``Brainteaser for us all``

IN A previous communication by the same author, attention was drawn to the fact that our youth, knowing awfully so little about our history, was bad. This pronouncement keeps buoying up, obstructively, whenever discussions crop up in any attempt to understand anything at all, in the very muddy post 1966 era.

One example after another, and when the need arises to go any deeper into the issue at hand, it all fizzles out into nothingness, because the fundamentals would be found to be missing. For example, a “29-year-old unmarried young man,” but father of a six-year old boy, calls my attention to what he thinks is the cause of his demise.

In his view, Kwame Nkrumah took Ghana's money and doled it in millions of pounds to Guinea and Mali. He should have used it in developing the country a lot more. This money could have built more motorways, and more railways to have connected the North. These investments would have survived him, either way. That, he thinks, could have put the country on an industrial footing, which could have sustained jobs for the youth ad infinitum.

This young man is a computer-programming-expert, but without a permanent job. He hops from café´ to café collecting a few Ghana cedis from both the owners and customers, as might be found fit. He is a member of the political party that opposes the ideologies of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, and that is how he votes too. There is another young man who just graduated from an elite university of our Republic. He read Economics, and since two years he cannot find a job. His dad is “luckily well-to-do,” and so far, so good. He is in the kind of field to comprehend that he better get a job of his own, and build up something by himself. His father's fortunes might not last forever. He blames collectively, everybody who has been in Government since we took the destiny of our country into our own hands in 1957. Why did we not become like South Korea, Taiwan, or Singapore? He recalled a radio-interview some four years ago, in which the then President, (Mr. J. A. Kufuor), defended the state of post-independent progress, or lack of it, as not having had the continuity that the Tigers of the Orient had enjoyed. The foreign correspondent called our leader's attention to the myriad of military takeovers that South Korea had gone through,, and yet evolved as a true industrial power. The interview ended there and then.

A third young man did not want to hear the name of Dr. Nkrumah, let alone recognise him as Father/Founder of the nation, because there was still bitterness in him, and all members of his family, hinging on the issue of a late family member who was once detained under the Preventive Detention Act, (PDA), having not been proven guilty of any crime. And of course, there are rudiments of stalwarts of the Convention People's Party (CPP) “new-blood” thereof, who see nothing sinister whatsoever, that Nkrumah and his “brainchild”, the CPP, ever undertook. When you take your time, and interest, the former is just as important as the latter, to discuss the issue, you are likely to hear a repetition across board, with the exception that, few women show any interest in such discussions, even on a casual basis. It is nonetheless surprising, that there are quite an appreciable number of women who fought, and won seats in parliament, in the last election, and in the two major political parties.

For those of us who saw Nkrumah whilst just entering secondary schools, the notion, even an urge to admire him, as the man who made it possible for us to get education (even gave it to us), is irresistible. Big chunks of the youth were pushed through, and when you got through the second phase, university education was not a mirage, but attainable, either at home or overseas. The nations then known as the Soviet Block, - the USSR itself, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary, all were offering scholarships, because Nkrumah's regime had opened trade-packages with them, encompassing facilities like that. Nkrumah, who never thought there could be a Ghana in his life-time without him at the top, had imagined all the students leaving the country with his blessing to study, would return rather sooner than later, and get webbed into the cobweb of nation-building towards a modern society.

Indeed, within his vision of “Africanisation,” he had standing instructions in Ghana embassies and missions throughout the world, (Ghana had more Embassies and missions, than any other nation, except the USA), to offer financial assistance to any stranded African student. This did happen, with Nigerian students benefitting most, in Great Britain, but also in the then Federal Republic of Germany. “Seek ye first, the academic kingdom”, and all the rest…!” This was followed by, “Seek ye first, the political Kingdom…!”

These slogans, plus others coming from quarters such as the YOUNG PIONEERS, chanting such things as “Nkrumah is our Messiah, Nkrumah never dies,” led an Anglican Archbishop residing in Ghana to make such an utterance as “Nkrumah's Young Pioneers is a Godless organisation.” The Bishop was further accused of having publicly compared the Young Pioneer movement to The Hitler Youth. The Holy man from England, representing the Church of Her Majesty the Queen, paid an almost instant price of getting deported. He returned to Ghana only weeks later, supposedly having rendered an apology to the President, Dr. Nkrumah. Increasingly, Nkrumah had amassed too much power, to the dislike of even men and women from the academia, who loved him initially. Military coups d'etat, prior to the February 26th, 1966, all failed. There was the one at Kulungugu in 1961, followed by another shortly thereafter at the Flagstaff House. Accused of having been involved were in both cases, men from his own party, and/or trusted lieutenants from the Police Force, or Military. Foreign dignitaries, (from Britain and Nigeria), kept sounding soft voices of caution. Nkrumah had alienated chunks of the masses that he claimed to have come to liberate. Where was the Freedom? Where was the Justice? But, both were embossed in bold in our coat of Arms. Was he a Communist? His detractors think he was, his adherents differ. Was he a Dictator? Here even big brains in his party don't say he was not, they say he needed such tough methods to stay afloat. He himself agitating against British rule at the beginning of his career was interned on two occasions, but for brief periods. Under his rule, others under suspicion of having actively or passively done something sinister could be interned indefinitely, without trial. It is difficult for whoever looks at it. There is anger from some supportive quarters with any attempt to compare Nkrumah to Adolf Hitler. Both were massively popular in their times. Hitler thought Germany had been cheated at the Versailles Agreement. Nkrumah convinced his people Colonialism was exploitative. Both had grandiose ideas for development. Hitler said: “In a Democracy, you make one step forward, but two backwards.” Nkrumah can't clearly be accused of the same statement. Both men erred in how long the movement they had set in motion could thrive. Hitler's lasted 12 years, Nkrumah's 14 years, The CPP has in a way bounced back, but the NAZI-party not. Nkrumah has sympathisers, and so does Hitler. Ghanaians must find out more about Nkrumaism, and let the youth be pre-occupied either way. Germany does the same about Hitler. A Psychoanalyst, sympathetic to Nkrumah's cause, says, “Kwame possibly needed Sigmund Freud, but he died in 1939, unfortunately.

   Comments0