Sophistication is something few in Uganda can be fairly accused of, especially considering the quality and accessibility of education.
This lack of sophistication is evident in the arbitrary way we approach many issues—football and politics being prime examples.
Listen to how we discuss these topics and you’ll quickly understand the problem. A significant number of people genuinely believe that sacking a football manager automatically leads to winning more games.
Manchester United has done just that—firing manager after manager—yet their win rate hasn’t improved.
Tottenham Hotspur has also had a carousel of managers and still lost over 16 games this season. Some fans now want Ange Postecoglou out too.
A more sophisticated approach would recognize that winning football matches is a complex process, not something that can be reduced to simply changing the coach.
Where’s the evidence that the current manager lacks tactical skill? Tottenham previously fired a manager who is now taking a less talented squad to European competitions—clearly, he knew what he was doing. But today's generation believes in gambling: keep firing until you strike gold.
Now they want Mikel Arteta out because he's “only” finished second three seasons in a row. They say this with a baffling sense of arrogance, as though coming second in one of the most competitive leagues in the world is a sign of failure.
It’s a kind of entitlement that ignores important context: the team that beat you might just be better—more experienced, more resourced, or both. Just because you're second now doesn’t mean you'll naturally be first next.
That’s not how life works.
Take the case of Kai Havertz. Many argue that he’s a terrible striker. But is he even a striker by trade? No—he’s a midfielder adapting to a new role in a modern system. Sophistication would demand we ask such questions before rushing to judge.
Yet, ironically, the same people who insist Kai isn’t good enough for their team will turn around and claim that anyone can lead a country like Uganda.
And this is where my head begins to spin.
How can someone believe that leading Arsenal's attack requires elite skill, yet think that leading Uganda—a nation with deep political, economic, and social complexities—requires no special expertise at all? Is it because you believe running a country is easier than leading the line for your football club?
As we begin the conversation around who will succeed President Museveni, we must first acknowledge that leading Uganda is an incredibly difficult job that demands a unique skill set—one not easily found.
I know many of you will now accuse me of fronting Museveni’s candidacy. Let me be clear: I am not.
Aspiring to lead better than President Museveni is a noble goal. Making personal sacrifices to serve the country is commendable. But none of that automatically means you're capable of doing a better job.
Museveni himself believed he could outperform Amin and Obote—and in many ways, he did—but he also ended up repeating some of their worst mistakes, and even introduced new ones of his own.
So, to the young people: bring seriousness and intellectual depth to the conversation about Uganda’s future.
The casual, impulsive way many of you support presidential hopefuls reflects a dangerous ignorance—not just of how we got here, but also of where we are, and what it will take to move forward.