Calling Ivor Greenstreet's Bluff!

Since when did reckless behavior and irresponsibility become a benchmark to

assessing the adequacy of the nation’s political leaders? What kind of nation

are we building when the leadership of our political parties is flooded with

acerbic people who are themselves stained with conducts that defy the basic

stipulations of contemporary universal morality?

Do we ever, for a minute, take into account, the incalculable dangers to leaving

our nation’s politics to our experimental politicians? I take offense to Ivor

Greenstreet’s recent coldhearted comment that the ex-president Jerry John

Rawlings is a “loose canon”. In a rebuttal to a claim from the Propaganda

Secretary of NDC that the youth organizer of CPP Kwabena Bomfeh is an NPP mole

in the CPP, the general secretary of CPP Ivor Grenstreet lunched a scathing

attack on the former President, Jerry John Rawlinngs.

“If criticism is the yardstick by which NDC determine what a mole is, then the

real mole the NDC should be concerned with is their own loose canon; founder

Jerry John. He is the greatest critic of His Excellency the President and in a

most shameful and disgraceful manner”. Those were the exact words Ivor

Grenstreet used in describing the former president. Should Ivor Greenstreet’s

populist brand of political rhetoric go unchallenged? It would be absurd for

Ivor Greenstreet to link Mr Rawlings to loose cannon. What has Rawlings got to

do with Richard Quashiga’s calling of Kwabena Bomfeh as an NPP mole in the CPP?

Why the personal attack on Mr Rawlings? Ivor Greenstreet’s statements have

portrayed him as a loose talker who does not exercise discretion in the public

domain.

When you reach a certain level of public elevation and stature, you avoid loose

talk like a strange disease. One may ask how much of life I have seen to be able

to make such statements about someone as old as Ivor Greenstreet. My response is

simple: it is true that what an old man sees when sitting down will elude a

young man standing at his full height. So also is it true that what a baby sees

when crawling would totally elude an old man when perching. Ivor Greenstreet has

done the unthinkable. Simply put, he has let many people down with his reckless

outburst.

How does he think people would think of him, his judgment and posturing after

this classic status-deflating spree he has embarked on? Pathetically enough, the

more he opens his mouth to defend, rebuff, or redress the situation, the more

flies he invites to feast on the carcass he has unleashed into the Ghanaian

political atmosphere. I honestly think he is so gone with the wind with this sad

comment of being momentarily carried away. Until he spoke that balderdash, I was

inclined to think political rallies were the only grounds upon which such loose

talk is spewed. If issuing a mere statement to counter someone’s “guff” can

elicit such momentary flights of indiscretion, I shudder to think what a

political rally would bestow upon a General Secretary if and when called to

address the charged crowds that show up at such gatherings. Ivor Greenstreet, in

my opinion fell into a trap, one created by himself but unfortunately set for no

other but the trap-builder.

Let this be a warning to those acerbic politicians in our political parties, who

think rather pathetically that their political careers have spanned over decades

and therefore cannot be wrong. There is a new breed of interpreter in Ghana

today. That breed is generically called “Youth” and they are as smart as they

are vicious and eager to overturn any semblance of pretentiousness at the

highest echelons of any political party. I have always held that those who

cannot understand and comprehend the changing dynamics of political activity

today have absolutely no business trying to become political players. There is

always a price to pay for loose talk or emotional outbursts irrespective of whom

they emanate from. If Ivor Greenstreet’s pain is anything to go by, let his

contemporaries in government begin the process of fine-tuning their act for a

time is coming when so-called political leaders would be told openly in the face

to go burn the sea.

Does the president and his advisors, for a minute, compute the harm his

political friends causing the NDC? Whose interest was he serving when he lunched

such a scathing attack on the former president?

Does the provision on free speech confer on our politicians the uninhibited

privilege to express their idiotic guff in public without being hauled over

burning coals? If the preceding is what democracy is about, then we must rethink

our brand of national politics, and re-socialize some of our political leaders

to learn good manners. While democracy offers us the window to communicate our

views on any subject matter, it does not allow incendiary provocations. Our

nation cannot afford the cost of any human folly that could be misread, as a

threat, and incite violence.

The breeding of the likes of Ivor Greenstreet in the nation’s political space

also attests to the quiescent character of the Ghanaian voting public, and our

predisposition to choosing impulsive politicians, whose reckless talk, if left

unchecked, will one day reduce our nation’s democratic accomplishments to

rubble. What true, and civilized, democracy would allow a political figure to

pass such a loutish comment without dispensing some form of consequence? If as a

nation, we would allow Mr. Greenstreet to speak with such a discourtesy, and get

away with it, what moral obligation do we have to guiding our young children

from using snide language against noble citizens? Having run out of ideas, some

of our nation’s politicians have turned our democracy into a theatre for

political comedy, and character vilification.

Would Ivor Greenstreet be immune from the physical and psychological wounds his

rhetoric is seeking to create? Civilized democracies thrive on the display of

wit to outwit one’s opponents and not calls for war of attrition to discredit

one’s adversaries. In twenty-first century liberal democracy, to deviate into

the space of good judgment is forgivable. It marks a noticeable departure from

old thoughts into the orbit of civilized conduct. The fault in our democracy, as

we have come know, does not rest in our stars, but our chose of politicians

whose concept of free speech, and peace, is at the atavistic stage, and cannot

be trusted as a dependable resource to solidify our communal values on peaceful

co-existence. Let’s reject recklessness of our politicians and embrace peace in

the interest of our dearest nation.

Many of Mr. Rawlings’ criticisms of President Mills have been overanalyzed and

misrepresented to serve the political ends of his adversaries. In the coming

days, or months, we should not be surprised to seeing Ivor Greenstreet and his

sponsors at the presidency run, gasping, to the radio station to announce that

Mr. Rawlings is trying to recruit an army of dead people to effect regime

change. This is not a conjure of my imagination, but my satirical way of

chronicling the growing insecurity that has enveloped our ethno-democratic

politics.

Let’s accord our past presidents, the respect they deserve, even if we disagree

with their policies, and vision for the nation. Like him, or loathe him, Mr.

Jeremiah John Rawlings has served his nation well, and the best way he knew how.

In 1992, he became acquiescent to political pluralism. In 2000, he conceded to a

transition, which he personally supervised, and left our nation in one piece. As

a pragmatist, and an astute leader, he understands Africa’s politics and time to

quit, if and when necessary, to preserve the achievements of the struggle

against injustice. Mr. Rawlings is someone who command respect across the broad

political spectrum in Ghana and beyond. His forthrightness is legendary,

especially when he throws light on issues that fall within his experience.

Let’s not allow the conceited to use the child’s words to create castles to keep

our nation in darkness. As Ghanaians, our commitment must rest with building a

nation that respects the rights of all, and not some. We should create a

collegial atmosphere that encourages impassioned articulation of ideas, and not

the culling of the irrelevant to justify a lost cause as some have done. I bear

no ill-will towards any individual. However, I cringe to see the unwholesome

assimilation of irrationality by the likes of Ivor Greenstreet to the nation’s

cultural-moral consciousness.

If our nation continues to elate itself on the nonsense that it is fed our by

politicians, then we should be prepared to pay a very heavy price for not

speaking out against a rogue-General Secretary of a political party whose

notoriety is sourced from making a reckless statement.

We shall be back!

Emmanuel Dela Coffie

www.delacoffie.wordpress.com