Account for what you have achieved, rather than dwelling on innuendoes and defending yourself, we love you.
“Max Weber’s theory of cultural rationalization and differentiation is well known. For Weber the development of modernity not only involved a long process of differentiation of the capitalist economy and the modern state but also entailed a cultural rationalization with the emergence of separate scientific, aesthetic, and moral value spheres. Weber’s (1948) discussion of the differentiation of the cultural sphere from a more rudimentary, holistic, religious cultural core is conducted at a high level of abstraction.
Although Weber provides brief glimpses of the way in which each aspect of the cultural sphere is relentlessly driven by its own logic, the way in which values relate to life-style and conduct, and the tensions experienced by intellectuals, the “cultivated man” and the cultural specialist, his prime purpose was to sketch out a typology (Weber 1948:323–24).
While we do find fuller discussions of the cultural sphere in the writings of Bell (1976) and Habermas (1981), we need to build on these sources if we seek to understand the particular conjunction of culture in contemporary Western societies.
In effect we need to investigate the conditions for the development of the cultural sphere by focusing on particular historical sequences and locations. First, we need to understand the emergence of relatively autonomous culture (knowledge and other symbolic media) in relation to the growth in the autonomy and power potential of specialists in symbolic production. We therefore need.”
GULU CITY-FRIDAY, July 28, 2023. Customary laws and the criminal justice system in Uganda says underlying transitional justice discourse is the maxim that to move forward, we must look back; this maxim is equally pertinent to understanding the future of international criminals today.
The quality of formal criminal justice approaches and traditional justice principles is a product of colonial inequality; local customs were deliberately suppressed in favor of foreign values that were alien to people’s senses of justice. Prior to the declaration of a British Protectorate in 1885, communities within the region that became Uganda followed their own body of established rules, which were unwritten customary norms and practices for peace and justice.
Thus, given all scenario mentioned-above from 2005 when Rwot David Onen Acana II elected by Acholi Chiefs as Paramount Chief, he should have embarked on the emergence of separate scientific, aesthetic, and moral spheres to affirm and legitimized is realm of power as part of bargaining package as Ronald Mwenda Mutebi, the Kabaka of Buganda did.
Rwot Acana since he assumed the reign of leadership he has been complaisant reluctant and failed to administered his duty, political pundit argues that in 2005 when he elected as paramount chief, instead of seeking advice from his peer’s chiefs, he was surrounded by ill-fitted military commanders mostly his kin from Payira led by the late Col. Walter Ochora Odoch.
This faulted his vision to become the paramount chief of Acholi, that was the first challenge he had, and later became part of his ethos.
Secondly, Rwot Acana came at the times when Acholi community needed a leader that could unveil them from the York of bandage of the ruling power, Acholi community had lost hope of sanity, they were facing environmental justice, enslaver, alienation, forceful eviction from their land, open land grabbing, the aftermath of Lord Resistance Army LRA, returnee, former International Displaced People’s camps from within and former self political exile.
Others, Reparation, Truth Telling and Reconciliation from both parties that have been engaged in the Northern Uganda conflict. But, he sided with the Gen. from his kin and kits who are abetting or campaigning to quell the northern Uganda conflict, to them they were viewing LRA conflict as an Acholi conflict versus National Resistance Movement NRM regime.
All those issues needed Rwot Acana word only to be presented to President Museveni, including compensating LRA victims, and Uganda People Defense Forces UPDF casualties.
The big question to be asked is whether Rwot Acana calls and commands Acholi to stop, or response to his calls, no. Can Apire calls his people of Atiak to respond for his need and his subject turns up in urination, yes.
My conflict of interest, both Chairman of Lawirwodi elect Rwot Richard Santo Apire, and former Rwot Acana both are my friends.
But, this week when Rwot Richard Santo Apire calls for contribution from his subject of Atiak because 37 Chiefs of Acholi they are designated to visit his palace, within 15 munities Lwani community raised over UGX 20 million.
Equally, when Rwot former Lawirwodi Acana II, was dis-tooled his subject of Payira community gang up to defend him.
Who failed PRDP, NUSAF….
Let us borrow from Max Weber’s, theory of cultural, Max argued that and he provides brief glimpses of the way in which each aspect of the cultural sphere is relentlessly driven by its own logic, the way in which values relate to life-style and conduct, and the tensions experienced by intellectuals, the “cultivated man” and the cultural specialist, his prime purpose was to sketch out a typology
Under PRDP I, II and III World Bank has provided 100 million dollars in each project, 100 million dollars equal to UGX 366,383,400,000.0, this money if Rwot Acana had put in weight behind it, Acholi Bank would have been put in place for us to utilize the money, condition would have been attach to it that. Anyone who hopes to invest in the PRDP fund lets them develop project concepts.
Now, we have the fourth PRDP coming in place, statistics indicate that 80 percent of the PRDP went back to the donor, while 20 percent was seen on road construction infrastructures of education and health sectors.
It means that the government of Uganda does not have district Discretional Equalization grant for Acholi Sub region and Lango Sub Region war affected areas, no money has ever been released apart from the so called PRDP and NUSAF.
NUSAF I, II, II, and NUSAF IV have been getting the same 100 million dollars, but who is responsible for the accountability. If Acholi paramount chiefs faced the President and asked for accountability, President Museveni would have given the presidential Executive Directive order as he has done with Charcoal and the issues of Balaalo.
How about the sons and daughters of Acholi working with the government?
Are they aware that under PRELNOR they are getting 750 million dollars in the project? But, are our stakeholders aware of the project?
Please, Rwot Acana, if you had accounted for this, your subject would have been the one to fight for you are product of colonial inequality; local customs were deliberately suppressed in favor of foreign values that were alien to people’s senses of justice. Prior to the declaration of a British Protectorate in 1885.
Please, for now, keep quiet, and reprimand the 22 chiefs’ ally to you, and agree to work with another chief’s ally to Apire, tong oromo Lyec.