Yes, we can, but together!

 

By Kwadwo Afari

Our country is black Africa’s first country to gain self-rule from colonialism, and among the best in the multi-party democratic experiment. But our democracy and nationhood still face complex challenges. The harsh partisan tone that seems to inject itself into virtually every issue, makes the possibility of a new era of good feelings in our socio-political environment sound more like fiction than analysis.

The cost of ignoring the need to reach out to a diverse broader audience is obvious – economic defeat. Yet, while trying to reboot the country’s economy, and a new direction is necessary, we should understand that there is an inherent danger in nation building that needs to be understood properly, if Ghanaians are to avoid making a different mistake than that of being stuck in the political and economic paradigms of the past.

A wise man, George Santayana, once wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” While for now, at least, we all agree in favour of multi-party democracy, the attitude and mind frame of almost the leadership is stuck in the monolithic politics of the single-party state, where the leader takes and shares everything to himself and partisans – the winner takes all. It seems we are still going to have a bumpy ride into the future without national unity and democratic consensus building. We are doomed to repeat the past attitude of intolerance that has kept us apart and delayed our prosperity.

The first leader, who started the trend, Kwame Nkrumah, chose to call himself the Osagyefo, with a mission to liberate all Africa, alone, refused to listen, hunted his critics and opponents, became a dictator, was overthrown, and died in exile, miserable and alone. Almost all those who have followed prefer the title Father of the nation, a title that sets them apart and makes them all knowing patriarchs, with absolute powers to dispense or deny patronage to friends and foes alike.

We should think about it. Intolerance is not fiction. It is real. And it has serious costs for our country. Sadly, after sixty years of independence, it still persists, weakening the state while sectarianism, arrogance, repression and the lack of stronger institutions, including political parties, weakens the quality of leadership.

Our politics is still dominated by envy and driven by foul language, animosity, and suspicion. Kwame Nkrumah called his opponents outcasts, traitors, brutes, thugs and unrepentant devils, and told the masses that J.B. Danquah and members of his group were their enemies. The veranda boys were especially encouraged to get in their opponents’ faces and harass them. And Nkrumah’s opponents used the same mixture of abuse and insinuation – thieves, rogues, double-tongued receivers of bribes, givers of bribes and gangsters.

This posture limits freedom of thought and action of the people, and the creative abilities of our leaders, and creates room for opportunists to try and outlaw or restrict freedom of speech.

This posture creates instability and unpredictability in our politics, and makes it very difficult for long term planning and economy growth.

This posture makes it difficult for us to talk and to debate the issues confronting this country; when we do, we shout, bicker, and try only to get the upper hand. A keen observer of our political debates will notice the trend. Politicians, and most others, rarely address the issues raised, instead, they just try to get their own views across to make their opponents look foolish. The times and issues may be different, but the debates or arguments still follow the old format:

‘Nkrumah is the founder of Ghana!’

‘No, he is not!’

‘Yes, he is!’

‘No, he is not!’

‘Revisionist!’

‘Liar!’

This is the model. No why, and no attempt to give reasons. Our leaders contribute to these irrational debates, and it grows, widens and deepens, in spite of the fact that in this period of multi-party democracy, there is need for serious dialogue, and the free flow of ideas.

Our leaders also hate and loath criticism and those who criticise them. Who needs criticism?  Nobody!  Criticism can be painful, hurtful, mean-spirited, and sometime inaccurate. It is a Ghanaian thing. We do not question elders or criticise authority, much more ‘wash our dirty linen in public.’ So, we have not learned how to criticise. But when we do, we hurl insults and abuse. Mostly, the words and tone are like a two-edged sword which pierces the heart. Hmm?  What is worse, it affects our political environment and reduce investments.

The reality, however, is that some criticism is valid.  Leaders aren’t infallible; people aren’t perfect.  Even the best leaders make mistakes.  But, in this country, our leaders make no mistakes? In fact, they celebrate their ‘thick skin’, ‘yentie obiara’ (we will not listen to anybody), and ‘dead goat’ attitude to the annoyance of even those who support them. It was this animosity and lack of tolerance that led to various repressive acts, including the Preventive Detention Act, which encouraged young people and political activists to turn in citizens who criticised the Osagyefo. We still treat critics as enemies who must be crushed, treated with scorn, shunned, or made to starve with all opportunities closed to them and their friends.

Criticising the President should not be made enemy behaviour. It should be made acceptable in the multi-democratic environment. Labeling people as the enemy, because we do not like them, or because they oppose us, is very much a communist inferior tactic. It is our duty, as people, to question everything that can possibly be questioned. It is our duty to look into matters, and every law, regulation, and policy that affects us. Without individual thought, there can be no democracy; to not question our president would make our president a dictator. “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism,” says Thomas Jefferson

All leaders face criticism. This should be at the back of our current crop of leaders. It comes with the territory. Nehemiah serves as a biblical model for leaders in how to confront and counteract critics.  Nehemiah had not finished explaining the vision to rebuild Jerusalem’s walls, when Sanballat and Tobiah began criticising him (Neh. 2:10).  All good leaders know they cannot, and will not, please everyone, even within their inner circle. Any leader who seek the approval of everybody, will be greatly disappointed. Those who want to be effective should rather be wary of sycophants and the ‘yes men and women’, who applaud every move and actions, and come with tall tales.

What has happened in this country, over the past sixty years, is the commercialisation of independence, the political and economic auction of political parties, and rent seeking. Those who acquire political and leadership positions in the bureaucracy cheaply allow themselves to be enticed by trappings of power, money, and easily seduced by flattery.  Previous leaders and governments failed woefully in improving the economy and creating the jobs they promised, because they chose the threatening closed fist of repression, rather than the open hand of dialogue.

“Change” cannot happen without an informed, reasoned, and focused debate on the issues. Ghanaians are hoping that the current administration, led by President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo Addo, would be able to unite all shades of opinion behind him, and draw boundaries between right and wrong. Yes, he must by all means pray persistently, but he must be focused on his mission and vision, and be not afraid to persuade citizens on the veracity of his choices. That was what Nehemia did. He did not repress his critics, but he defended his vision through reasoned debates, and allowed God to be the judge of his actions (Neh. 6:14).

Every leader has the right to be suspicious of critics. But when they label critics who seek simple answers on the size of government or taxation, as the enemy, they behave like communists who call opponents names in order to hunt them down. Not every critic is an enemy. Sometimes they are just patriots who seek good answers from leaders who take biased advice from vested interest lobbies, self-serving bureaucrats, academic ideologues and sensation mongering media, and mere gossips.

Just as there are real ‘rent-seeking’ sycophants who want things and what they could get, there are real critics who want nothing, but for the leader to succeed. Broadly labeling all critics and opponents enemies gives leaders little credibility when the real enemy rears its head.

Against what is stupid, nonsensical, erroneous, and evil, Nana should fight with the weapons of the mind, and not with brute force and repression.

 

The post Yes, we can, but together! appeared first on The Chronicle - Ghana News.

  By Kwadwo Afari Our country is black Africa’s first country to gain self-rule from colonialism, and among the best in the multi-party democratic experiment. But our democracy and nationhood still face complex challenges. The harsh partisan tone that seems to inject itself into virtually every issue, makes the possibility of a new era of […]

The post Yes, we can, but together! appeared first on The Chronicle - Ghana News.

Read Full Story