POLITICS OF POLARISATION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS A CASE FOR DEMOCRACY IN UGANDA
Polarised mindsets have negated inclusivity. But democracy demands reaching conclusions that benefit the national, social, economic, and political situation. Instead, what boosts the collective national growth has been sacrificed at the expense of what benefits individual political parties.
In 1962, Uganda became independent. It had been a British protectorate since 1894. Far from having a positive expectation, the country exploded into turmoil. This was manifested by power struggles to ensure its social, economic, and political directions. Within 30 years, nine presidents ruled the country. The country also registered three decades of a single political party system. It was not until 1996 through a national referendum, that the long-dreamt idea of democracy and its principles came to fruition.
Related Articles
SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN THE EASTERN REGION OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO
Given that survivors of sexual violence are often stigmatised by their communities and abandoned by their husbands, the JRS not
ENGAGING WITH POLARISATION
Polarisation comes in different forms. An important distinction can be made between ideological and affective polarisation. Ideological (or issue-based) polarisation
ETHNIC, RELIGIOUS AND IDEOLOGICAL DIVIDES CATALYSTS FOR SOCIETAL POLARISATION
Ethnic divides can significantly contribute to societal polarisation, often with tragic outcomes, as exemplified by the Holocaust. Defeated and economically
