The Traditional and Modern Concepts Of Insults

Details

Category: Culture & Tourism

Created on Monday, 03 August 2015 00:00

Hits: 8595

The Traditional and Modern Concepts Of Insults

CULTURE & TRADITION: Re- “Where did civility go? When did civility leave us? When adults insult and exhibit insulting behaviour, what are children to learn- A Facebook Inquiry By Clara Beeri

[1] No doubts- our political and perhaps, even our traditional landscape, are arguably, littered with all forms of insults. And there is, yes, an adage in our collective cultures and traditions that ‘but for adulthood’; every adult had once been a child before. So we could comfortably conclude that since charity begins at home; such insulting adults might have been brought up by insulting parents/guardians?

[2] Probably, wrong- we are all unique and might have acquired such character traits along the way from other peoples or cultures/traditions that are even not closer or similar to ours! Indeed, culture is said to be a notoriously difficult term to define‘. Yet Hofstede(1994: 5) defines it as “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another.’ Matsumoto(1996: 16), puts it this way: “… the set of attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors shared by a group of people, but different for each individual, communicated from one generation to the next.”

[3] So our sister Clara Beeri, might be right to be concerned about an acts that speak or treat others with disrespect or scornful abuse. To insult or treat people we disagree with an offensive or contemptuous remark or action(s) that signals affront; slight or rendering them to nothing, stupid and useless in the minds of right thinking people can certainly, not be summed/flagged up as an act of civility- described by dictionary reference as an act or express of courtesy or politeness towards that person(s) in question.

[4] But in his article- “How to Deal With Insults and Put-Downs”- Timeless advice on dealing with insults, Neel Burton M.D (2013) asked us to begin to think about the various kinds of insult that are out there. “First, there are, of course, verbal insults, which can be either direct or, more commonly, indirect. Examples of indirect verbal insults are jokes and ironic comments, backhanded compliments, mimicry, and false fascination. As our eyes and facial expressions can substitute for speech, such things as a cold or constant stare, a false or exaggerated smile, or a raised eyebrow can also count as an indirect verbal insult. Then there are much more obviously physical insults such as punching, slapping, or spitting.”

[4] All of the above, Neel Burton wrote at the psychologytoday website, involve actively doing something and therefore count as insults of commission. “But insults of omission are equally if not more common. Examples of insults of omission are not inviting or including someone, not deferring to his rank, not laughing at his jokes, and studiously avoiding eye contact with him.” Why, then, do we insult?

[5] We have learned that insulting behaviours could culturally/traditionally, come from different shades of communication formats and in cultural practices, it could be detected not only from the way we eat or drink but could also be discovered, for example, in the way we drum or dance. More recently, in the Asante Region, there had been a stand-off between a delegated “traditional chief and a subject” over an appropriate choice of “cloth/shoe” to wear at one of the government-sponsored community gathering.

[6] In most Western worlds it could be seen as an insult or disrespectful attitude if for example, we fail to honour a proper dress-code at an interview or a conference. Whereas European cultures lay emphasizes on an eye-to-eye contact in any direct dialogue, culturally/traditionally, such attitude could be seen as an insult/disrespectful act in most cultures in Ghana. There could be such cultures/traditions among us but for the purposes of this contribution, let us respectfully, consider, for example, the Akan’s tradition that in any gathering- be it a funeral/naming ceremony, if we wish to greet officially, we ought to begin from right-to-left and not the other way round. Traditionally, we could be fined if such norm is not observed. Then is the custom that unless otherwise stated, culturally we cannot wear white-cloth to a funeral.

All these [un]known traditional/cultural practices we find in our various communities, perhaps, make our understanding of culture and insult, very complex and unless it is verbally spoken we might not be able to comprehend. Thus, we could be insulted daily without it being understood- either in drumming, singing by dressing or even without a word spoken. So, what is the best way to deal with any or all of these insults? Find below some clues or answers provided by the Psychologytoday UK, for our consideration:

…..

The best way to deal with any or all of these insults

1. Anger. This is the weakest possible response, and this for three main reasons. First, it shows that we take the insult, and therefore the insulter, seriously. Second, it suggests that there is truth in the insult. And third, it destabilizes us and causes us pain.

2. Acceptance. This may seem like a very weak response, but in many cases it is actually the strongest response of all. When someone insults us, we ought to consider three things: whether the insult is true, who it came from, and why. If the insult is true, the person it came from is reasonable, and his motive is worthy, then the insult is not an insult but a statement of fact and, moreover, one that is potentially very helpful to us. Thus it is usually the case that we do not or ought not take offense at our teacher, parent, or best friend.

In general, if I respect the person who insulted me, I ought to give thought to the insult and learn as much as I can from it. On the other hand, if I think that the person who insulted me is not worthy of my consideration, I have no reason to take offense at him, just as I have no reason to take offense at a naughty child or a barking dog.

Notice that, whatever the case, I have no reason to take offense.

3. Returning the insult. There are several problems with the put-down, even if it is a very clever one. First, it does have to be clever, and, second, it has to occur to us at just the right moment. But even if we are as sharp and witty as Oscar Wilde, a clever put-down is unlikely to constitute our best defence. You see, the problem with the clever put-down is that, however clever it is, it tends to equalize us with our insulter, raising him up to our level and bringing us down to his. This gives him, and therefore his insult, far too much credibility. In fact, the clever put-down should only be used amongst friends, and only to add to the merriment of the occasion. And it should end with something like a toast or a rub on the shoulder. In short, it should only be used for the purpose of humor.

4. Humor. Humor is an especially effective response for three reasons: it undermines the insult, it brings the audience (if any) on side, and it diffuses the tension of the situation. Here is an example of the effective use of humor. Cato the Younger, the Roman statesman and stoic philosopher, was pleading a case when his adversary Lentulus spat in his face. After wiping off the spittle, Cato said, “I will swear to anyone, Lentulus, that people are wrong to say that you cannot use your mouth.”

Sometimes, it might even be appropriate to exaggerate or add to the insult so as to make a mockery of the insulter and, by extension, of the insult. “Ah, if only you had known me better, you would have found greater fault still!”

5. Ignoring the insult. One downside of humor is that it requires quick thinking. In contrast, ignoring the insult is easier and, in fact, more powerful. One day, a boor struck Cato whilst he was out at the public baths. When the boor realized that it was Cato whom he had struck, he came to offer his apology. Instead of getting angry or accepting the apology, Cato replied, “I don’t remember being struck.”

Subtext of his reply: “You are so insignificant that I don’t even care to register your apology, let alone to take offense at your insult.”

In conclusion, we need never take offense at an insult. Offense exists not in the insult but in our reaction to it, and our reactions are completely within our control. It is unreasonable to expect a boor to be anything but a boor; if we take offense at his bad behaviour, we have only ourselves to blame.

Acknowledgement: The principal ideas and examples in this blog post came from a reading of the excellent book by William Irvine, A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy (link is external).

Neel Burton is author of The Meaning of Madness (link is external), The Art of Failure: The Anti Self-Help Guide (link is external), Hide and Seek: The Psychology of Self-Deception (link is external), Heaven and Hell: The Psychology of the Emotions (link is external), and other books.

JusticeGhana

.........

References

https://www.psychologytoday.com

No comments

Who is an African?

Details

Category: Culture & Tourism

Created on Sunday, 21 June 2015 00:00

Hits: 9167

Who is an African?

At face value, the answer to this question seems obvious. Surely, everyone knows who the African is, it would seem. But the answer becomes less obvious once other probing qualifiers are added to the question. Are White South Africans really Africans? Are Moroccans, Egyptians and other Arab Africans as much Africans as say, Nigerians or Ghanaians? Is Barrack Obama an African? Do all categorised as African or as having an African pedigree perceive themselves as such? Are all who perceive themselves as Africans accepted as such? Are there levels of “African-ness”, and are some more African than others? Who allots this African-ness, and why? How does African identity interface with other levels of identity and citizenship in Africa? In short, how is the African identity constructed in the face of the mosaic of identities that people of African ancestry living within and beyond the continent bear?

The above are some of the questions one confronts when trying to empirically delineate the African.

For some, the African is simply a racial category - a Black man with certain Bantu features. But this classificatory scheme often poses more questions than it answers. Let us for instance assume that a Caucasian English police officer described the scene of a crime thus: “At the scene of the crime were four Africans and four white boys.” What kinds of images come to our mind to differentiate the four ‘Africans’ from the four White boys? If the same police officer changes the description to: “There were four Black men and four White boys at the scene of the crime”, what sorts of imageries come to our mind? Or better put, what sorts of imageries do we think he is trying to convey?

It would seem that the use of ‘African’ is much narrower than the use of ‘Black’ because our hypothetical Caucasian police officer would most likely think of Africans as being different from Black Caribbean, Black Guyanese or African-Americans even though they are all generically called Blacks. This analogy suggests that while race does matter as an organising category in identifying the African, it would be inadequate in properly differentiating, in the Western imagination at least, who is an African from who is Black.

Again if we use race alone in the delineation of the African, a legitimate question is raised about non-Blacks with African citizenship, say, the White South Africans, who never knew any other country but South Africa. Are they Africans?

Some have tried to use territoriality to define the African. For those who adopt this perspective, all it takes will be to look at the map of the world and categorise all who were born in the continent of Africa or who hold the citizenship of one of the countries that make up the continent, or has ancestry in the continent, as African. This option however has equally a number of problems. For example, if we choose to call all who have ‘African’ ancestry Africans, how far back in time should we go? This perspective also wrongly assumes [U1]that all who are citizens of the countries that make up the continent of Africa accept that they are ‘Africans’. Even within sub-Saharan Africa, sections of countries like Somalia, Mauritania, Niger and Sudan would prefer to be called Arabs, not Africans.

There are also those who believe that consciousness of being an African, or commitment to the cause of Africa should be the only or main criterion for delineating who the African is. This form of classification is quite popular with the remnants of the African ideological left and those eager to wear the toga of universalism and cosmopolitanism. One of the weaknesses of this classificatory scheme however is that it is so fluid that any one expressing any sort of interest in African affairs could, by this definition, legitimately claim to be an African. For instance is Tony Blair, who as Prime Minister of Britain, said that Africa was a scar on the consciousness of the world, and felt moved enough to set up the Commission for Africa, an African by this definition? Besides, using consciousness to delineate the African could end up de-Africanising a majority of the people who non-Africans will commonly identify as Africans. Does for instance the village Igbo or Yoruba or Hausa woman in Nigeria have any consciousness of being an African? If, as is commonly believed, such a consciousness is non-existent, or at best insipient, does that then imply that such people are not Africans?

Eminent African political scientist Professor Ali Mazrui made a distinction between “Africans of the blood and Africans of the soil”. For him, Africans of the blood are defined in racial and genealogical terms. They are identified with the black race while Africans of the soil are defined in geographical terms. For Mazrui therefore, both territoriality and race should be used simultaneously in identifying the African. A major problem with this view however is that it seems to imply a hierarchy of Africans since someone who is both an African of the blood and an African of the soil could legitimately claim a higher ranking than those who have fewer attributes such as those who are only Africans of the soil or of the blood.

More than the controversial question of who is an African, are the implications of the contentious nature of African identity for the continent’s unity project and development trajectory? Fortunately they are many who believe that despite these challenges, there are sufficient grounds for optimism. These grounds include the rise of new economic powers – Brazil, China, India and Russia- which are increasingly looking upon Africa as the next big destination, the apparent deepening of democratic ethos in the continent, which could lead to a weakening of the fissiparous tendencies that underlie the various notions of Africanity, and the emergence of Barrack Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America.

For many Africans Obama is both an African name they can relate to, and a metaphor expressing that anything is possible if you strive hard for it with the ‘right attitude.’ It is believed that this ‘right attitude’ is an attitude that is post-chauvinism, for it is only by being post-racial and a reconciler that a Blackman, with an African Muslim father, who was not born into privilege, could emerge president of the most powerful country in the world. This lesson is not lost on Africans and it is a powerful boost to the African unity project.

_________________________________________________

The book, Who is an African? Identity, Citizenship and the Making of the Africa-Nation, is published this week by Adonis & Abbey Publishers (www.adonis-abbey.com)

[U1]Don’t make any judgment

By Jideofor Adibe, PhD, LLM

pcjadibe@yahoo.comThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Source: http://www.gamji.com/article8000/NEWS8639.htm

No comments

How I Wish Krobo Edusei Was Alive!

Details

Category: Politics

Created on Saturday, 11 July 2015 00:00

Hits: 9968

How I Wish Krobo Edusei Was Alive!

When Mr Krobo Edusei became Minister of the Interior in Dr Kwame Nkrumah’s Government in November 1957, the atmosphere in Ghana’s Parliament was one of the most pleasant in the world.

Humour was the most appreciated contributions Members could make to debates, with the result that sharp-witted people like Mr Kofi Baako, became “pillars” of the House.

Whatever the chief humourist of the day, Joe Appiah, threw at the Government of Dr Kwame Nkrumah, Kofi Baako would manage to find an answer to.

As Parliamentary Reporter of the Ghana Broadcasting Corporation, I enjoyed the exchanges between the MPs. I also found that they respected objectivity: I never once received a complaint from an MP on either side of the House about how they had – or had not – been reported.

Me and a guy called Sam Morris, originally from Trinidad did our best to deserve the respect of both sides of the House. And the country enjoyed our efforts — even today, old pals with whom I used to work in Broadcasting House, often yell “TODAY IN PARLIAMENT!” when they see me.

One of the victims of Joe Appiah’s wit was Mr Krobo Edusei, who became Minister of the Interior in November 1957. Mr Edusei had once attempted to get the Government of Ghana to commit itself to carrying out some joint enterprises with a Ceylonese national, operating in Britain, who styled himself as “Dr” Emile Savundra. But Joe Appiah and others who had lived in the UK for a long time knew of Savundra as a swindler, who had collected huge amounts of money from customers who sought life and motor-car insurance from his firm, but left them without insurance.

Joe Appiah and the others exposed “Dr” Savundra, and he had to make a fast exit out of the country before the CID – which was then very independent and efficient – hauled him before Ghana’s courts.

From then on, any time Mr Krobo Edusei entered the House, Joe Appiah would yell across to him: “SAVU!” And the Opposition MPs would chant back: “SAVUNDRA!” But Mr Krobo Edusei, who had started his working life as a debt collector for the Ashanti Pioneer newspaper, had a thick skin and would feign deafness and take his seat on the Government front bench.

He only changed his attitude to mockery when the Preventive Detention Act was passed and he obtained power to detain people without trial for five years. He began to preface every statement he made with the words, “As Minister of Interior (sic) responsible for internal security I shall not tolerate….” (He always managed to omit the “the” before “Interior” thus sending shivers down the spines of those who wrote his speeches for him!)

All this brought a huge laugh from the Opposition benches. They thought Mr Edusei was merely boasting, parrot-like, about his new-found power and that the Prime Minister, Dr Kwame Nkrumah, would respect the Constitution of the land and curb Krobo Edusei’s desire to “show where power lies”.

But they calculated wrongly, for the ebullient Krobo Edusei was but his “Master’s Voice”. Although the ugly violence that had occurred in Ghanaian politics between 1954 and 1956 – carried out, in the main, by the Action Troopers (on the side of the National Liberation Movement, NLM) and the Action Groupers (of the governing Convention People’s Party, CPP) had died down by 1957, Mr Edusei and some of his colleagues in the Government wanted to reap revenge.

And before long, all the Opposition front-benchers were in jail without ever having been tried: Joe Appiah, Victor Owusu, R.R Amponsah, S.D Dombo, Jato Kaleo, and so on.

The result was that the House subsequently became extremely dull and tedious. I no longer enjoyed reporting the debates, because the wit and spontaneity had vanished from speeches and one could predict what everyone who stood up to speak would day. What was debate if it did not throw up ideas that had to be challenged with other ideas?

The sour atmosphere spread and eventually, even some CPP ministers who did not entirely toe the party line but exhibited an independence of mind (such as Patrick Quaidoo), found themselves being detained. Freedom of speech in the House reached rock bottom when K.A Gbedemah, former Minister of Finance and the man who, as deputy leader, had kept the CPP alive when Dr Kwame Nkrumah was in jail, fled the country in order to prevent himself being detained.

On the day Gbedemah fled, he made a fiery speech in the House, denouncing Dr Kwame Nkrumah for being drunk with power. Everyone thought that was the end of him. But he had made arrangements to drive to Togo, and whilst his car drove to his house and someone dressed like him got out of it and entered the house, he was driven across the border by Mark Cofie, one of the fastest drivers I have ever encountered.

When I hear that the current Minister of the Interior state that he wants to license some groups that commit violence against others, such as was witnessed in the Talensi by-election, I shudder. My mind flashes back to how we stepped on the slippery slope that took us from the “violence” of incarceration through Preventive Detention, to the gun-violence that occurred with the coup of 24 February 1966, and how we then moved into further violent overthrows of government, in January 1972, July l975, June l979 and December 1981.

In each of these violent overthrows of government, completely innocent and apolitical people got killed or suffered from serious acts of violence of various types, because when violence breaks out, reason vanishes through the door. Many men, women and children, van testify to that.

And many Ministers of the Interior who have occupied that office since independence, including Mr Krobo Edusei himself – have seen prison from the inside. (Mr Edusei went in twice after a change in government!) I am sure he would, if asked, tell the current Minister of the Interior to be careful not to encourage the outbreak of violence in the service of politics, because no-one can tell where exactly such violence can lead.

And Krobo would be quite right, for the 1966 violent overthrow of the government was as different from those of 1979 and 1981 as “oranges and apples.” Yet even 1979 and 1981 could become child’s play, compared to what we could, if we are stupid enough, to unleash upon ourselves in a world that has since experienced 9/11 and Boko Haram.

To say nothing of Laurent Gbagbo and Blaise Compaore – both rulers who believed in violence, and whose idiocy occurred a mere one door away from us, so to speak!

By Cameron Duodu

Source: www.cameronduodu.com

No comments

Ghana Is Bankrupt - Akufo-Addo

Details

Category: Business & Finance

Created on Thursday, 11 June 2015 00:00

Hits: 4137

Ghana Is Bankrupt - Akufo-Addo

It is early in the morning on a public holiday, but opposition presidential candidate Nana Akufo-Addo is already ensconced with advisers at his house and campaign headquarters.

The compound, its gates emblazoned in bright red and blue election posters for the New Patriotic Party (NPP), reminds everyone that Ghana's presidential elections are less than 18 months away.

Akufo-Addo's family home – with its exquisite ebony furniture, vivid tableaux by Ghanaian artists and intricate African sculptures – is an impressive structure on a generous plot in an area of Accra known as Nima Presidential.

The name, given by locals, distinguishes this street of elegant villas from the other Nima: an adjacent and sprawling working-class conurbation whose people are feeling the full effect of rising prices, wage freezes and power cuts.

It may also help Akufo-Addo, the scion of one of Ghana's leading political families, to keep it real. A few yards from his house, traders are eking out a living selling sachets of 'pure water' and scratch cards for cellphone credit.

These are exactly the people, he insists, who will benefit from his policies of free, universal secondary education and a determined state-led policy to industrialise Ghana.

This morning, the talk is of events in Nigeria. Akufo-Addo and his party see the victory of General Muhammadu Buhari and the main opposition party in credible elections in April as holding import- ant lessons for Ghana's upcoming presidential contest.

There are clear parallels. Both Akufo-Addo and Buhari ran for the presidency multiple times, with their ever-loyal supporters arguing they were cheated of victory, and both men are political veterans in their seventies.

They both say their countries are drifting, suffering from an economic and moral malaise, and their people are losing out to the high-flying economies of Asia.

Akufo-Addo's team is already dissecting Buhari's success. Nigerian opposition activists mobilised their supporters to register and protect their votes and then, together with civic activists, organised their own parallel vote count to guard against political interference in the vote count and results.

"I think there are some obvious things we're going to have to look at," Akufo-Addo tells The Africa Report. "That grassroots organisation associated with mobile technology is not very big around here."

Buhari's decision to declare his assets publicly ahead of the election reinforced his anti-corruption credentials. Would Akufo-Addo be willing to do the same?

"Personally, I would. I can't speak for the views of my col- leagues, but I think it is a debate that we're going to have long before the election. We should not be grandstanding.

"Let the parliament have a look at this to decide the is- sues of disclosure and confidentiality so that it isn't just an example that's set by one or two people but an obligation that covers all office holders," he explains.

In Nigeria, Attahiru Jega, the academic who chaired the electoral commission, insisted on a new electoral register and the use of biometric cards. In Ghana, the situation is muddier.

This year, the veteran chair of the electoral commission, Kwadwo Afari Gyan, hands over to a successor appointed by President John Mahama.

The biggest issue that the commission's new chair will face is whether to organise a new voters' register. Oppositionists and civic activists say the current one contains millions of extra names.

There are more than 14 million names on the list for a population of 25 million with a median age of about 18. Should the commission reject the calls for a new electoral register, Akufo-Addo and his party are planning to step up the pressure.

Economic conditions have deteriorated sharply in Ghana over the past two years.

The government's accord in April with the International Monetary Fund for a nearly $1bn loan is seen by many as a reversion to the bad old days, while complaints of grand corruption are legion.

The campaign trail will again test Akufo-Addo's pragmatism and stamina to the limit. Almost certainly it will be his final – and perhaps best starred – run for the presidency.

The opposition victory in Nigeria may have been a fillip to his campaign, but his team are already talking of the political fight of their lives.

The Africa Report: How serious is Ghana's economic crisis and who is responsible?

Nana Akufo-Addo: The government in power today has received more resources – from loans, increasing tax revenues, receipts from exports – than any other government in the 60-year period of our national existence. Indeed more than probably three or four of them put together. Yet here we are, wallowing in corruption.

No serious effort has been made to tackle the structural problems confronting our nation, whether in governance or the management of our economy. No one seems to have a clear idea of what's happened to all of this money.

The economy, four or five years ago, was considered the rising star of Africa. Ghana – everybody's favourite African country – was on the verge of take off but is now bankrupt and back in the hands of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), begging for a billion dollars to sustain it over the next two or three years.

It's a very sorry tale: mismanagement and widespread corruption have brought us to where we are now. So, if really we're serious about going forward, we've got to be able to convince our population that we have the policies to do so.

And I'm very keen that we should have the wherewithal, the political will and the technical capability to deal with corruption and mismanagement in our country.

Do you support the government borrowing from the IMF?

It's a very sad development in our country. [...] We worked very hard to rid ourselves of IMF dependency. The sooner we find a way to govern ourselves intelligently and honestly, the better it will be.

If we don't have the capacity to accept the dictates and the discipline of the [IMF] programme, it will just be another programme.

No one seems to know the terms of the IMF loan. Why has your party not demanded a full debate in parliament about it?

We're the opposition, and it's our prime responsibility to demand parliamentary scrutiny. But the full ramifications of the [IMF] deal have never been put before parliament. The oversight capability of our parliament is a problem because of the distribution of powers between the legislature and the executive.

Our parliament doesn't have any control over the exchequer. Money bills are all the function of the executive. No member of parliament has a right to bring a money bill without the authorisation of the minister of finance.

I believe our parliament should be like all parliaments: the final authority and the final control [over] the exchequer. These are very important constitutional reforms that will have to be made.

Are you committed to making those reforms if you win the election next year?

That is absolutely where my thinking is. There's a lot of input that is going to be made in Ghana if we're going to have a parliament that has genuine independent oversight capability.

What is your plan to tackle corruption?

We're looking for a system where the prosecutor and the investigator have a much more symbiotic relationship, [...] perhaps to have a system of special prosecutors who work much more closely with the police.

That can come out of the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ). If there's any institutional rethinking that can be done, it will be to break CHRAJ into two distinct entities: its ombudsman and human rights surveillance capacity on one hand and its anti-corruption and investigative capacity on the other.

It may be that we need to do that and then give the anti-corruption wing of it the teeth to do not just investigation but also prosecution.

How do you respond to the criticism that your party is too conservative and restrained, and can't mobilise people on the streets?

The NPP is quite robust in mobilising public opinion. About a month ago probably the greatest demonstration in Ghanaian history took place right here [in Accra], followed by a massive rally. Another one is going to be mobilised.

We are very keen on making sure that the world, and especially the government, is made fully aware of the feelings of our people. Within the ambit of our constitution, we will continue to agitate.

There's part of the image of the NPP which is a good one, which is that we are within the rule of law. I don't think that it is an image that has prevented us from being able to articulate the concerns of the masses of people.

Your opponents say your party depends overwhelmingly on support from the Eastern and Ashanti Regions, that it is too reliant on the Akan vote. What's your response?

It's a propaganda weapon that serves them well, but it has nothing to do with reality. The idea that somehow or other we are confined to these two regions and we have no grassroots support – that's rubbish.

The country was 50-50 [in the 2008 and 2012 elections], so how do you then say that a party that is capable of winning 50% of the popular vote is in some way some small, narrow elitist party?

Historically, your party is on the right. But many of your policies for a proactive state have a leftist, even an Nkrumahist, tinge.

These are the policies that have developed Korea and Japan. My understanding is that the United States was the first country to have free secondary education. It's difficult to call America a country on the left. These are tools of development.

We're looking for the critical things to bring sustainable development. Education clearly has to be a high priority in all of this.

You couldn't build a modern economy with a mass of illiterate and ill-educated people. I don't see this as Nkrumahist or leftist. I'm not advocating state enterprises for Ghana. On the contrary, I think enterprise, if properly motivated, is the way forward for our country.

What is your modernisation strategy? Do you favour an industrial policy?

As far as I'm concerned, the three key things that allowed the economies of Asia to develop were modernising agriculture and having a clear industrial policy. And thirdly, rationalising the financial sector so that it can support growth in agriculture, growth in manufacturing and industry. That is the only way we can build a resilient and self-sufficient economy.

Which would you prioritise – democracy or development?

I don't accept that trade-off. I was a member of President John Kufuor's government. What he inherited in 2001 and where he left it in 2009 was a radical transformation of Ghana's economy. And this was with an open political system, separation of powers, respect for human rights, the whole pantheon of ideas and goals for a democratic system.

Because there was a purposeful attitude towards the development of the economy, the correct policies, maintaining fiscal and financial discipline and promoting private sector development, we had this rapid development of the economy. If we had continued from there, Ghana would have made the breakthrough and then we'd be on the other side of the equation.

In our balance of payments, 80% of our foreign receipts are from the export of raw materials: we can give ourselves a target that says in 10 years we're going to change that balance so it's 50% and that industrial and value-added exports will make up the other 50%. Another decade perhaps will take us to 70%/30%.

I don't believe that the Ghanaian people are interested in an authoritarian option. We've been through the one-party state. We've had military rule, 30 or 40 years of it, and we're very clear in our mind that is not the way we want to go.

The evidence shows that more countries have developed through the democratic state as opposed to the authoritarian state. You also recognise that most countries turn on their authoritarian states at some point. Singapore is one example and then South Korea.

Do you believe there is a capitalist class in Ghana or are they just business cronies of the government of the day?

The mainstay of the Ghanaian economy has been cocoa – the production and export of cocoa– and that has been a wholly indigenous enterprise based on small-scale peasant farmers. That has generated the wealth of our country such as it is. It's been the Ghanaian farmers.

Look at what is going on over the border – a tremendous expansion of agricultural productivity. It's not been done by foreign people. Today, the export value of products from Côte d'Ivoire – cashew, cotton, cocoa and coffee – is $12bn a year. We can do the same here in Ghana with our indigenous farmers.

Secondly, there's several enterprises that have proved to be genuinely productive. We're not talking about the briefcase businessmen who are living on 10% commissions. We're talking about employing people.

It's not a question of substituting people for other people when you get in power and taking the cake away. It is about creating a system whereby people who have the capacity will emerge to take over development of our country.

Source: Africa Report

No comments