patronage. Given Uganda’s moral
psychology, opposition activists want Besigye to give them goodies in the same
way Museveni does for his supporters. They accuse those who speak anything
positive about Museveni of having been paid precisely because that is how they
understand power; that those who support it get paid.
Therefore, Muntu has always belonged to a wrong party. His
ways have never been the ways of the FDC. There are many decent men and women
in FDC.
But for the most part they have been outwitted, out gunned and out
maneuvered by the radical extremists around Besigye. In rejecting Muntu, the
Besigye faction of radical extremists in FDC has rejected the idea that power
should be pursued, not as an end in itself but as a means to an end – the end
being the realisation of the virtues of tolerance of dissent, commitment to
democratic principles, belief in institution building, and placing collective
goals above personal ambition and greed.
We must not forget that like NRM, the FDC was born in a
moment of great hope.
Many of its founding leaders were holding influential and
comfortable positions in government as ministers, ambassadors and other high
offices. They sacrificed their comfort in pursuit of these high ideals. They
thought they were leaving NRM because it had increasingly come to be based on
the messianic role of Museveni whose authority could not be questioned.
No comments:
Post a Comment