Searching for Transformational Elites in Ghanaian Development.

My colleague Karl Botchway, City University of New York, in his publications has suggested that socio-economic development, -- that is the transformation of a state from underdevelopment to an advanced one, -- is primarily a question of politics among other factors. Based on extensive fieldwork and comparative analysis of developmental projects in the world, he arrives at a general proposition, that success of development projects is contingent on the involvement, compromises and active roles of major actors and state leaders to ensure its success. Moreover, in two of the few bright spots of success in Africa: Botswana and Mauritius, the major actors or elite have demonstrated political savvy in sharing common objectives, processes and procedures for development. Botchway’s thesis is a significant contribution to the literature on development.

But my study of development, partially dovetails with his proposition. Based on a review of the literature on development as advocated by Marx, Weber, Schumpeter, Hagen, Rostow, Frank, Fanon, Amin, and Stiglitz one discerns a significant role for the nationalistic elite in socio-economic development. These major theorists suggest that the role of elite in socio-economic growth cannot be minimized. Readings of the history of development in the “new” developed regions of Asia suggest that the elite (i.e. a transformational elite) played an important role in the development of modern industrial society. But the story in Ghana and some parts of the third world seem to be different. The question is why has the elite abandoned this important role when it comes to the societies of Africa?

Historically, this was not the case. In pre-colonial Africa some of the elite comprising of the kings, chiefs, entrepreneurs, priests, warriors and scholars played significant transformative roles. That group helped to found and build the empires of Egypt, Zulu, Yoruba, Ghana, Mali, Songhai, Asante and Ethiopia among others. Most of these societies developed sophisticated legal, economic, social and political institutions, which provided the framework for developing functional and stable societies.

The modern Ghanaian elite, essentially a product of colonialism seems to have been “created” to perform a different task in the Ghanaian societies. This new elite, educated within the European value system and well anchored in western ideals saw their mission rather differently. Perhaps the greatest theorists of the anti-colonial struggle, Franz Fanon captures best the dilemma of the African elite when he writes in The Wretched of the Earth that: The national middle class discovers its historic mission: that of intermediary. Seen through its eyes, its mission has nothing to do with transforming the nation; it consists, prosaically, of being the transmission line between the nation and a capitalism rampant though camouflaged, which today puts on the masks of neocolonialism”

The African elites born out colonialism were to carry out the mandate of the colonial enterprise in what can describe as a “negotiated” independent Africa. Feeling comfortable within a European value system, they rejected their history, culture and traditions while at the same time not completely assimilated in western tradition. They found themselves in a state of suspended animation. They were caught up in no man’s land. The basis of their identity as W.E. B Du Bois would have put it may be the crux of their problem. Even though some of the elites were instrumental in the nationalist movement for independence, most of them as Fanon suggested: “identifies itself with the decadence of the bourgeoisie of the West,” despite their exposure to African culture.

The tragedy of the Ghanaian elite in contemporary times is how their personal interests supersede the national interests. In reality, their personal interests become the national interest! They use their domination of the major institutions of society and government, - executive, judiciary, legislative and media - to advance their parochial interests. Though the elite espouse democratic ideals as necessary for modern society and development, their monopolization of all facets of societal life, have made this exposition, a farce. This prompted one informed observer on Africa to question whether the “self-interested elites [of Africa are] the curse of liberal democracy [and development] in Africa?”

There is some encouraging news. Beginning in the early 1990s critical elements of civil society across much of Africa seems to be rebelling against the political order and establishment of the “old” elite. To what extent does this rebellion create the political space for the emergence of a “new” nationalistic and a developmentally oriented elite in Africa? Time will tell. But as Richard Werbner suggest in his book, Reasonable Radicals, developmentally oriented elite are capable of emerging in Africa.

This is a work-in-progress to examine the pre-conditions under which transformative elite can emerge in Ghana.

Prof. Steve Panford.(City University Of New York)
spanford@citytech.cuny.edu

Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage.