Talkative Polity. Florence Brisset-Foucault

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ was born out of the attachment to intellectual political debate rather than radical ideals of democracy. It had nothing to do with the model of the Resistance Councils, in which these men were not interested.⁴⁵ In a certain way, the beginnings of Ekimeeza reflected an ideal of a bourgeois liberal public sphere and a desire to be distinguished from the citizenship promoted by the Movement.

      These men’s moderate position toward Ganda royalism should also be noted, and can again be better understood by taking into account their socioeconomic status and trajectories. The historicals considered they had benefited from the change of regime and did not come from radical royalist family backgrounds. They did not see their social and moral fulfillment as being ontologically linked with the restoration of the kingdom. Their attachment, in some cases, to the institution of kingship and to the king in person did not encourage any support for the radical royalist politics of the 1990s and the 2000s, but led instead to a desire to act as intermediaries and to protect a certain social and economical stability, in accordance with their discreet comprehension of political action.

      Nor were they champions of multipartyism. As a matter of fact, the historicals’ attachment to the Movement system also came from their own strong hostility to party politics. Their position reflects how Museveni’s leftist historical diagnosis of the necessity of avoiding political parties on the count that African societies were not divided along class lines was amalgamated with an elitist hostility to mass party politics seen as vulgar and perilous.⁴⁶ For these highly educated men, the absence of party politics was regarded as a condition for a sane and high-quality debate, based on personal ideas rather than party discipline or ethnic and religious identities. Their hostility to party politics was intertwined with an ideal of political engagement that had to be very light, discreet, and intellectual, and that thus diverged from the “official” Movement ideology. This was reflected in the comments the historicals made on the new generations of Ekimeeza speakers, whom they often accused of “politicizing” excessively the topics of discussion. As James Wasula explained:

      I don’t like [political] parties. They tend to oppose anything, so whatever topic you bring they will be on the opposition. It’s funny—I don’t know how it happens, but that’s how it happens.

      Q: It also depends on how you write the question, actually—

      A: No. It’s so funny. [. . .] There was a topic on football and people who would not support were all from the opposition.

      Q: Didn’t support what?

      A: You know, there was [. . .] a committee which was administering the administration of football in Uganda, so we wanted to talk about football and actually the invited guests were mainly from the football fraternity. But the few that participated from Ekimeeza, those who opposed the topic, were from the opposition. And it had nothing to do with politics (he laughs).⁴⁷

      The “partisanization”⁴⁸ of the Ekimeeza was regretted and associated with sterile debate, emotionality, and lack of content. For the historicals, on the contrary, not being in a party reflected a certain political sophistication and independence of mind, and the fact that the opinions expressed were based on the strength of arguments rather than political discipline. Political competition and antagonisms, however, were far from absent from the Ekimeeza, as we will see in detail in the next chapters.

      The Social Composition of Ebimeeza Audiences

      As mentioned, founding members invited their famous friends to attend the discussions. This was an extension of their usual social and political practices and ensured the maintenance of a certain standing.⁴⁹ But it was also a commercial strategy. The presence of political celebrities, in particular Capt. Mike Mukula, former minister of health; Tim Lwanga, at that time minister of ethics and integrity; Capt. Francis Babu, former minister of work, housing, and communications; and Nyombi Thembo, minister of the Luwero Triangle, attracted more people.⁵⁰ Exclusive sociability had thus an ambivalent dimension: high connections were indeed the privilege of a happy few, but the commercial and social value of the Ekimeeza was to make these connections public, and to make more people feel part of the circle.

      And indeed, from the end of the year 2000, the audience of the debate enlarged progressively. A new generation of speakers began to attend. They were professional cadres, international corporate organizations, and administration employees, all from different social backgrounds. Among these was L.N., born in 1977 to an Acholi father working in customs. In 2001, he graduated in administration and public management. While a student, he was a member of the executive of the Uganda National Students Association and guild vice president. He worked at the office of the vice president as an assistant coordinator for the National Youth Development Project. He was also an elected member of the National Youth Council, representing a Northern District. He resigned in 2003 because, according to him, it was “turning into a Movement project.” He then went into business and consultancy for the government until he found a position in an international NGO.

      Before engaging in the discussions, L.N. frequented Club Obbligato for the good food and the music. He went there with his colleagues from the vice president’s office and had never met the historicals before.⁵¹ His participation in the discussions was thus linked to the professional world and the fact that the club was frequented by executives from the administration. However, it reflected more generally a generational, ethnic, and political opening of the Ekimeeza. Supporters of the opposition favoring multipartyism, who had important experiences as student activists and who had only childhood memories of Idi Amin or the Bush War, began to frequent the club. People from Northern Uganda also started to come.

      In this context and in the middle of the heated electoral campaign of 2001, Maria Kiwanuka, director of Radio One and one of Wamala’s friends, came to Club Obbligato and attended one of the debates.⁵² Enthusiastic about the quality of the discussions and looking for a new product to position the station editorially and commercially during the campaign, she asked one of her journalists to “format [the discussions] for radio broadcasting.”⁵³ Sources do not concur on the date of the first broadcast, but it most likely occurred in March 2001,⁵⁴ between the presidential and the general elections.⁵⁵ Economic interest is important to explaining the emergence of the Ekimeeza. Wamala overcame his original reluctance to broadcast the discussions: “We agreed [to broadcast] because [the radio station] came with a package. They would give us beers to give to the people who come to discuss. [. . .] We sell [them for] 1,000 shillings instead of 2,000.”⁵⁶ The Ekimeeza did not generate money in itself: the earnings of the beer sales went directly to the club.⁵⁷ According to Wasula, the Ekimeeza did not represent a major source of income for Club Obbligato compared to the concerts,⁵⁸ although it was definitely an opportunity for free advertising.

      Even if some among the original members chose to leave, the audience kept growing, in particular in the electoral context. After the historicals and the cadres, students were another population that came to the club: they were mainly men born in the 1970s, most not married and childless, with far more modest incomes. They came in groups, often from campus, after they heard the show on the radio. Again, this audience was diversified ethnically and politically. B.W. and W. K., both members of political parties, from Eastern and Northwestern Uganda, respectively, came at that time.

      B.W. was born in 1973 in Mbale.⁵⁹ He was a Mugisu and a Catholic. His mother was a teacher and his father worked in the administration. He graduated with degrees in education and biology from Makerere, where he led a Hall and was a member of the Panafrican Club, in which he met important leaders of the NRM. He became a teacher, first in a secondary school, then at a private university. He was well known for supporting the NRM and was often teased about it by other members of the Ekimeeza. He was part of the Pan-African Movement, an organization close to the NRM that also organized debates.

СКАЧАТЬ