“Man is born free, but wherever he goes, he is in chains.” – Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
The wars, massacres, genocides, and animosities of the world, spanning as far back as history can remember to the present day, are underpinned by two major parallel ideologies: Communism (Communalism/Socialism) and Capitalism, each of which found fertile soil in the world’s East and West, respectively.
Africa, in the same vein, according to historical records, was a communal society that featured EGALITARIAN practices—collective ownership of resources, cooperation, interdependence, and mutual survival for all. It is no surprise that pre-colonial African societies vested lands and royalties in traditional authorities, not as exclusive owners but as custodians who would hold the heritage in trust for posterity.
This peaceful and progressive social existence was truncated by economic infiltrations and adulteration linked to colonialism and its cascading effects, especially when colonial governments had to recruit and induce a few influential Africans (the elite) to join the exploitation spree to the detriment of the aborigines. The African elite tasted extravagance and fell in love with the paradise of capitalism.
Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, in his early life in the Gold Coast, encountered capitalism when he taught in Roman Catholic schools and seminaries and at Achimota College while under colonial rule. He, therefore, understood the injustice of keeping both four-legged and two-legged animals in the same farmhouse.
Fast forward, in his quest for further studies in Europe and America, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah was exposed to a new social theory—communism—which stresses the economic, social, and political equality of all men. Inspired by the literature and philosophy of Marcus Garvey (Garveyism) and Karl Marx (Marxism), Nkrumah pursued the just cause of human equality, which he reiterated was only attainable through the mobilization of all men and resources for the collective good.
He believed that at the crux of life lay man’s highest purpose—self-preservation. As such, if men were to live in peace, self-preservation must be assured through a comfortable and dignified life for all. This assumption birthed the socialist republic of Ghana and his lifelong dream of the political unification of Africa—a central political authority, an African high command (Common Defence System), a continental central bank, etc. His faith was grounded in the belief that the world would be a better place if hunger and anger were quenched by diverting resources invested in armament by capitalist institutions into poverty alleviation. His greatest discovery pointed to the inevitability of chaos and uprising in the face of injustice and inequality, asserting that to achieve peace, the state must prioritize an average life for all (socialism) over the profligacy of a few elites (capitalism).
Tragically, his philosophical inclination created monstrous enemies within his own CPP government, as many officials who had worked in the erstwhile colonial government were swallowed up in the pool of expensive lifestyles. A classical testimony to this fact is found in his book The Dark Days in Ghana, in which he lamented:
“These colonial-trained professional classes, with certain notable exceptions, looked on independence as a strictly national concern. In many cases, all they were concerned with was taking the place of the former colonial occupiers in their jobs and making the same money as these did in the same social and economic pattern. Insofar as they were within the party, they were a source of weakness because they sabotaged attempts to prevent corruption and, in a number of cases, actually joined in it themselves.”
One’s mind can now be put to rest regarding the justifications for the countless assassination attempts on Nkrumah’s life prior to the 1966 coup, which are believed to have emanated from within his own circle.
Deductively, not even all officials in the CPP government were Nkrumaists.
The above rationale explains the abrupt desertion of Nkrumah in Beijing by his trusted ministers, including Quaison A. Sackey (Foreign Minister) and Kwesi Armah (Minister of Trade), shortly after the news of the coup was broken to them.
Meanwhile, there were—and still are—political fraternities who embraced Nkrumah for his philosophies but opposed him for his later-life authoritarian tendencies.
Conclusively, not all people who mask themselves with a socialist tag are Nkrumaists. It is, therefore, nauseating to see some self-proclaimed socialists in today’s Ghanaian political space using Nkrumah’s image merely to court public political sympathy.
If you revere Dr. Nkrumah as you so preach, put his socio-economic philosophies and virtues into practice, for the HYPOCRISY is NAUSEATING.
