Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Crisis of Legitimacy and Political Violence in Uganda, 1890 to 1979

Part of the book series: African Histories and Modernities ((AHAM))

  • 316 Accesses

Abstract

Uganda, as an imagined territorial state and a tragic human drama, was the “child” of the late nineteenth-century European expansionist violence. This child came into imperial “existence” in 1890, following the Anglo-German Agreement. Since that time, it has experienced intense political violence. Indeed, it has become an important example of a state that continues to be ravaged by harrowing political violence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    M. Mann, “The Autonomous Power of the State: Its Origins, Mechanisms and Results”, in J. A. Hall, ed., States in History. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986: 109–127, makes a distinction between infrastructural power, the capacity of the state to penetrate society by imposing its decisions, and despotic or direct, forceful power of the state and the state elite. According this observation, infrastructural power is compatible with democratic as well as totalitarian regimes. Contemporary Western democracies, this view maintains, are despotically weak but infrastructurally strong. Feudal states, on the other hand, were weak in both respects. Modern authoritarian states, it is further asserted, are despotically strong and infrastructurally strong. For informative debates about these political forms, see B. Buzan, “The Concept of National Security for Developing Countries,” in M. Ayoob and Chai-Anan Samudavanija, eds., Leadership Perceptions and National Security. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1988: 1–2; C. B. C. O’Brien, “The Show of State in Neo-Colonial Twilight: Francophone Africa,” in J. Manor, ed., Rethinking Third World Politics. London: Longman, 1991: 145–165. See also, D. K. Gupta, The Economics of Political Violence: The Effects of Political Instability on Economic Growth. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1990: 251–258; F. Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth. New York: Grove Press, 1963: 21–2, 72, 87, 102–103; R. J. Goldstein, Political Repression in Modern America. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman Publishing Co., 1978, especially: 530, 548; T. R. Gurr, Why Men Rebel. Princeton: New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1970: 3, 232; T. R. Gurr, “A Causal Model of Civil Strife: A Comparative Analysis Using New Indices,” The American Political Science Review, LXII, 4 (December, 1968): 1107; F. R. Von der Mehden, Comparative Political Violence. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973: 4–6; A. Dallin and G. N. Breslauter, Political Terror in Communist Systems. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1970: 127–129; D. Forster, Detention and Torture in South Africa. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987, especially: 7–29.

  2. 2.

    See, for a start, K. Lorenz. On Aggression. London: Methuen, 1967, especially: vii–x, 34–65, 237–8; A. Bandura, Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973; E. Fromm, The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winton, 1973; L. Berkowitz, A Survey of Social Psychology. Illinois: The Dryden Press, 1975, especially: 52–76; R. B. Lockard, “Reflections on the Fall of Comparative Psychology: Is there a Message for us all?”, American Psychologist, 26 (February 1971): 168–179; K. N. Waltz, Man, the State and War. New York: Columbia University Press, 1959: 16–41; W. Graylin, R. Macklin and T. M. Powledge, eds., Violence and the Politics of Research. New York: Plenum Press, 1981; C. C. O’Brien, Herod: Reflections on Political Violence. London: Hutchinson & Co, 1978; I. K. Feirabend, R. L. Fierabend and T. R. Gurr, eds., Anger, Violence and Politics: Theories and Research. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972; E. Zimmermann, Political Violence, Crises and Revolutions: Theories and Research. Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman, 1983; D. A. Hibbs, Mass Political Violence: A Cross-National Causal Analysis. New York: John Wiley & sons, 1973; T. Nardin, Violence and the State: a Critique of Empirical Political Theory. Beverly Hill, Sage Publications, 1971; M. Hoefnagels, ed., Repression and Repressive Violence. Amsterdam: Sets & Zeitlinger, 1976; K. W. Grundy and M. A. Weinstein, The Ideologies of Violence. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merill, 1974; H. L. Nieburg, Political Violence: the Behavioral Process. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1969.

  3. 3.

    See, for example, A. P. Schmid, Political Terrorism: A Research Guide to Concepts, Theories, Data Bases and Literature. New Brunswick, N. N.: Transaction, 1983: 20; Zimmermann, Political Violence, Crises and Revolutions: 6–15; S. P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968; Gurr, Why Men Rebel; C. Mitchell, M. Carleton and G. A. Lopez, eds., Government Violence and Repression: An Agenda for Research. Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1986: 7–10.

  4. 4.

    Schmid, Political Terrorism: 20. See also, H. Lasswell, Politics: Who gets What, When, How. New York: The World Publishing, 1958; Zimmermann, Political Violence, Crises and Revolutions: 6–15.

  5. 5.

    Schmid, Political Terrorism: 20; T. Nardin, “Conflicting Conceptions of Political Violence,” Political Science Annual, 4 (1973): 7.

  6. 6.

    See, for example, Nardin, “Conflicting Conceptions of Political Violence,”: 75.

  7. 7.

    Ibid: 99.

  8. 8.

    See, for example, H. Eckstein, “On the Ethnology of Internal Wars,” in Feirabend, et. al., Anger, Violence and Politics: 10–16.

  9. 9.

    Gurr, Why Men Rebel : 3–4.

  10. 10.

    See, for example, Eckstein, “On the Ethnology of Internal Wars,”: 10–16.

  11. 11.

    In his earlier work, “Urban Disorder: Perspectives from the Comparative Study of Civil Strife,” American Behavioral Scientist, II, 4 (March–April, 1968): 50–55, Gurr offered two seemingly contradictory solutions to the “urban disorder”: removal of the root causes of unrest; and strong and coherent state coercion. This work informed his definition of political violence and the subsequent thesis he developed in his pioneering work, Why Men Rebel. For a more rigorous and plausible explanation of political violence that engulfed the USA during this period, see H. L. Nieburg Political Violence. New York: St. Martins, Press, 1969: 75–97, 133–1263.

  12. 12.

    See, for a start, W. D. Jordan, White Over Black: American Attitudes Towards the Negro, 1550–1812. New York & London: W. W. Norton, 1977; S. I. Kutler, Looking For America. The People’s History. Second Edition. Vol. 1. New York & London, W. W. Norton, 1979: 350–358, 386–406; Looking for America: The Peoples History. Second Edition. Vol. 2. New York & London: W. W. Norton, 1979: 223–248; S. Carmichael and C. V. Hamilton, Black Power: The Politics of Liberation in America. New York: Vintage Books, 1967; M. Marable and L. Mullings, eds., Let Nobody Turn Us Around: Voices of Resistance, Reform, and Renewal. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2003.

  13. 13.

    In fact, Gurr’s own works, “Urban Disorder: Perspective from the Comparative Study of Civil Strife,” American Behavioral Scientist, II, 4 (March–April, 1968): 52; Why Men Rebel: 90–154, 234, 240, 251, 256, suggest that people are less likely to act violently against the state if they are convinced that the political system is legitimate.

  14. 14.

    Nieburg Political Violence: 9. Nieburg offered a devastating criticism of many theories of political violence in America: the riffaff theory, the gun theory, the McLuhan theory, the Lorenz-Ardrey killer-instinct or aggression theory, the frontier theory, the deprivation theory and the frustration-aggression theory. He then presented political violence in terms of the dynamics of bargaining relationships in society competing for choices, rewards, authority and scarce values. Political violence, he posited, creates and tests political legitimacy and conditions “the terms of all social bargaining adjustments.” It is an early warning system for a society in crisis. In keeping with his theory, which emphasized the political dimension of violence in social bargaining, Nieburg concluded that political violence is a natural bargaining behavior which cannot be eliminated, unless societies want to commit suicide. See Ibid: 5–163. See also, C. Von Clausewitz, On War. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1984. Here, war is presented as a form of political violence deployed for bargaining in politics. Similarly, T.C. Schelling, Arms and Influence. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960: 1, discussed arms in diplomacy as a form of bargaining. Works that adopted Nieburg’s definition of political violence include, F.R. Von der Mehden, Comparative Political Violence. N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1973: 7; Nardin, Violence and the State; Zimmermann, Political Violence, Crises and Revolutions; M. Hoefnagels, ed., Repression and Repressive Violence. Amsterdam & Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger, 1977: preface; B. Singh, “An Overview,” in Y. Alexander and S.M. Finger, eds., Terrorism: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York: The John Jay Press, 1977: 5–6.

  15. 15.

    Zimmermann, Political Violence, Crises and Revolutions: 9.

  16. 16.

    Joshua Mukasa, 34 years, graduate of Makerere University, and George Ogwang, 37 years, graduate of Makerere University, years, interviews by author, Kampala, December 12, 1992.

  17. 17.

    Joshua Mukasa, 34 years, graduate of Makerere University, and George Ogwang, 37 years, graduate of Makerere University, years, interviews by author, Kampala, December 12, 1992.

  18. 18.

    Joshua Mukasa, 51 years, graduate of Makerere University, and George Ogwang, 54 years, graduate of Makerere University, interviews by author, Kampala, December 10, 2009.

  19. 19.

    See G. A. Lopez, “A Scheme for the Analysis of Government as Terrorist,” in M. Stohl and G. Lopenz, eds., The State as Terrorist. West Point, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1984: 63.

  20. 20.

    Nardin, “Conflicting Conceptions of Political Violence,”: 75.

  21. 21.

    D. Pion-Berlin, The Ideology of State Terror: Economic Doctrine and Political Repression in Argentina and Peru. Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1989: 7.

  22. 22.

    The development of computer-based programs for analyses of enormous volume of data and the development of data banks have led to growing interests in cross-national quantitative studies of political violence. A good example of such a study is Feierabend, Feierabend and Gurr, eds., Anger, Violence and Politics: Theories and Research, especially: 185–221.

  23. 23.

    For a similar view, see A. Zwi and A. Ugalde, “Towards an Epidemiology of Political Violence in the Third World,” Social Science Medicine, 28, 7 (1981): 633; R. J. Goldstein, “The Limitations of Using Quantitative Data in Studying Human Rights Abuses,” Human Rights Quarterly, 8, 4 (November, 1986): 612–3; Von der Mehden, Comparative Political Violence: 4–6; Amnesty, Amnesty International Report. London, 6, 1 (1984): 2; M. Mitchell, M. Stohl and G. A. Lopez, “State Terrorism: Issues of Concept and Measurement,” in Stohl and Lopez, eds., Government Violence and Repression: An Agenda for Research. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1986: 2–3.

  24. 24.

    Nardin, Violence and the State: 11–33, made a similar observation about the study of political violence in other societies.

  25. 25.

    See, for example, R. Lemkin, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe. Washington, D.C.: Carneige Endowment for International Peace, 1974; I. Wallimann and M. N. Dobkowki, eds., Genocide and the Modern Age. New York: Greenwood Press, 1987: 237–251, F. Chalk and K. Jonassohn, The History and Sociology of Genocide: Analyses and Case Studies. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990; L. Kuper, Genocide: Its Political Use in the Twentieth Century. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981; E. Markusen and D. Kopt, The Holocaust and the Strategic Bombing: Genocide and Total War in the Twentieth Century. Boulder: Westview Press, 1995, especially: 35–55; A. Palmer, “Ethnocide,” in M. N. Dobkowski and I. Wallimann, eds., Genocide in Our Age. Ann Arbor, M.I.: Pierian Press, 1992: 1–21.

  26. 26.

    See, for a start, A. Sivanandan, A Different Hunger: Writings on Black Resistance. London Pluto Press, 1987, especially: 105, 108, 116, 120–126; P. Johnson, A History of the Jews. New York: Harper & Row, 1987: 423–517; W. Carr, A History of Germany, 1815–1985. Third Edition. London: Edward Arnold, 1987: 323–325; F. Gilbert, The End of the European Era, 1890 to the Present. Third Edition. New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1984: 287–89; W. Brink and L. Harris, Black and White. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1967, especially: 15–43; W. Jordan, White over Black; W. H. Chafe, “The Civil Rights Movement,” in A. F. Davis and H. D. Woodman, eds., Conflict and Consensus in Modern American History. Seventh Edition. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath & Company, 1988: 499.

  27. 27.

    See, for example, V. S. Peterson and A. S. Runyan, Global Gender Issues: Dilemmas in World Politics. Boulder, West View Press, 1993, 2; P. H. Merkl, “Approaches to the Study of Political Violence,” in Merkl, ed. Political Violence and Terror: Motifs and Motivations. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986: 21–59; S. Hassin, Jo Meteler Kamp and A. Todes, “A Bit on the Side?: Gender Struggles in the Politics of Transformation in S. Africa,” Transformation, 5 (1987): 3–32. An observation made by one of the most prominent historians, E.H. Carr, What Is History? London: Penguin Books, 1990: 12, about the construction of the image or history of Greece in the fifth century sheds more light on the discussion: “Our picture of Greece in the fifth century B.C. is defective not primarily because so many of the bits have been accidentally lost, but because it is, by and large, the picture formed by a tiny group of people in the city of Athens….Our picture has been preselected and predetermined for us, not so much by accident as by people who were consciously or unconsciously imbued with a particular view and thought the facts which supported that view worth preserving.”

  28. 28.

    See J.H. Scholar, Legitimacy in the Modern State. New Brunswick, N.J. & London: Transaction Books, 1981:17–30. Scholar noted that: “a claim to political power is legitimate only when the claimant can invoke some source of authority beyond or above himself [sic]. History shows a variety of such sources: immemorial custom, divine law, the law of nature, a constitution. … If a people hold the belief that existing institutions are “appropriate” or “morally proper,” then those institutions are legitimate.” For similar criteria, see also, A. Moulakis, ed., Legitimacy. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyer, 1986: 2–5; G. L. Clark and M. Dear, State Apparatus: Structures and Language of Legitimacy. Boston: Allen & Unwin, 1984: viii–5, 153; D. Betham, The Legitimation of Power. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press, 1991: 3–31; R. Barker, Political Legitimacy and the State. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990: 5–59; M. Wright, Systems of States. London: Leicester University Press, 1977: 153–173; N. N. Kittrie, The War Against Authority: From the Crisis of Legitimacy to a New Social Contract. Baltimore/London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995.

  29. 29.

    See, for example, K. W. Grundy, Guerrilla Struggle in Africa: An Analysis and Preview. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1971: 9–10.

  30. 30.

    C. A. McClelland, “Crisis and Threat in the International Setting: Some Relational Concepts,” Threat Recognition and Analysis Project (1975): 1–2, cited in M. Brecher, Decisions in Crisis: Israel, 1967 and 1973. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980: xi.

  31. 31.

    K. Miller and I. Iscoe, “The Concept of Crisis: Current Status and Mental Health Implications,” Human Organization, 22, 3 (Fall 1963): 196.

  32. 32.

    See, for example, T. Turner, “Zaire: Stalemate and Compromise,” Current History, 84, 501 (April 1985): 179–183; Miller and Iscoe, “The Concept of Crisis: Current Status and Mental Health Implications”: 195–200; A. R. Roberts, ed., Crisis Intervention Handbook: Assessment, Treatment and Research. Belmount, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1990: 8–11.

  33. 33.

    See, for example, Nzongola-Ntalaja, ed., The Crisis in Zaire: Myths and Realities. Trenton, New Jersey: Africa World Press, 1986: 5–7; L. Timberlake, Africa in Crisis: The Causes, the Cures of Environmental Bankruptcy. London and Washington, DC.: International Institute for Environment and Development. 1985; O. Otunnu, “Too Many, Too Long: African Refugee Crises Revisited,” Refuge, 12, 3 (1992): 18–26; R. M. Price, The Apartheid State in Crisis: Political Transformation in South Africa, 1975–1990. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991; R.E. Feinberg and V. Kallab, eds., Adjustment Crisis in the Third World. New Brunswick, USA and London: Transaction Books, 1984, especially: 5–10, 31–58.

  34. 34.

    See, for a start, Roberts, ed., Crisis Intervention Handbook: 8–11; Miller and Iscoe, “The Concept of Crisis: Current Status and Mental Health Implications,”: 195–200; Nzongola-Ntalaja, ed., The Crisis in Zaire: 5–7.

  35. 35.

    See, for example, Nzongola-Ntalaja, ed., The Crisis in Zaire: 5–7; J. Habermas, Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press, 1973, especially: 68–75.

  36. 36.

    For an outstanding study that associates the crisis of legitimacy with increased tensions, instability and violence, see Kittrie, The War Against Authority: From the Crisis of Legitimacy to a New Social Contract.

  37. 37.

    See, for a start, W. Connor, “A nation is a nation, is a state, is an ethnic group is a....,” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 1, 4 (October 1978): 441, 455; P. Vallieres, White Niggers of America: The Precocious Autobiography of Quebec “Terrorist.” New York: Monthly Review Press, 1971.

  38. 38.

    Grundy, Guerrilla Struggle in Africa: 9–10.

  39. 39.

    See, for example, Mann, “The Autonomous Power of the State: Its Origins, Mechanisms and Results”, in Hall, ed., States in History: 109–127.

  40. 40.

    See, for example, Buzan, “The Concept of National Security for Developing Countries,” in Ayoob and Samudavanija, eds., Leadership Perceptions and National Security: 1–2; O’Brien, “The Show of State in Neo-Colonial Twilight: Francophone Africa,” in Manor, ed., Rethinking Third World Politics: 145–165; T. R. Gurr, “Why Minorities Rebel: A Global Analysis of Communal Mobilization and Conflict since 1945,” International Political Science Review, 14, 2 (April 1993): 161–202; D. Rothchild, “Interethnic Conflict and Policy Analysis in Africa,” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 9, 1 (January 1986): 66–86; J. A. Hall, ed., States in History.: 109–136, 154–176; C. Ake, “The Future of the State in Africa,” International Political Science Review, 6, 1 (1985): 105–132; M. Mamdani, “Conceptualising State and Civil Society Relations: Towards a Methodological Critique of Contemporary Africanism,” in C. Auroi, ed., The Role of the State in Development Process. London: Frank Cass, 1992: 15–23.

  41. 41.

    T. N. Clark, “Clientelism, USA: The Dynamics of Change”, in L. Roniger and A. Gunes-Ayata, eds., Democracy, Clientelism, and Civil Society. Boulder, Colo: Lynee Rienner, 1994: 121–144, suggests a parallel between “Third World” patron-clients and American “machine politics.”

  42. 42.

    See Buzan, “The Concept of National Security for Developing Countries”: 1–2; O’Brien, “The Show of State in Neo-Colonial Twilight: Francophone Africa”: 145–65; Gurr, “Why Minorities Rebel: A Global Analysis of Communal Mobilization and Conflict since 1945”: 161–202; Rothchild, “Interethnic Conflict and Policy Analysis in Africa”: 66–86; Hall, ed., States in History: 109–136, 154–176.

  43. 43.

    See, for example, A. A. Mazrui, “Conflict as a Retreat from Modernity: A Comparative Overview,” in O. Furley, ed., Conflict in Africa. London: Tauris Academic Studies, 1995: 19; B. Ingham, “The Meaning of Development: Interactions Between “New” and “Old” Ideas,” World Development, 21, 11 (1993): 1803–1821.

  44. 44.

    For the purpose of this study, developmental dictatorship refers to dictatorship whose existence is justified by those in position of power in terms of the need for economic development and national integration. Proponents of this political and economic form claim that economic development and democratic practice are incompatible at a particular stage of economic and political [under]development. For an excellent discussion of this concept, see R. Sklar, “Democracy in Africa,” in P. Chabal, ed., Political Domination in Africa: Reflections on the Limits of Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986: 17–18. A. Leftwich, “Is there a socialist path to socialism?”, Third World Quarterly, 13, 1 (1992): 27–42, also provides a good analysis about how the quest for socialism led to developmental dictatorship in “socialist” states.

  45. 45.

    See, for a start, Sklar, “Democracy in Africa,” in Chabal, ed., Political Domination in Africa: Reflections on the Limits of Power: 17–29; Chabal, ed., Political Domination in Africa: 1–29, Mazrui, “Conflict as a Retreat from Modernity”: 19–27; L. Diamond, “Introduction: Roots of Failure, Seeds of Hope,” in L. Diamond, J. J. Linz, and S. M. Lipset, eds., Democracy in Developing Countries: Africa. Volume Two. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988: 13–23.

  46. 46.

    See Chabal, ed., Political Domination in Africa: 1–29; Sklar, “Democracy in Africa”: 17–29; Mazrui, “Conflict as a Retreat from Modernity”: 19–27; Diamond, et al., Democracy in Developing Countries: 13–23; Hall, ed., States in History: 154–176.

  47. 47.

    These policies are often imposed and enforced through repression, coercion and political violence. For excellent analyses of the possible links between the structural adjustment policies and authoritarianism in Africa, see P. Gibbon, Y. Bangura and A. Ofstand, eds., Authoritarianism and Adjustment: The Politics of Economic Reform in Africa. Uppsala: The Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, 1992; B. Onimode, A Future for Africa: Beyond the Politics of Adjustment. London: Earthscan, 1992; J. Torrie, ed., Banking on Poverty: The Global Impact of IMF and World Bank. Toronto: Between the Lines, 1983; T.W. Pariff, “Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics: The World Bank/ECA Structural Adjustment Controversy,” Review of African Political Economy, 47 (Spring 1990): 128–141.

  48. 48.

    See Hall, “States and Economic Development: Reflections on Adam Smith,” in Hall, ed. States in History: 154–176. For discussions about the NICS, see, for a start, P. Donaldson, Worlds Apart: The Development Gap and What it Means. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1986: 70–89; B. Crow and M. Thorpe, et al., Survival and Change in the Third World. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988: 210–241.

  49. 49.

    Sklar, “Democracy in Africa”: 17–29, maintained that legitimacy and economic development are not incompatible. The former President of Tanzania, J. Nyerere, made a similar observation during the Leadership Forum in Kampala in May 1991: “The worst deficit we have is the deficit of democracy. We thought we could develop without involving the people.... We tried to build socialism without socialists; we tried to create capitalism without entrepreneurs! But we tried. The West should pay us reparations for all the harm some of their ideas have done to us.” Quoted in “Back to the Future,” New African, July 1991: 11. Admittedly, the relationship between dictatorship and economic cum political development, on the one hand, and democracy and economic cum political development, on the other, remains a subject of endless controversy. See, for example, A. Benachenhu, “State and Civil Society: Prospects for the Theme,” in C. Auroi, ed., The Role of the State in Development Process. London: Frank Cass, 1992: 7–13; G. Sorensen, “Democracy, Dictatorship and Development. Consequences for Economic Development of Different Forms of Regime in the Third World,” in Auroi, ed., The Role of the State in Development Process: 39–57.

  50. 50.

    See, for a start, A. A. Mazrui, Soldiers and Kinsmen in Uganda. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications, 1975; “Leadership in Africa: Obote of Uganda,” International Journal, 3 (Summer 1970): 538–564; “Lumpen Proletariat and Lumpen Militariat: African Soldiers as a New Political Class,” Political Science, 21, 1 (1973): 1–12; “The Social Origins of Ugandan Presidents: From King to Peasant Warrior,” Canadian Journal of African Studies, 8, 1 (1974): 3–23; A. G. G. Ginyera-Pinycwa, Apolo Milton Obote and His Times. London: Nok Publishers (1978); Issues in Pre-Independence Politics in Uganda. Kampala: East African Literature Bureau, 1976; A. Omara-Otunnu, Politics and the Military, 1890–1985. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987; J. Jorgensen, Uganda: A Modern History. London: Croom Helm (1981); J. M. Mittleman, Ideologies and Politics in Uganda: From Obote to Amin. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1975; F. B. Welbourn, Religion and Politics in Uganda, 1952–1962. Nairobi: East African Publishing House, 1965;M. Mamdani, From Citizen to Refugee: Ugandan Asians Come to Britain. London: Frances Printer, 1973; Imperialism and Fascism in Uganda. N.J.: Africa World Press, 1984; Politics and Class Formation. London: Heinemann, 1977; N. Kasfir, The Shrinking Political Arena: Participation and Ethnicity in African Politics: A Case Study of Uganda. Barkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1976; “The 1967 Uganda Constituent Assembly Debate,” Transition, 33, 7 (1967): 52–56; S. R. Karugire, A Political History of Uganda. Nairobi & London: Heinemann, 1980; Roots of Instability in Uganda. Fountain Publishers, 1996. See also, C. Gertzel, “Leadership and Institution-Building in Uganda,” African Review, 2, 1 (June 1972): 175–88; Party and Locality in Northern Uganda, 1945–1962. London: Athlone Press, 1974; C. Young, “The Obote Revolution,” Africa Report, 11, 6 (June 1966): 8–14; “The Uganda Army: Nexus of Power,” Africa Report, 11, 9 (1966): 37–39; M. E. Lofchie, “The Political Origins of the Ugandan Coup,” Journal of African Studies, 1 (1972): 464–490; “The Ugandan Coup: Class Action by the Military,” Journal of Modern African Studies, 10, 1 (May 1972): 19–35; M. H. Segall, M. Doornbos and C. Davis, “Political Identity: A Case Study from Uganda,” Foreign and Comparative Studies/Eastern Africa. XXIV, Syracuse University (1976); R. Mukherjee, Uganda: An Historical Accident? Trenton, N.J.: Africa World Press, 1985; T. Aasland, “On the Move-to-the-Left in Uganda, 1967–1971,” Research Report, 26 (Uppsala: the Scandinavian Institute of African Studies (1974)); T. V. Sathyamurthy, The Political Development of Uganda, 1900–1986. Hants, England: Gower Publishing, 1986; Uganda Protectorate, Report of the Commission appointed to Review the Boundary between the Districts of Bugishu and Bukedi. Entebbe: Government Printer, 1962; Uganda Protectorate, Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Disturbances in Eastern Province. Entebbe: Government Printer, 1960.

  51. 51.

    See, for example, P. Mutibwa, Uganda since Independence. Kampala: Fountain Publishers, 1992; Kiwanuka, Amin and the Tragedy of Uganda; S. R. Karugire, Roots of Instability in Uganda. Fountain Publishers, 1996. See also, Uganda Government, The Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Violations of Human Rights. Kampala, 1994; K. Ingham, Obote: A Political Biography. London & New York: Routledge, 1994; E. Mutesa, The Desecration of My Kingdom. London: Constable, 1967; Y. Museveni, What is Africa’s Problem? Kampala: NRM Publications, 1992.

  52. 52.

    Nardin, Violence and the State : 10.

  53. 53.

    Kasozi, The Social Origins of Violence in Uganda: 4–10.

  54. 54.

    Nieburg, Political Violence: the Behavioral Process: 40.

  55. 55.

    See P. Wilkinson, “Social Scientific Theory of Violence”, in Y. Alexander, D. Carlton and P. Wilkinson, eds., Terrorism: Theory and Practice. Boulder, Colorado: WestView Press, 1979: 59; Zimmermann, Political Violence, Crises, and Revolutions: 32, 142–3; Nardin, “Conflicting Conceptions of Political Violence”: 101.

  56. 56.

    Similar reappraisal have revealed serious flaws in many works. For example, C. Pratt, “Colonial Governments and the Transfer of Power in Africa,” in P. Grifford and W.M. R. Louis, eds. Transfer of Power in Africa: Decolonization, 1940–1960. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982: 249, pointed out that, unlike more recent confessions of lack of objectivity made in British writings on India, none, if any, is made on the British writings on Africa. Referring to the period of decolonization, he contended that a “great deal of highly sympathetic scholarly and semischolarly writing has praised the planning and foresight of the Colonial Office and the colonial governments during the period in which power was transferred.” Some of the “sympathetic” British scholars he mentioned, such as D.A. Low and M. Perham, have been extensively quoted in many works on Uganda. In a similar vein, Chabal, ed., Political Domination in Africa: 2–3, called for a reassessment of existing works on Africa “because of the unsatisfactory state of our understanding of the social and political processes which determine the fate of the continent.” In his view, such an assessment is possible because the “added depth of historical perspective now makes it possible to see present-day African politics within its proper context.” W. Conner, “When is a nation?”, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 13, 1 (January 1990), especially: 92–3, made a similar plea for the reassessment of the works of many distinguished historians of European nations because more recent works, including that by E. Weber, have repudiated an important portion of the conventional scholarship on European nations.

  57. 57.

    See J. Vansina, Oral Tradition. Middlesex, England, Penguin Books, 1973; J. Tosh, The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions in the Study of Modern History. London & New York: Longman, 1984: 48–64, 93–126, 152–196; M. Glazer, The Research Adventure: Promise and Problems of Field Work. Toronto: Random House, 1972; D. J. Casley and D. A. Lury, Data Collection in Developing Countries. Second Edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DePaul University, Chicago, USA

    Ogenga Otunnu

Authors
  1. Ogenga Otunnu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Otunnu, O. (2016). Introduction. In: Crisis of Legitimacy and Political Violence in Uganda, 1890 to 1979. African Histories and Modernities. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33156-0_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33156-0_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-33155-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-33156-0

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation