Ghana is celebrating 68 years of independence today. It has been difficult getting this far. Surprisingly, we are still debating its founding. It is not very likely, that many citizens would be inclined to open the champagne, or whatever they drink in celebrations this year because they are angry at what politics has become and abhor the corruption of the men it is producing. Cynicism ran deep.
True independence and self-determination never occurred. Instead, what emerged was a neo-state in which politicians promised the people freedom, in terms the leaders knew to be a lie. Ghana under Kwame Nkrumah was an autocracy. The independent state and economic structure was not designed to liberate the people or decrease state control; rather, it took from the people the rights they already possessed and detained those who resisted. Our leaders enlisted the colonial state structures with their deep-seated tribal divisions, and economic and political institutions to support their rule.
Independence was a carefully managed illusion. It simply opened a domain for rent-seeking and corruption. Opponents were described as ‘quislings’, ‘stooges’, and ‘traitors’ and attacked with impunity. Independence divided the people and prevented a section from participating in the affairs of their own country because, in the eyes of those who have won power, they are ‘detractors’ working for the enemy.
The situation has changed little since 1957. The animosity between the Convention People’s Party (CPP) and the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC), the National Liberation Movement (NLM), the United Party (UP), and unbridled partisanship persists, with no significant attempts made to unite the people behind a shared vision and meritocracy. The government and State define the public interest.
Ghana has faced ongoing challenges of poor leadership, characterized by corruption, nepotism, and a misguided ideology of self-reliance in its democracy. From the regime of Kwame Nkrumah to those of K.A. Busia, Kutu Acheampong, Kwasi Akuffo, Hilla Limman, J.J. Rawlings, John Agyekum Kufuor, John Atta Mills, and John Mahama, the narrative has been consistent: gross mismanagement of the economy along with worsening issues such as poverty, ethnicity, and underdevelopment.
Despite the adoption of the 1992 Constitution, which recognizes the sovereignty of the tribe within a multi-party democracy, the country’s leaders have created echo chambers. These echo chambers enable individuals on both sides of the political spectrum to hear only what they want, offering validation rather than constructive challenge. The leaders serve as judges in their own disputes, enforcing their interpretation of democratic inclusion through a Parliamentary process that has become a mere charade.
Winning an election in Ghana has increasingly become a means for domination, control, and conquest. What does this mean for the ongoing polarisation in the country? The greatest threat is telling millions of voters that their thoughts, concerns; aspirations; and pleas for relief are invalid or unworthy of even being considered. The messy bitter business of democracy requires tolerating and protecting all opinions.
Where does disillusionment with institutions end and nihilism begin? Currently, we allow violent mobs, in a self-conscious exercise of political dominance, to dictate the outcomes of our democratic elections. Given the polarized times we live in, it is crucial to support leaders who view the state as a servant rather than a master and who prioritize the welfare of the nation over political games.
With John Mahama’s return to the presidency, his administration’s actions and partisanship reflect the saying, “To the victor go the spoils of the enemy.” His government is putting considerable effort into maintaining a partisan state amidst turbulent conditions. The past is once again being reshaped to serve current interests, with the hope of maintaining the status quo, similar to what the country has previously experienced.
John Mahama’s efforts to reset the economy suggest a desire to revive the failed socialist policies of the past. The NDC seems to discourage citizens from creating their wealth, promoting dependence on the ruling class instead. He appears to want the authority to decide who succeeds and who fails in the economy.
While the ideas of resetting the country and a 24-hour economy sound appealing, what do they mean in practice? How can private industry operate around the clock when the current system encourages cronyism and limits free-market activities? Who decides resource allocation and individual roles? It is easy to support state control while supporting the corruption of the existing system.
We need to challenge the clientelist bourgeois socialist economy that the IMF and the World Bank manage. Almost six decades have passed since independence — enough time, one should think, for our so-called leaders to come up with some ideas for a different development plan. Yet here we are. After all those years, we have still not moved beyond the buzzword stage.
To move forward, Ghana must shift away from being a patronage economy and a client state. By prioritizing inclusion and meritocracy, we can tackle economic challenges and establish a unified legal economy with larger markets for goods and services. Ghana remains a resource-rich country; however, its economic performance has become volatile and unpredictable. The government should stop borrowing and printing money to sustain the high levels of public spending that the population has grown accustomed to.
Independence was intended to empower the people by giving them a more significant voice in their affairs. Their input, often rooted in common sense, is essential for progress, as their perspectives can help drive the country forward. Independence without changing the structure, without new structural formation, and without an inclusive environment that promotes freedom and development, simply makes Ghana as oppressive, as misogynist as it was in pre-colonial days.
You cannot reset the same.