In this Odyssey, we shall delve into the phenomenon of political optimism that seems to be rising like a phoenix in many hopeful Ghanaians who are attuned to the political process. In the last article, we discussed political pessimism; this week, we shall afford the same treatment to its opposite ? political optimism.
Napoleon Bonaparte, the wily French General and Leader, said, ?You must not fight too often with your enemy, or you will teach him your art of war?. The NPP and NDC are mere political rivals, yet the pronouncements coming out of their members at large make them seem like enemies at each other?s throats. The recent timely message of Kwame Pianim, one of the more enlightened NPP advocates, in an uncanny way, validates Napoleons? edict. Too many ?fights? between these political giants can be anomic. Pianim opined that a ?back channel of communication? between the government and opposition ought to be streamlined as is done in other advanced democracies. This is a worthy call. It provides the first political optimism to be noted in this piece. Prior to his assumption of power in 2001, President Kufuor eagerly embraced this backdoor channel. So did former President Rawlings. A meeting was facilitated between them out of the glare of public scrutiny and important matters of State were freely discussed. Kufuor went into the meeting with his top advisor, so did Rawlings with his top Advisor. At a point only the two ?honchos? were left to speak freely. However, as soon as former President Rawlings handed over power peacefully to President Kufuor, the door to this backdoor channel was unceremoniously and emphatically shut. That was indeed a wasted opportunity for the further growth of Ghana?s infant democracy in more ways than readily meets the eye. It is therefore a good thing that Mr. Pianim is sounding the call for a return to the days of civility and communication between the government and the opposition.
Another French Mathematician and Philosopher Blaise Pascal?s words sum up the ominous gulf that developed between NPP and NDC beginning Jan 7, 2001, that is to say from the moment ?the backdoor channel? was closed. He said: ?There are Truths on this side of the Pyrenees, which are Falsehoods on the other?. A) Such was the view taken by NPP on the so-called ?Boom? Speeches of the former President, who if the backdoor channel had not been closed, may perhaps have utilized it to address some of the opinions he publicly shared on the failings of his successor, much to the anger of the latter. B) Pascal?s statement also represents the view taken by NDC of the events they described as witch-hunting, political persecutions, unwarranted prosecutions for the nebulous crime of ?causing financial loss to the State?, a ploy NPP is unwisely resorting to in 2006, after a string of embarrassing electoral losses post 2004.
A culture of intolerance for criticism of NPP leaders, especially President Kufuor, has become more pronounced as 2008 keeps rolling nearer at amazing speed, leaving the NPP less than 890 days in office. It was in the May 7, 1918 editorial of the Kansas City Star that US President, Theodore Roosevelt?s view on criticism of the presidency was delineated. That editorial intoned: ?"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
A few NPP fanatics who submit private mail to this writer have convinced themselves it is heresy to criticize President Kufuor. Other lying human beings have resorted to complete fabrications as tools of their trade in their vulgar comments. However, this writer is unfazed by such reckless attacks from fanatics either hiding behind anonymity or, under false or assumed identities, imbued with fear and cowardice, to print scandalous untruths. Louis Brandeis said: ?The most important political office is that of a private citizen?. Democracy as opposed to totalitarianism engages private citizens, to be precise the people, to be in control by the power of the ballot and voluntary or free participation in the process. In Totalitarianism, it is the State Machinery controlled by the Oligarchy that is in charge of the process. With the authority of the private citizen to participate in the process, speak their minds freely, support candidates of their choice, criticize without fear of death or fanatical gang attacks, as well as cast ballots, it is indeed the most powerful ?political office?.
Thomas Jefferson?s opinion that ?When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property? ought to be a clarion call to Ghanaian politicians. The actions and behaviour of public officers is under 24/7 scrutiny by the public that hired them. They sign off their rights to be ?private citizens? till the day they relinquish power, are sacked, end their term of office or run away from office by taking ?French Leave?. It would be the second political optimism of note, for Ghanaians, either NPP fanatics, or NDC critics, to understand that truthful political criticism of public officers, particularly President Kufuor, is in full exercise of the Articles provided in the Constitution that grants them power to rule and to keep them honest.
The stress and friction in the political front today is another political optimism to look forward to in a strange way. It is the realization and appreciation of rights and responsibilities of the elected official and the electorate not to be that society envisaged by Frederick Douglass when he observed, ?where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe.? The Ghanaian people have proven from colonial times that they are not just docile, sitting idly and accepting political abuse from any quarter. From Yaa Asantewaa defiantly standing up for the rights of her people to Sergeant Adjetey protesting against the injustice of the British, Ghanaians have demonstrated a proud tradition of going against the unjust.
And those politicians who have engaged in corrupt acts must realize that there is no safe haven for them, even if they decide to leave the country. The process of globalization has ensured that crimes of corruption can be investigated across national borders. The international community continues to enact legislation that makes it possible for corrupt public officials to be caught and punished for their extortionist activities. Meanwhile, national attitude must be changed, to the extent that Ghanaians need to condemn those who engage in bribery and corruption, rather than merely accepting it as a so-called ?fact of life?.
The word ?Affordability? was on the lips of every NPP campaigner attacking NDC before the 2000 election. As soon as NPP won in 2000, the word disappeared from their talking points and has not been heard coming out of their lips since then! Where did the word ?Affordability?, subject matter of beautiful NPP campaign Television Commercials, go? Why has the NDC, in turn, shunned that word and is not playing any role in our national discourse as it did before? Perhaps ?Affordable? has lost out and lost its relevance because to both NPP and NDC, Ghanaians earning less than the equivalent of $3.00 a day have managed to control that savage beast. Even though the twin terrors of high inflation and a rising cost of living have conspired to keep many Ghanaians living in poverty, it is still a testament to the tenacity of the average Ghanaian that they have managed to survive and keep afloat in this time of scarcity. It is almost certainly due to the remittances sent from abroad that have enabled many Ghanaians to live in circumstances appropriate to human dignity, without having to bear, too harshly, the perils of poverty, disease and squalor. And while it is certainly generous for brothers and sisters abroad to remit money, whether out of duty or out of love, is it not shameful that millions have to rely on these remittances merely to survive? When the President proudly boasts of consumption remittance, he is rather shamefully admitting that times have become so hard in Ghana, that those abroad feel compelled to rescue their families from the harsh economic conditions, even in situations where they themselves have no place to lay their heads in their respective Diasporean countries.
In the December 3rd, 2005 Odyssey ?Diasporean Remittances and Poverty Alleviation?, this writer said, ?remittances from Ghanaians living abroad are larger and more stable than even loans and grants from the governments of foreign countries, and also larger and more stable than even foreign direct investment (FDI). There is a large, untapped potential in these remittances. The problem is that these remittances are dispersed in a very scattershot manner, and there is no consistent direction as to where they are targeted. These remittances go mainly to private households, unlike ODA and FDI which are geared towards specific projects that create wealth. So even though remittances are lauded as valuable for survival, they lack the direct impact of targeted transfers. Hence, the majority of remittances is used for consumption purposes, while investment in business or traditional productive uses and in savings is small?. Refer to: http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/features/artikel.php?ID=95410
There is optimism for the electorate to go with the party that will offer a comprehensive programme on the revamping of our Agriculture, not by high sounding words that stay put on the paper they are printed on without specific means to translate those words into real action. What about Aveyime Quality Rice Project? Another optimism for 2008, is to bring to the fore the question on Afram and Accra Plains and how these arable lands can effectively be irrigated, of course, with Land Tenure Reform, taken seriously by contending parties. There have been too many Manifestoes already paying lip-service on this issue. It is time for contestants to be forced to discuss openly and often the grand plan they have for Afram and Accra Plains. Here, the 2008 Magna Carta stated in Political Odyssey 3 would come handy. Refer to: http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/features/artikel.php?ID=101783
Going on a tangent and perhaps out of tune with the above, this writer craves a writer?s privilege to sneak in a subject matter of importance worldwide, but may not feature in the thoughts of voters in 2008 since politicians would be loath to talk about it. It is Global Warming and the Greenhouse effect. Ghana is not isolated or an island of itself or by itself. Ghana is part of the global village. As such, issues concerning global warming ought to be discussed on the national level, if we are to become globally competitive and relevant. 2008 offers optimism that such discourse will be part of the national debate. Some may be snickering that this is a complicated subject, which cannot be fully appreciated by majority of the electorate. Those who would profess that argument are those who generally misjudge the intelligence and insight of the native Ghanaian.
As recently as April 3, 2006, Tony Blair called for a ?Green Revolution? when it was announced that Britain would hit its target of 20% reduction in greenhouse emissions by 2010. Blair, who spoke in Auckland, moved for the replacement of the Kyoto Treaty due to expire in 2012 with a new Treaty that must include China, India and the USA, the three nations whose industries contribute most adversely to emission problems. Our President has been invited to a sit down with President Bush, as we pen this piece. Is he merely going for a lecture, or during small talk with his host, would he ask why America did not sign the Kyoto Agreement and offer reasons why America should begin the process of joining a post Kyoto Treaty? Would he not gain respect and admiration of his closest allies Bush and Blair? Would he not set the stage for his successor to pursue this matter and make Ghana?s voice be heard globally?
This writer gives credit to R. Scarborough, who has become a worthy friend by correspondence emanating from these feature pieces, for drawing attention to a piece from a Nigerian News outlet, The Tide Online of April 6, 2006 to be quoted here verbatim to allow readers share their views. African Capitalist Market Economy hailed as the panacea to under-development as proposed in the article is definitely not the same as the Capitalism that NPP professes to practice. It is also not exactly the same as the Social Democracy Philosophy as propounded by NDC. Does it come close to Indigenous Capitalism that Nana Akufo Addo spoke about on February 17, 2006 at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology? He did not provide many details and so that conclusion cannot be drawn now. It offers a chance and optimism to discuss thoroughly the paths of progress that the various contenders would take Ghana post 2008. Optimism in Ghana politics must therefore be considered high.
Here is the verbatim piece from The Tide Online. The article can also be found at: http://www.thetidenews.com/article.aspx?qrDate=04/06/2006&qrTitle=Africa%20must%20empower%20producers&qrColumn=OPINION
Africa must empower producers ? Thursday, Apr 6, 2006
When African and Asian colonies gained independence last century, their new leaders faced two main challenges: to quickly consolidate their political power while ensuring stability and to transform their countries? economies away from colonial era norms.
At first, many expected Asia to remain mired in conflict, while Africa would surpass it. But the opposite has happened. Although much of Asia at first succumbed to conflict, southern and east Asia soon had stability and the region moved fast to address the economic challenge. In Africa, however, old conflicts still rage, and new ones have erupted. With few exceptions, Africa?s political elites have undermined their countries? economies comparing Ghana and South Korea, for instance, the World Bank notes that they were at a similar level of development in the 1960s. Yet by 1995, Korea?s exports had increased 400-fold, compared with only four times for Ghana, where real earnings per capita had declined.
What went wrong? Thinkers across the political spectrum agree that the private sector is the driver of modern economic development. Yet Africa?s private sector, one of the largest in the world, is one of the least developed. Classical economic theory suggests that we all seek greater security and comfort, which in turn should make us productive members of society, who will accumulate more wealth to shore up that comfort. The logic of capitalism says that since every one is competing for security and comfort, everyone will produce more, better and more cheaply, for fear of suffering the opposite fate.
However, if capitalism is right, Africa should be a hive of activity and growth, driven by the logic that private individuals and households are all trying to maximize that basic need. But today the vast majority experiences less of both and in many instances faces homelessness, violence and starvation every day.
The problem is the theory assumes that private firms and individuals are free to pursue their security and comfort while owning and controlling the means to do this. It assumes they are free to exchange their products without hindrance and that where they can save, they are free to keep those savings and plough them back into improved techniques or other investments.
This is not the case for the private sector in sub-Saharan Africa. It predominantly consists of the rural poor and of subsidiaries of foreign-owned companies. Neither of these groups is free to operate in the marketplace because each is dominated politically by non-producers who control the state. This weakness of the African private sector best explains its inability to become an engine of economic development. Africa?s private sector lacks political power and is therefore not free to operate. Above all, it is not free to decide what happens to its savings.
The vicious circle of corruption. In short, the political elite use its control of the state to extract savings from the rural poor who, if they could, would have invested those savings either in improving their skills or in other productive economic activities. The elite divert these savings towards its own consumption, and also to strengthen the state?s repressive instruments. lf sub-Saharan Africa is to develop, it needs a new type of democracy - one that will empower the region?s private producers. First, the rural poor must become the real owners of their primary asset, land. This is the only way towards environmental improvement, as opposed to the trend of rampant deforestation and desertification. To do this, freehold must be introduced and the so-called communal land-tenure system that in reality is state land ownership - must be abolished.
Secondly, peasant producers must gain direct access to world markets without the political elite acting as the go-between through state-owned corporations. This means that internationally traded cash crops - such as coffee, tea, cotton, sugar and rubber - must be auctioned by the producers themselves rather than being sold first to state marketing boards.
Co-operatives needed. New financial institutions are needed which are independent of the ruling elite, and which will address the financial needs of the rural societies as well as of small and medium-scale producers. These could be cooperatives, credit unions or savings banks. They would undertake all the other technical services such as crop research, extension services, livestock improvement, storage, transportation, distribution and other services that would help to make agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa more productive.
What socio-economic system would these changes bring about? Certainly not socialism. These changes would herald an African capitalist market economy that answers the needs of African producers rather than that of colonialists and, more recently, the ruling elites, who try to maintain the colonialist vision of Africa as a primary producer for the industrialized world.?
There is great optimism in Ghana as the 2008 Election inches closer. It offers a chance once again to decide what the philosophies of the major parties are and how effective they have been in solving Ghana?s myriad problems as year 50 approaches March 6, 2007. NPP describe themselves variously as, democrats, liberal democrats, nay, property- owning democrats or perchance, ?Indigenous Capitalists?. Do Real Capitalists anywhere in the world dabble with free Lunches and free bus rides for any segment of their societies? Do Capitalists beg a Socialist nation like Cuba to provide them with Health Personnel at the same time as locally produced health personnel leave for better life abroad? These are not the actions of a supposedly capitalist-oriented administration. So we have the NPP paying lip service to their Capitalist Philosophy whilst executing Social Democratic Ideals, as enunciated in the 2004 NDC Manifesto as the NDC philosophy! It is good that NPP has co-opted the NDC?s philosophy in material particular since Crass Capitalism does nothing but bring woes to developing nations such as Ghana. Crass Capitalism calls for full cost recovery for goods and services like water, education and health, regardless of affordability, leading to a great social imbalance.
The future of Ghana Politics is bright. There is the will to get things right. There is the hope to elect the right kind of leader. There is the impetus to move forward as a united people. There is the vibe that salvation is around the corner. We can only hope and search for the leader who will justify this sense of optimism.
Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage.
