8
“Federalism”
Manipulation, Exploitation, and Reciprocity
Ssaalongo Kiwanuka Matovu Deziderio (1924–2015) composed the song “Federalism” (“Federo”) in 1996. The composition was a musical response to various political events, most notably the National Resistance Movement (NRM) government’s refusal to restore federalism in the 1995 constitution. Federalism had been a topic of heated debate in the national parliament since 1993, when President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni’s administration restored all the kingdoms that the 1967 constitution had abolished. The Kingdom of Buganda pushed for the restoration of this system, but the national government ignored its demands. To draw the government’s attention to the Baganda’s disappointment in President Museveni’s administration and to contest the government’s decision, Deziderio composed “Federalism” and performed it at various social and political gatherings (including at my wedding in 2006) in hopes that he would spark change. Deziderio had this to say about the song after performing the version analyzed in this chapter:
These lyrics indirectly express how federalism was generally a peaceful political arrangement in Uganda. In this system, every person had authority over their own area, whereas the republic system instituted after political independence in 1962 enabled some people to take advantage of others, abusing them and stealing their property. Federalism accounted for everyone, and therefore many people would support it today. Because of the system’s eminence and likability, this song urges the national government to restore federalism. The song presents federalism not just as the people’s agreement but also one through which God works, suggesting that animals also have federalism among them. Because every animal has its own niche, the hippopotamus (envubu) sleeps in water, not in the marsh (a type of wetland, olusa), while the sitatunga (a type of antelope, enjobe) sleeps in the marsh, but the two kinds of animals share the same feeding grounds, because they all eat at a meadow (ettale). After they eat their fill, each one returns home to where it sleeps. When this was a governmental arrangement, people in the assembly or parliament would join forces while working in the same space. When they were done, everyone would clean up and return to their respective areas, the Kingdom of Bunyoro, the Kingdom of Busoga, the Kingdom of Ankole, and other regions that are not kingdoms. If Ugandans did so today, instability and conflict could be alleviated.
Before 1966, the national government collected one shilling out of ten taxed to give to the Buganda government in Mmengo, and this money helped the king greatly. Citizens paid twenty-five shillings every month, ten shillings as the king’s tax and fifteen shillings as graduated or poll tax. Accordingly, a taxpayer received two receipts. Citizens also faced a land tax (obusuulu), which came after oluwalo, another form of land tax and from which the king often exempted some of his musicians. Beneficiaries never did communal work (bulungi bwansi) such as plowing, digging, or maintaining roads in their home villages. Paying land tax on one’s land meant the government would not evict them from their plot. In fact, once someone paid land tax, no one bothered them. These arrangements defined the later years of the colonial and postindependence eras, during which the king of Buganda, Sir Edward Muteesa II (r. 1939–1966), was the president of Uganda. When the national government dismantled the kingship in 1966, they removed land tax, which Buganda has attempted to revive in recent years. Many Baganda long for a better tax system, as the current one seems to disproportionately benefit the national government at the expense of the region of Buganda. The government has expanded many tax funds to their limit, exceeding what average people are able to pay without relinquishing all of their earnings, yet some government officials fail to pay any.
King Mutebi II (r. 1993–present) once asked me to perform “Federalism” on Central Broadcasting Services (CBS, Buganda’s central radio). The engagement was an opportunity to aid many people’s understandings of the changes that Buganda and Uganda faced after 1966.
1Deziderio interview, July15, 2005.As Deziderio demonstrates, “Federalism” is not just background entertainment for people to consume blindly. Rather, it is a veritable political commentary worthy of the public’s attention. Deziderio’s earlier performances of the song were themselves a part of the composition, which articulates why the federalist system is relevant to people’s daily lives and choices.
Deziderio’s performance of “Federalism” opens with the bow strokes of the tube fiddle (endingidi), which he plays rapidly in triple meter. Soon his vocals start up, continuing throughout the entire song without any substantial pauses. The tube fiddle part continuously fluctuates between three central notes with occasional glides that deviate from the norm. While this repetition is unchanging, it does not lock neatly into a structured pattern, and as such, it lets the song be spontaneous. This balance between rehearsed and improvised performance is evident in the character of the lyrics, which are simultaneously declarative and emotionally charged. The balance in question lends itself to the nature of African music performance, in which no two performances of a piece ever sound the same. Deziderio adopts a chanting vocal style, which signifies the seriousness of the song’s subject matter. The timbre of his voice is loud, impassioned, and even hoarse at times, conveying a sense of wisdom and experience. The singer begins each melodic phrase at generally the same pitch, only sometimes dipping up or down toward the end of the phrase. Through this use of repetition and continuity, his lyrics sound meditative and introspective, taking on an almost sacred quality. The texture of the song barely changes, maintaining the lead vocal melody against the busy accompaniment of the tube fiddle. Although there are only two elements of sound in the performance, the energetic sincerity of the voice coupled with the swift momentum of the tube fiddle creates enough rhythmic and polyphonic texture to feel full and dynamic. That the song is performed by only one musician strengthens the personal, diaristic nature of the lyrics. Although Deziderio conveys many different ideas, the lyrics’ sonic quality is quite uniform, such that the performance becomes contemplative; at the same time, the singer spurts out the lyrics quickly, endowing the song with a sense of urgency that suits its political subject matter. Deziderio’s lyrics are as follows:
1 Nandigambye ntya, nga eyankwana yabula, nandigambye ani?
What would I say, when the one who wooed me disappeared, who would I tell?
2 Kaakati olowooza otya, nga wankwana, nandigambye ntya?
How do you now think, when you wooed me, how would I say?
3 Abange nga Katonda bw’abeera, nga Katonda bw’atuusa, olowoozanga
Friends, just as God assists, just as God fulfills, always think
4 Abange nga Katonda bw’abeera, nange n’amala Ambeera, olowozaanga
Friends, just as God assists, if He can also assist me, always think
5 Balisanga tubuusabuusa, nti okukkiriza kuba kwa bato, olowoozanga
They will find us doubting, as believing is for the young, always think
6 Abange endowooza ya bonna, nga endagaano bw’ebeera, nandigambye ntya?
Friends, a consensus, just like an agreement, how would I say?
7 Bannange okuva ku ndagaano ziri, okutuuka ku y’olwenda, zaakolwanga baki?
Friends, from the past agreements, to that of 1900, who drafted them?
8 Abange okuva ku ndagaano ziri, okutuuka ku y’o lwenda, zaakolwanga nnannyinimu
Friends, from the past agreements, to that of 1900, they were created by the householder
9 Ate okuva ku y’olwenda, okutuuka ku za leero, zino za kanyoolabikya
And from that of 1900, to the current ones, these are neck twisters
10 Abasajja abaakola endagaano empya, bbaffe mwamusuula nnyo, mwamujooga nnyo
The men who drafted the new agreement, you left out our husband, you belittled him a lot
11 Omuntu okuliira ewa munno, w’otemedde n’otamuwa, ye muli alowooza atya?
Feasting from another’s place, butchering meat from there but you do not share with one, how would one feel?
12 Abange mwandiridde za musolo, oluwalo lubeera lulwe, afunenga ky’alyako
Friends, you could have embezzled graduated tax, and leave the land tax to him, so that he earns a living
13 Na wano e Kampala, yalinga emu ku kkumi eriweebwa, nga nayo emuyamba era
Even here in Kampala, it was initially a tenth of the collections, and it would benefit him
14 Naye bambi zonna mwazigatta wamu, ez’oluwalo n’omusolo, ne mulya ne mwekkutira
But sadly you consumed it all, land and graduated taxes, and you embezzled to your satisfaction
15 Kaakati mukuba bibejjagalo, mukuba bibejjagalo
Now you are belching, you are belching
16 Kaakati mukuba bibejjagalo, n’omuto avuga mmotoka, ffe ababe tukomba vvu
Now you are belching, even the young drive cars, yet we—his subordinates—are licking ashes
17 Njagala mutuule wamu, mukole endagaano endala, federo mugizzeewo
I want you to sit together, and draft another agreement, and reinstate federalism
18 Endagaano ya bonna, federo mugizzeewo, y’endagaano y’oku nsi
The collective agreement, reinstate federalism, it is the earthly universal agreement
19 Era eyo ye ndagaano ya bonna, ne Katonda mw’akolera, olowoozanga
And it is the collective agreement, and one through which God works, always think
20 Kubanga yo enjobe esula mu lusa, enjobe esula mu lusa, olowoozanga
For the sitatunga antelope dwells in a marsh, the sitatunga antelope dwells in a marsh, always think
21 Bannange envubu esula mu mazzi, yo enjobe esula mu lusa, zigatta lwaliiro
Friends, the hippopotamus dwells in water, yet the sitatunga antelope dwells in a marsh, but they share the dinning ground
22 Bannange zigatta lwaliiro, zituuka ne zikutula, olowoozanga
Friends, they share the dining ground, but they eventually split up, always think
23 Ate era nga zigatta lwaliiro, zituuka n’ezawukana, olowoozanga
And even though they share the dining ground, they eventually part, always think
24 Naawe essowaani njagala okoze mu yiyo, n’omulala munno, nga mugatta lwaliiro
I want you also to dip in your own plate, and your other friend too, while you combine the dining ground
25 Ate temugamba nti ntemaatema mu bantu, ng’ebigambo bye mpulira, kuno kulongoosa
And do not say that I segregate people, as I already hear, this is putting things right
26 Abange Kampala omugamba otya, okumuggya ku bannyini ye, Mbarara n’omuleka?
Friends, how do you suggest taking Kampala away from its owners, and leave out Mbarara?
27 Bwe muba nga mwagala kulongoosa, byonna mwandibiggyeewo, ffena ne tubeererawo
If you want to put things right, eliminate all, so that we all stay without
These lyrics describe the political shifts that shook Buganda after 1900, when British administrators indirectly weakened the power of the king. The lyrics also allude to the political and administrative injustices that the king has endured against Uganda’s leaders during the postindependence and postcolonial eras, highlighting the corruption and manipulation that has developed in conjunction with their rise. “Federalism” generally expresses political frustration, disappointment, and a strong desire to return to a previous form of government. “Householder” (line 8) refers to the king; “neck twisters” (line 9) means disagreeable arrangements; “our husband” (line 10) is the king; and “licking ashes” (line 16) means reduced to poverty.
The song begins with a series of questions (lines 1–2) that appear to express the singer’s confusion and disillusionment with his present position, suggested by the phrase “when the one who wooed me disappeared” (line 1). This phrase insinuates that betrayal or loss is at the root of the singer’s bewilderment. Lines 3 through 4 serve to expand on this notion of loss by evoking the figure of God as one who would empower and strengthen the singer. It is as though Deziderio is calling to the Creator to strengthen him against the imminent foe he will face. This point suggests some sense of the danger that subsequent lyrics reveal.
After overcoming his disorientation and calling for God’s support, the singer begins to explain his conflict at hand (lines 5–11). For example, he describes the agreements of the past, which the king, householder (
nnannyinimu), made. However, in 1900, British settlers chose to sidestep the leader and make agreements without his input (lines 9–10). These agreements were not made in the name of the people, and the drafters were the sole beneficiaries. As the singer puts it, these new agreements and the people who wrote them “left out” the king (line 10), after “butchering meat from” his “place” (line 11). The ignorance of the king’s sovereignty, as John Lonsdale documents, reflected racist and antiquated colonial values, which held that Africans had no interest in politics or citizenship, that they lacked unity or fraternity between different tribal groups.
2Lonsdale 1992, 328, 348.The connection between the king and his civilians is a recurring theme in Deziderio’s narrative, as the singer depicts the king not as a separate appendage of the kingdom but as an extension and representation of its people. The performer does this by speaking of their mutual sufferings almost interchangeably. In lines 9 through 16, for example, Deziderio describes how, in 1900, the king lost his ability to decide on governmental matters. However, rather than simply depicting it as a political shift, the singer articulates this change as one that directly impacted people. It was not just the king who lost his position, but the people lost their representative voice. Furthermore, Deziderio highlights the notion of self-centeredness by explaining how today’s leaders embezzle excessively, not even leaving enough resources for the king to live on. The lyrics describe them as “belching” (line 15), as though the riches they steal are a massive and undeserved meal. The singer explains how even the youngest of these leaders are rich enough to own a car, while the rest of the country can do no more than eat ashes (line 16), be reduced to poverty. Rather than using stories that emphasize the grandeur and opulence of the king’s struggle, Deziderio employs anecdotes that shorten the distance between the king and his subjects, demonstrating how ordinary themes of human life also pervade macropolitical decisions.
Having focused on the post-1993 situation, Deziderio transitions to his proposal of reinstating federalism (lines 17–23). To convince us of this idea, he provides an anecdote in the form of a story. He explains how the hippopotamus and the sitatunga live in different spaces yet come to the same place to have their meals and drink their water (line 20). Through this parable, justice becomes something inherent and universal—reflected in the most fundamental laws of animal nature—and makes Uganda’s current political system appear all the more unstable. Deziderio’s description of the intricate mutuality between wildlife species leads us to imagine that human political systems could calibrate themselves to the proposed model. From the comparisons he makes, we come to see that a friend’s betrayal is no less significant than a politician’s greed. In the same way, the complementarity of species in the wild that Deziderio references is no less significant than the systems of mediation that constitute our governments. Both determine the function of a community, whatever form it might take.
As already suggested, the singer’s language also exemplifies the blend of politics and life. He uses words like “earthly” to describe the benefits of federalism, emphasizing a philosophical stance of sentient connection to the land against the type of abstraction and idealism typical of Western republics. Just as this book analyzes meaning by collaborating the voices of various figures, this “earthly” style of federalist governance is reciprocal, a quality that people can only achieve if they listen to one another. For this to happen, what must exist is an open, responsive channel for communication between different levels of political life. This can only happen if the government comes around to creating the infrastructure for it. As Deziderio mentions, an extension of the scenario he describes would be far better than the current system because it would allow all parties to have the freedom to operate independently but encourage them to unite when necessary (lines 24, 26, and 27). Overall, his lyrics plead for the implementation of federalism in Uganda.