Putting Intellectualism In Our Politics (II)

In the first instalment of this write-up, I came up with a working definition of what intellectualism constitutes. Intellectualism was considered loosely to reflect the derivation of knowledge from reason alone. It was seen as a rational philosophy that asserts that “truth can best be discovered by reason and factual analysis”. References were made to some international and local think tanks and their usefulness in policy formulation and implementation of the country. More importantly an argument was made for the nurturing and growth of think tanks as an integral part of deepening democracy. Further, an analysis was made of some dangers to democracy in Ghana. The main dangers discussed included ignorance and lack of appreciation of national issues, poverty and disunity. In this piece a consideration would be given to the effect of repressive governance on the growth of democracy and the intellectual basis underpinning the system of governance adopted by leaders in the political history of the country. However, before continuing with the piece a response would be made to some comments on the introductory piece to this write up. This can be sourced from: http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=107594

Intellectualism or Ideology

I try very hard not to respond to comments that tend to insult me or attack me on a personal level. I do respect some critics to my writings. Some of them engage in intellectual debates based on issues without personalising. I do not necessarily agree with their viewpoints but do respect them for them. I have decided to respond to comments of Odurose and Peter Kwabena Senkyire notwithstanding the fact that they did use some abusive words. Odurose begins his contributions with the comment:

This piece reads well but it is a little diffuse and lacks focus. You advocate intellectualism, as you define it, in our politics but concede along the line that we indeed have intellectualism in our politics.

Let me begin by saying I am not a trained writer but just an ordinary Ghanaian who tries to put his thoughts down in an attempt to share with others and ‘provoke a healthy debate’. For this reason I hope to be forgiven for any incoherence and lack of focus as he claims. I believe if I am able to withstand all the personal insults hurled at me for expressing my views I may end up writing a little better in future. I would however like to state that I am unconvinced this view is representative my piece. Without doubt almost every government in the history of our country has been founded on one political ideology or another but that is not to say the political discourse of the country has always been intellectual in nature. The question of intellectualism is at the heart of my piece and any attempt to divert the discussion from this premise would put the whole exercise out of context. I explained at the outset of the write-up my working definition of what constitutes intellectualism. Mr (or Ms) Odurose seemed to have chosen to ignore what I considered to be intellectualism. No wonder the whole piece was ‘a little diffuse and lacks focus’ to him. He further claimed that:

As for the diversity we enjoy which you think is ethno-centric or tribalist I don't think you can seriously argue that this has been a national bane. Occasionally there comes the rogue elephant of a politician who appeals to these sentiments, but it is my experience and that of many Ghanaians, I believe, that when it comes to the national interest Ghanaians generally subsume their tribal affiliations under the national interest. Our educational system, certainly as of the colonial and the immediate post-independence decades, saw to it that children from all ethnic or tribal backgrounds were educated together and therefore received a better appreciation of individuals irrespective of their tribal origins. That certainly was my own experience at school and at the University of Ghana, Legon.

I do agree with Odurose’s comment about the level of integration fostered by our education system from the primary to the university. However, even within the university communities, students have their own tribal unions and even the academic and non-academic members of staff also have similar associations. On-campus politics (even at the senior members level) sometimes turns so tribal in outlook that some members opt out to avoid being tagged ethnocentric. I have studied and worked in a university in Ghana for a total of seven years, so I am talking out of personal experience. At the national level, Odurose would agree with me that the New Patriotic Party (NPP) is tagged as an Akan party and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) is considered an Ewe party. Unfair as these assertions may be the fact still remains that it is repeated almost daily by the media men and politicians. A recent statement by the Moderator of EP Church urging people from Volta Region to disabuse their minds of any secessionist tendencies emphasises the level of national unity in Ghana.

Sadly, top politicians, and not the occasional ‘rogue elephant of a politician’ as Odurose would want us to believe, perpetuates this obvious misconception of ethnic division for their gains. Even on the academic level there is evidence to suggest the preaching of ethnic hegemony by leading academics (cum politicians). The least said about ethnocentrism on internet forums, such as the Say It Loud on the Ghanaweb.com, the better. Ethnocentrism is a real phenomenon in our part of the world. Arguably, those of us in Ghana have forged greater national cohesion than many of our African siblings notwithstanding the occasional misunderstandings. However, this should not be taken for granted. It would be a great disservice to the unity and development of the country and dangerous to pretend ethnocentrism does not exist. It is important to bring out these issues in the open and reasonably discuss it to find solutions to them.

Another gentleman Mr. Peter Kwabena Nsenkyire believes I did not think well before writing. As insulting as this was I have decided to share his views here for all to judge. In one comment he agreed totally with the assertions of Odurose. May I indicate here that I respect their right to contrary opinions from mine. Mr. Nsenkyire begins his comments thus:

Well I will not sit here to condemn this writer off hand. From his own article he had already exposed himself, being seen as snotty. Well if this guy is a Ghanaian and a Blackman he will do himself and the Ghanaian population a great service by apologising to the poor and the so call illiterates in our society. Thousands of our dear country men and women had paid with their life, more of these individuals had live in poverty since day one, they are paying for the stupid policy and mismanagements of the economy of this beautiful country by these so call intellectuals. They had driven the country to economic suicide.

I do sincerely hope Peter read and understood my piece in its entirety. Either this was the case or he is one person full of venom as he seems to talking about something entirely different from my line of thought. When I set off on the course to writing this piece I knew some people would not understand this and indeed stated at the outset I expected such a reaction. However, I do not owe anyone an apology because illiteracy is a fact of Ghanaian life. For his benefit I am a full blooded Ghanaian who also has relatives and friends who are illiterates. I genuinely cannot understand his basis for asking me to apologise “to the poor and so ‘call’ illiterates in our society”. For his sake I will quote the meaning of illiteracy as defined by the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary: 1. not able to read or write; 2. ignorant in a particular field, e.g. be scientifically illiterate. If according him this does not apply to any section of the Ghanaian population then indeed I owe all Ghanaians a grovelling apology. If on the other hand it definitely applies, then Mr. Nsenkyire owes me an unqualified apology for questioning my integrity and ‘Ghanaian-ness’. Poverty in Ghana is also a fact which should not be swept under the carpet simply because it may offend the sensibilities of the Oduroses and Nsenkyires of this world.

Again he claims that “… intellectuals had made all effort to tell Ghanaians that only those that can speak ‘big Queens English’ with all the meaningless degrees can rule a country”. Once again, I will reiterate that that was never the premises of my write-up and he should not impugn on me anything I have not said or supported. I did not even indicate that our politicians should be intellectuals, although it may be desirable to have many intellectuals taking up politics. In a very sweeping statement Nsenkyire says:

I will on this occasion try as much as possible to use words judicious. Mr Nyame Kofi ( I doubt that is your real name) you should had realise that the trouble in Ghana and Africa had been cause by we, Africans and nobody else, The so call elite and useless Intellectuals are at the fore front. They had rule Africa for all that long, it is the poor who had paid with their life. Recently we all saw Doctors going on strike, seeing their fellow Ghanaians die, all because of Money. Doctors as we all know had swore an oath to save live, but in the Ghanaian context they will rather be taken life, what a shame. They should be ashamed of themselves. Mr KOFI NYAME where were you? When Ghanaians were dying, as for me Peter I will never agree with you, so call intellectuals, none of you had done or suggested anything good for mother Ghana or for African as a whole.

Dear reader, I would have wished to reserve my comments and leave you to form your own views about the statement above. However, permit me to state that this seems to have nothing to do with my write up. It seems Mr. Nsenkyire cannot differentiate between intellectualism and professionalism. To Peter Nsenkyire, my name is indeed Kofi Nyame. Hopefully, even he would admit that this is a common name in many parts of Ghana. The purpose of my writings is not to embark on an exercise of personal glorification and to I would share a little story to affirm the ‘authenticity’ of my name. Once upon many years ago whilst working in the University of Cape Coast, I met a foreigner at a seminar who needed some information for her research. I offered to assist her and therefore asked her to come to my office. She found the department but had forgotten my name. She however knew my name had something to do with God and Friday. When she got there she simply asked for Friday God and everybody knew she was referring to me. Interestingly, to this day, some of my former colleagues call me Friday God. So, Mr. Nsenkyire, do not be overly worried, I am not a coward who is hiding behind a false identity. Your doubt reminds me about a Bill Marshal’s book in which a character had to get a medical certificate to prove his being alive after an inadvertent obituary alluding to his death. Mr. Nsenkyire concludes his comments with the statement that: “I will hope you will have a second thought before coming to this forum with this stupid article”. Indeed his line of thinking reinforces my purpose the more for starting the series – to inculcate sound reasoning in our political discourse. It would be a sad day for democracy, individual freedom and freedom of expression if I were to be cowed into silence by the likes of Nsenkyire. In conclusion, dear reader, permit me to share with you the views of Mr. Kweku Aidoo on Mr. Nsenkyire’s comments.

Dear Peter, Kofi did not say or indicate that " Since day one the intellectuals had made all effort to tell Ghanaians that only those that can speak “big Queens English” with all the meaningless degrees can rule a country" (you wrote). He even confirmed that there are some who should know better, but talk only rubbish. Doctors going on strike is not an issue here. Being an intellectual does not necessarily mean having degrees but the ability to think and reason. My mother never had any formal education but she is an intellectual in a way. You seem to have a blanket hatred for all people with a form of formal education. It is a pity!

I rest my case here and leave it to the discerning minds if the piece was ‘stupid’ as Mr. Nsenkyire claims.

REPRESSIVE GOVERNANCE

Repressive governance occurs when the government through state and political power restricts the ability of individuals or groups from participating freely in the democratic process. This may take the form of oppression or persecution of such people for political reasons. This is usually through discriminatory policies, surveillance abuse, imprisonment and police misconduct, brutality, murder or forced disappearance. In situations where repression is sanctioned and organised by the state, it may constitute state terrorism. This is violence against civilians perpetrated by a national government. Political repression is a common feature of dictatorships and totalitarian states. It may be common for acts of violence and denial of civil rights to be carried out by secret police forces, paramilitary groups and in extreme cases death squads. Ghana under different governments has experienced a number of state, or at least government, sponsored repression. Reports emanating from the National Reconciliation Commission (NRC) allude to some repressive occurrences. It is important at this stage of our democracy to resolve never to allow the country to descend into those conditions that permit such occurrences.

The Dawn of Democracy – Dr. Nkrumah’s Ghana

The first Ghanaian political leader, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, took major steps towards lifting the country out of poverty through the creation of a welfare system, starting community programmes and establishing schools throughout the country. Developmental projects in water, health and road construction were established in the country. Dr. Nkrumah was a professed socialist who took a non-aligned Marxist view on economics. He expressed his belief in socialism as the system most suited to reverse changes capitalism had wreaked on the country. Dr. Nkrumah as an intellectual devoted much of his time to writing. About 12 published works are credited to him. After the world price of cocoa rose from £150 to £450 per ton in 1954, the first seed of Dr. Nkrumah’s political demise were sown when he chose to divert additional profit on cocoa to national development. This made him fall into the disfavour of the cocoa farmers who were one of his major constituents. In 1958 he introduced the Trade Union Act making strikes illegal in reaction to the Gold Miner’s Strike of 1955. He also proposed the Preventive Detention Act (PDA) which made it possible to arrest and detain anyone charged with treason without the recourse to the court system in reaction to a suspected plot on the part of an opposition member of parliament. The two legislations restricted the freedoms of the people of Ghana and set the road for a tyranny comparable to colonialism which Ghanaians led by Dr. Nkrumah had fought against. President Nkrumah ordered the arrest of strike leaders and opposition politicians in the aftermath of the railway workers strike in 1961. When accused of being repressive, he argued that: “Even a system based on a democratic constitution may need backing up in the period following independence by emergency measures of a totalitarian kind.”

The PDA led to widespread disaffection as some men close to Dr. Nkrumah were alleged to have used the law to settle their private scores. As a declared socialist he proved to have the best will of the people. However in addition to the repressive laws, declaring himself Life President and turning the country into a one party state perhaps gave the coup makers a justification for their action. With this background, Prof Ali Mazrui, the renowned African commentator, describes Dr. Nkrumah as “a Great African but awful Ghanaian” in an interview on BBC to remember the 40th anniversary of the 1966 coup. This is an affirmation of the perception held by some Ghanaians that he was sacrificing their needs and rights at the expense of his ambitious African liberation and unity projects. Some claimed that whilst life was getting tough for Ghanaian students, Dr Nkrumah provided scholarship places for other African students, especially those from Southern Africa.

The 1966 Coup

The preceding governments before the Dr. Busia premiership were military juntas led by Generals J.A. Ankrah and A.A. Afrifa. The military rulers suspended the constitution and ruled by decrees. Many members of the CPP were compelled to denounce Dr Nkrumah. History has proven many of these were coerced to take that action. However the Generals Ankrah and Afrifa’s National Liberation Council (NLC) restored certain freedoms by granting amnesty to all political prisoners and exiles. Within two years the NLC lifted the ban on the formation of political parties and appointed a Representative Assembly to draft a constitution which became the Second Republican Constitution of Ghana.

Dr. Busia’s Westminster Style Parliamentary Democracy

Much was expected of the Dr. Busia government because it was made of members who were considered intellectuals and more understanding of problems facing the people. Dr. Busia was an academic of international repute as he rose to be a professor of Sociology and Culture at the University of Leiden, The Hague, Netherlands. He subscribed to the liberal democratic principles of the governance associated with the United Party (UP) and the Progress Party (PP). The government comparatively did more to respect individual rights in comparison with Dr. Nkrumah’s governance. It was perceived that the Dr. Busia administration took decisions that were more in the general interest of the country, rather than the rather Dr. Nkrumah’s personal agenda the CPP government pursued. However the government prosecuted some CPP members who had been accused of financial crimes. Mr. Komla Gbedemah the leader of newly formed National Alliance of Liberals (NAL) was barred from taking his seat his seat in the National Assembly by a Supreme Court decision. The Dr. Busia government through its Aliens Compliance Order deported large number of non-citizen and through a companion measure, limited foreign involvement in small businesses. These moves made the government very popular among Ghanaians. However the introduction of the university student loan programme and the devaluation of the cedi by 44 percent in 1971 were deemed conservative policies aimed at introduction a class system. The main unpopularity of the Dr. Busia government did not stem from its democratic credentials but the austerity economic policies it introduced to put the economy of the country on an even keel.

Gen. I.K. Acheampong’s UNIGOV

A number of people regard the Lt. Col. I.K. Achempong’s led military coup as one of the least justifiable in the country’s political history. The main arguments of the coup makers were the withdrawal of certain amenities enjoyed by the military as part of the government austerity measures and the changes in the leadership of the army’s combat elements. The Lt. Col. Achempong took political power in a bloodless coup on 13th January, 1972. The government formed was the National Redemption Council (NRC) which was reorganised into Supreme Military Council (SMC) in 1975 and still headed by then General Acheampong. The leadership were not known for any major intellectual disposition. After failing to deliver of its promises of improved economy, the SMC became unpopular for economic mismanagement and high perception of corruption. Gen. Acheampong proposed the concept of Union Government (UNIGOV) which was meant to make Ghana a non-party state. The concept was perceived as a ploy by the Acheampong regime to perpetuate itself in power. UNIGOV was resisted through strikes and demonstrations by professional groups and students.

Gen. FWK Akuffo and the Return to Constitutional Rule

In July, 1978 Lt. Gen. FWK Akuffo arrested Gen. Acheampong in a palace coup and formed what came to be known as the Supreme Military Council II (SMC II). Gen. Akuffo like his predecessor did not display much intellectual appreciation of national issues. He however abandoned the UNIGOV concept and put in place a programme to return the country to constitutional and democratic rule. He led the establishment of a Constituent Assembly tasked with the writing of a constitution to usher into place the Third Republican Constitution of Ghana. He also decreed the revival of political party activities. The fall of the SMC II in the violent coup of 4th June, 1969 is attributable to the failure of the Gen. Akuffo government to stem the high incidence of corruption and turn round the economy of the country.

Junior Jesus and the June Four Uprising

The first coming of Flt. Lt. Jerry John Rawlings marked an important point in the history of the country. Perhaps besides Dr. Nkrumah no other political leader has had as much of an impact on Ghana as Flt. Lt. Rawlings. The 4th June, 1979 coup which ushered in the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) remains perhaps the bloodiest in the history of the country. The mass hysteria might have contributed to the extensive abuse of human rights which culminated in the killing of eight top military men including three former heads of state. The legal process during the period was through Special Tribunals that tried military officers, government officials and private individuals. The main charges were corruption and profiteering. The process was secret and without due process. Long prison sentences were passed and properties confiscated through a combination of force and exhortation in an attempt to rid the country for corruption and profiteering. The AFRC contributed to the democratic process by accepting the draft constitutions albeit with a few amendments and promulgated it. The Council supervised the presidential and parliamentary elections and handed over power to the Dr. Hilla Limann led People’s National Party (PNP) on 24th September, 1979.

The next installment will conclude the analysis on the effect of repressive governance on the growth of democracy and the intellectual basis underpinning the system of governance adopted by leaders in the political history of the country. This would cover the period including the third and fourth republican constitutional democracies with the Flt. Lt. Rawlings led Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) rule in between. Further an attempt would be made to assess the political philosophy underlying the major political parties in the country and conclude with a look at the current national discourse with special attention to the level of intellectualism in journalism in country.

God bless Ghana.