Ghana was truly liberated on February 24, 1966?

E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Ghanadot

February 25, 2015

The question is raised by a title of an article published on Ghanaweb. Simply put, this article is a false understanding of what took place on February 24, 1966 and one born out of carelessness of thought about what was at stake in Ghana then and what is at stake now.

For Ghana, the struggle has always been about sovereignty and development. Now how much does a coup say about your sovereignty when others have to influence and push you to overthrow your government?

But don't blame the writer. The article was written in the context of events surrounding the memorial of Dr. J. B. Danquah's death. Within this context the reputations of Nkrumah and Danquah were severely savaged by opposing sides - forgetting that the eulogies have been said and the memorials read long ago.

Though this contest has been a tradition, we still have not come to a better understanding of Nkrumah and Danquah than we had before, only the assurance that the rancor would continue at the next opportunity.

Ultimately, this contest is destructive. It is shrinking us as a people. It has to stop.  We need a truce.

Our difficulties today have nothing to do with Nkrumah or Danquah. We are the ones left. In 1966 we made a coup. As Gen. Colin Powell once famously said in his Pottery Barn Rule about Iraq, "You break it. You own it."

We have owned Ghana since 1966. For close to 50 years, we have fixed nothing. We wanted a revolution. We got the so called "glorious revolution", a concept the soldiers didn't understand and the meaning of which we are still struggling with today.

Collectively, we missed the real revolution. It required discipline. But our serial revolutions killed discipline. Every immodest act in our city streets, towns, insults heard on our airwaves and read in our publications are by-products of indiscipline in our society.

Sing "Obiaa nye Obiaa." And if you prefer do "Yentie obira." They are the current philosophical anthems of our culture. The instances of insults we hurl at our leaders today are part of this culture. We are destroying something more important with this way of life.

We are destroying at a rabid pace the ability to preserve some myth about our heroes of history.

In myth humans find some mortar to build great nations. Just check the history of some nations and the stories about some of their great leaders, starting with George Washington and the cherry tree.

But first, imagine wax statues of Nkrumah and Danquah, standing side by side at a Madame Tussauds, with all the bad things we have written about them as text for tourists to read. Should we be proud of the spectacle?

Our approach to building our history so far has been unimaginative.

Danquah and the UGCC leaders brought Nkrumah back to the Gold Coast for one mission. Did Nkrumah complete the job?

The UGCC leaders had the largeness of spirit to recognize that Nkrumah had the organizational skill to accomplish the objective they had in mind. Let's make this experience relevant. Can a political party today do the same?

Can a party in power today find a qualified person to head a national task other than a person from its own membership?

The job of building this nation can be done but we constantly sidestep qualified people for partisan reasons. Thus our development efforts are littered with waste. The largeness of spirit that makes statesmen possible is avoided while we excuse this lack by bad mouthing people!

We have become bottom dredgers of our own history. We insult each and everyone. Nkrumah is game. Danquah is another. Thus the vitriol continues as we keep feeding that beast today.

In the process we forget one thing. We need a change, a serious one; not a bloody revolution but a serious reformation.

We tried the revolution route and came up short. We know "What Went Wrong in Ghana" under every regime since 1966. But we are not using the good ideas that were right. Something else must be wrong.

We call for democracy and good governance at each start. Yet we fail to recognize that democracy is a process. It grows when allowed. When truncated, the process will have to start again.

Ever since the Magna Carta was signed in 1215, and even after Oliver Cromwell, the British are still working on their democracy by processing and improving on the ideas contained in the concept.

But as a term, democracy is indeterminate. Freedom of speech without discipline cannot guarantee it. It requires discipline, experience and education. Our kids in sub-standard schools and in environments replete with indiscipline are at risk.

A kid in a junior high school in Ghana who doesn't understand the basic functions of math or can't write a complete sentence in a language of his choice will not understand the term democracy. But eventually this kid would get to vote!

Chances are parents of this kid wouldn't understand the term either or comprehend fully what is at stake, yet will also vote, lured on by the music "Yentie Obiara"!

Thus the struggle and unraveling of our chances for devolvement continue in negative gear.

Democracy for us has so far been a path and excuse to power. And once in power the opportunity to destroy personalities and their good ideas by men who have none - for fear that the usage of those ideas would grant credit to others instead of their selfish brand.

For instance, the seed of a dam for Ghana was an idea of Albert Ernest Kitson, a colonial geologist in 1915. He was the first to discover bauxite in Ghana (then the Gold Coast} . Later he found manganese ore at Tarkwa and deposits of diamond on the Birim river.

In 1934, diamond export from the Gold Coast was said to have accounted for 39% of the world's supply for that year, all went to the British colonial interest. (Anyone asked yet how much the British stole form us?)

Kitson's idea for a dam was valid. Nkrumah's feat was to latch on to the idea and to bring it to realization for the benefit of Ghana. He was wise to have built the Akosombo Dam by 1965. The consequences would have been dire without it.

Same applied to Kufuor for the Bui Dam. He completed an existing idea. Thus the practical sense in the usage and continuation of good ideas was affirmed. But you be the judge.

However, notice the panic that sets in after a regime change in Ghana.  What good there was under Nkrumah, was quickly reversed or buried by the "glorious revolution". But If it is too much to go back to 1966, then use a recent example - the transition from Kufuor to Atta-Mills in 2009.

The Kufuor 's administration was just yesterday, only one regime away. Any lesson to learn?

Good ideas inherited from previous regimes are worth pursuing - not to be subjected to the slow roll or the usual sudden death new regimes give them.

The rest of us must learn and promote the good points of our history. Take the good from the past and move on with it.

But first, as citizens, there is one admission to make, regardless of our experiences and our ideological preferences: "We found the enemy and it is us," as said Pogo, the protagonist of that comic strip.

Take away the deaths, the bereavements and other tragedies brought to us by our turbulent political past and our behavior today would have been just as comical as Pogo's; thus, the more reason for an ideological truce among us today. It is needed for nation development.

E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Publisher www.ghanadot.com, Washington, DC, February 25, 2015.
Permission to publish: Please feel free to publish or reproduce, with credits, unedited. If posted at a website, email a copy of the web page to publisher@ghanadot.com . Or don't publish at all