You are here: HomeNews2015 02 04Article 345191

The Brutal Dictatorship of Kwame Nkrumah II

Comment: Answering the Nkrumaist Tree-Heads

Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law
2015-02-04 23:30:57
Comment to:
The Brutal Dictatorship of Kwame Nkrumah II

There is no gainsaying the fact that the cabal of Nkrumaist scream-heads are mentally screwed, and trying to reason with them is like speaking to a tree-head. But I choose to answer some of their arguments if only because a tree-head may also bow to a fresh waft of morning breeze…

Nkrumaists are fond of using the bomb-throwing incidents to justify his atrocious treatment of his political opponents. The first bomb-throw occurred at Kulungugu in 1963, while the Preventive Detention Act (PDA) was passed in 1958. Thus the Nkrumaists are guilty of the fallacy of circular cause and consequence, where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause. Truly, Nkrumah's tyranny was the cause of the armed struggle for true freedom.
When he became power drunk, and openly portrayed his communistic ideas, Nkrumah would not tolerate any dissent neither from the official opposition nor from his own party members. After the PDA was enacted in 1958, his finance Minister K.A. Gbedemah who introduced the bill in Parliament had to run away into exile in the USA, fleeing from the Act he gleefully spearheaded. When the people were overfed with Nkrumaism and were suffering under his tighten-your-belt Socialist policies, the bombs from his own camp became an option just as he himself was advocating violence as a strategy for freedom fighters elsewhere. And by the way, at the time of his overthrow (God Bless Kotoka and Afrifa) there were more CPP members in prison under the PDA than UP folks, just as Danquah had warned Gbedemah and his gaping sycophants.

Nkrumaists also raise negative sentiments against the glorious coup d'état by associating it with the negative image of the CIA, as if the mass support for the coup was also engineered by the CIA. If the CIA overthrew Nkrumah, then they merely fulfilled our sacred national aspiration to "resist the oppressor's rule with all our will and minds forever more" and therefore are they our national heroes deserving of our eternal respect. But saying that Nkrumah's overthrow was the work of CIA merely turns our people into lobotomized idiots who did not have the courage to get rid of a bloody dictator!! I do not subscribe to the idea that the colonial masters were responsible for giving us back our freedom from the tyranny of Kwame Nkrumah. The gallant men and women who overthrew Nkrumah should be credited with the greatest act of patriotism for our country.
Nkrumaists are always saying that Nkrumah does no wrong, and go ahead to rationalize and justify his evil deeds against humanity, summarily condemning all his opponents as nation-wreckers and extolling him as our Messiah, and when we raise the man’s faults, they turn around to say that fairness demands us to be balanced by discussing the man’s great qualities. What are these qualities? Ingratitude, lies, blackmail, jealousy or ambition? And when have Nkrumaists said anything positive about the others who helped in the founding of the nation?

Nkrumaists state that Nkrumah gave us freedom from the colonial masters. We should only be proud of our independence if it truly gave us true freedoms. But what do they mean by "freedom from colonial masters"? Are they here accepting oppression from our own kind as a good substitute for "oppression from colonial masters"? Do they again narrowly define "self-government" as Nkrumah's singular right to impose a totalitarian regime on our people? I believe that the better task for Nkrumah was to have sought first the solid principles for democratic governance and to spread these across Africa. All others would have been added unto him. But his simplistic faith in dictatorship and his effort to propagate same across Africa makes him a truly bad leader for all time.

Nkrumaists claim Nkrumah founded Ghana, but Ghana had already been created long before Nkrumah came. Rather, he came to find it (not to found it) and to claim that he was giving us freedom, liberation and justice, and that is where the problem is. He could have vividly put on the table before the people that he was going to imprison them without trial and abolish all opposition and declare himself president in order to build our country into a great nation, and if the people had accepted him, then he would have been considered honest under the circumstances. But he promised freedom and justice from colonial oppression, only to turn around to inflict a worse form of oppression on the people. How can we say that Nkrumah gave us freedom and justice and liberation when he abolished all these forms? And if all he accomplished were the huge infrastructural developments minus the freedom, the colonial masters could have achieved more with these same resources and kept us under less oppression than Nkrumah.
Nkrumaists quote US to justify Nkrumah’s terror against the Ghanaian population and also quote the USA to condemn Nkrumah’s overthrow. This is a fallacy of argument characterized as Tu Quoque. ("You Do it Too!"; also “Two Wrongs Make a Right”). This is a corrupt argument from ethos. It is no sign of intelligence to excuse one's own bad action by pointing out that one's opponent's acts are perhaps even worse than one's own. Such an argument has no substance in logic!

This article is closed for comments.

02-04 01:07
Answering the Nkrumaist Tree-Heads
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law
02-04 23:30