ABSTRACT:
Peter Ekeh (1975) theorizes in “Colonialism and the Two Publics in Africa: A Theoretical Statement” that, primarily, two publics emerged out of European colonialism in Africa—the primordial public (akin to the ethnic groupings) and the civic public (the state and its bureaucracies). Contrasting dispositions and moral etiquettes are exhibited toward these publics; positing that, while the primordial is seen as vulnerable, and thus nurtured, the civic is an item for exploitation. The dynamics of these publics and the associated interplay of values have become fluid and complex in contemporary Ghana. However, attempting to interrogate these attitudinal dispositions requires an examination of the nature of socialization that occurs in Ghana’s higher education (university) system. The article, therefore, reflects on the colonial antecedents of Ghana’s university education, arguing that it was molded predominantly by the economic aspirations of the colonial enterprise. It is geared toward the production of people who use it to bolster their own economic position, usually through the perpetuation of amoral arrangements. However, the motivation for pursuing higher education is not the desire to confront or alter these established exploitative values and schemes, but the idea of it as an avenue to be co-opted into its bureaucracies. Going forward, I contend that universities must remain cognizant of the colonial foundations and corresponding value systems, and how they consciously or unconsciously sustain them. Universities should engage in critical rethinking in order to nurture a critical mass interested in the development of an equitable society.
Introduction
In “Colonialism and the Two Publics in Africa: A Theoretical Statement,” Peter Ekeh (1975) identifies two publics (primordial and civic) as having emerged out of European colonialism in Africa. The primordial public (akin to ethnic federations) and the civic public (the state and its bureaucracies) are all institutions bequeathed through colonialism. There are different attitudinal inclinations and essentially moral standards demonstrated toward these spaces. While the primordial is perceived as vulnerable, and thus is supported, in line with the exploitative European colonial enterprise, the civic public is seen as affluent and thus an item for exploitation.
European colonialism ushered African societies into its own forms of stratification. Just like other colonial deeds, it had little or no relevance to the cultural realities of the colonized. The colonial enterprise was designed to institutionalize robust exploitative, bureaucratic structures; the school system was, ultimately, its human resource base. Ekeh (1975) argues that the European colonial classification of African societies into “lower,” “middle,” and “upper” classes was baseless and alien. In doing so, he explains:
The European colonial rulers of Africa and their African successors in the postcolonial [sic] period do not fit readily into the same social stratification system with other segments of the societies they ruled and now rule. The African bourgeois class especially does not have an upper class, an aristocracy, over and above it, although it does have a defeated traditional aristocracy whose bases of power have been weakened by the importation of foreign techniques of governance (p. 94).
Coming back to the publics, the highly schooled (“educated”) operate and acquire capital in both publics but relate to them differently. This relationship led Ekeh (1975) to argue that, although the unschooled are complicit in Africa’s challenges, it is largely the schooled who are the architects of Africa’s undesirable circumstances. The situation has barely changed in post- independent Ghana, and the complicity of the “educated” automatically calls for the examination of the aims and aspirations of the higher education process. For instance, although Ghana is a leading global producer of gold, non-Ghanaians own almost 95% of the more than 20 mining companies at different levels of operation in Ghana. Similarly, only 39% of Class 1 licensed banks have a majority local ownership. This situation cuts across different sectors of the economy (see Adombila, 2021). When these local ownership arrangements are carefully investigated, the “educated” are largely the go-betweens in the exploitation of their natural resources to feed the industries of the colonial metropolis. It is a relic of the colonial arrangement and is sustained by an education system designed to nurture enablers for these schemes.
The need to interrogate the higher education processes becomes vital as the civic public is superintended by the products of that system. They sustain or regenerate colonial relationships, and, in many instances, develop and implement legal and political systems that foster and guard their self-seeking interests. Thus, they resist traditional African philosophies and reformist perspectives that seek economic and political liberation (Rodney, 1981) because colonial education thrives and sustains itself on materialism, and the accumulation and hoarding of wealth for the minority it privileges (Fonlon, 1965). The African political and middle classes, and the systems that nurture them, are, thus, collaborators in exploitative schemes, and require interrogation.
This article therefore reflects on Ghana’s higher education process through its colonial antecedents and Ekeh’s two publics. I argue that, whether intentionally or unintentionally, the colonial heritage continues to influence the development of the detrimental outlooks displayed toward the civic public. These dispositions seem to have been aggravated post-independence and, regrettably, the schooling process does not grant students cogent awareness of the schema of European colonialism in Africa and the acts that perpetuate it. Accordingly, the prevailing essence of higher education is not to confront or alter these colonially established systems, but to provide an avenue to join the scheme through any of its establishments—a fundamental reason for its creation. The colonially crafted lopsided relations that inhibit social cohesion and development are thus sustained, promoting inequality and creating tension-filled states. These realities caused the United Nations to initiate efforts to reduce poverty and global inequality, and promote peace and sustainability, as captured in the Sustainable Development Goals, Goal 10 (see United Nations, n.d.).
Despite the international interventions, institutions of higher learning must remain cognizant of the colonial foundations and prevailing colonial relationships to help douse these unbalanced realities in Ghana. Universities must engage in critical rethinking and reevaluation to nurture a critical mass who are interested in the development of an equitable society—possibly, a conversation on the purpose of higher education and its value system. I do not think this overstretches the aspirations and functions of universities. The anthem of Ghana’s premier university, the University of Ghana, clearly indicates the need for a collective cause toward the greater good of society by proceeding “in unity to uphold the public cause.” Furthermore, it strives to nurture students with a mind “ready at all times and a conscience quick to feel” as they “prepare to face the world” (Nketia, n.d.). Therefore, universities must focus on how to nurture and transfer the values exhibited toward the primordial public to the civic public, because the foundations and determinations of higher education in Ghana contribute to the nurture and sustenance of the unworthy values demonstrated in the civic public.
Methods
This article emerged as part of a study on decolonizing higher education in Ghana. Encountering Ekeh’s article aroused my interest in the ways in which colonialism nurtured values that people consciously or unconsciously exhibit within different spaces, and the ways in which what we call education perpetuates and sustains colonial ethos. Considering that both of Ekeh’s identified publics and higher education operate and affect all aspects of society, an inquiry into such domains should attempt to elicit deeper meanings that could lead to suggestions for altering the status quo. A qualitative approach was deemed most appropriate to argue out how higher education helps sustain these publics, especially the civic public (Creswell, 2013). Since qualitative research entails constant reflection during the research process—pre, during and post—to offer context and interpretation, I employed reflexivity as an overtly self-consciousness awareness about my sociocultural and politico-economic value positions relative to European colonialism in Africa and how these biases influence my interpretation of reality. Adopting reflexivity enabled me to reflect and express my locus and subjectivities for the reader. These positionalities are captured in the reflection section (Sutton and Austin, 2015).
I examined Ekeh’s framework with an anti-colonial eye to offer a “perspectival” interpretive analysis and application of how the exigencies and interplay of the publics continue to manifest in Ghana. Despite the nuances, this approach offers appreciable understanding of the postcolonial conditions and complexity in power relations. A perspectival approach nurtures perspectives “derived from specific positioning within power structures related to disability, nationality, religion, and so forth” (Griffiths, 2009, p. 4). The perspectives nurtured are quite predictable considering that a person’s subjectivity may drive their “understandings of the world as well as our capacity to act within the world” (Griffiths, 2009, p. 30). The processes to this subjective position “are overlapping, fluid and shifting” (Griffiths, 2009, p. 4).
In these overlapping processes of qualitative data analysis, I looked out for what to extract from Ekeh’s article and the kind of data needed to highlight its contemporary manifestations. As a result, I employed comparative narratives from high-ranking political officers in Ghana, international organizations, academics, and other relevant data, in order to offer some empirical explanation. Overall, the intention is to demonstrate universities’ roles in sustaining the civic public. Hence, the article seeks to apply Ekeh’s framework to the educational system of Ghana to see how values could be transferred from the primordial to the civic public.
Overview of Higher Education in Ghana
Even though Africa has had higher education institutions since its antiquity, some of the oldest in the Common Era are the University of Al-Karaouine, (established circa 859 AD), Al-Azhar University, (circa 927 AD) and the University of Sankore (circa 1100 AD) in Morocco, Egypt, and Timbuktu (Mali) respectively. The first Western form of university in West Africa during the British colonial era was Fourah Bay College (now University of Sierra Leone) in 1827 (see Ashby, 1966). The early activism (1870s) by nationalists like Edward Wilmot Blyden (Liberia) and later by Nnamdi Azikiwe (Nigeria) in the 1930s caused British colonialists to initiate measures to establish similar institutions in West Africa (see Emudong, 1997). In 1943, the government established the Asquith Commission and Elliot Commission to explore the possibility of creating universities within the colonies. The former was tasked to examine the relationship between the prospective colonial university colleges and those in the colonial metropolis, and the latter to design a plan for the development of university education (see Emudong, 1997). The Elliot Commission produced two reports: a minority report to establish a single university for British West Africa and a majority view establishing two university colleges, one in Nigeria and another in the Gold Coast. The colonial authorities preferred the minority view as higher education was not a colonial aspiration. Gold Coasters resisted, causing the government to rethink the matter and subsequently establish the University College of the Gold Coast in 1948. As recommended by the Asquith Commission, an Inter-Universities Council was created as a governing board and the institution was affiliated to the University of London. Thirteen years later, Ghana’s first post-colonial government created the University of Ghana by an Act of Parliament (University of Ghana Act, 1961 [Act 79]) and began issuing its own degrees (Agbodeka, 1998; University of Ghana, n.d.).
The purpose/s of these colonially established universities were not explicit. While Ashby (1966), for instance, says the mission focused on the adaptation of European culture, Agbodeka (1998) explains that an aim of the colonial universities was the “education of an elite” (p. 86). In Ghana, considering that it was structured on the British model, it was bound to mimic the British elite and their associated values. These foundational issues have not been radically addressed over the decades and continue to serve as the foundation for the establishment of other institutions of higher learning. Newman and Mahama (2015) state that governments’ funding of higher education in the post-colonial era “has been justified by the need to train a corps of professionals to replace the departing expatriate civil servants and managers” (p. 1).
By 1965, the government had established two additional universities, the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST) in Kumasi and the University of Cape Coast (UCC). At the moment, Ghana has over 150 accredited public and private institutions offering different degree programs (National Accreditation Board [NAB], n. d). Student numbers in public universities have correspondingly increased from some hundreds at inception (Attuahene & Owusu-Ansah, 2013) to 264,994 in 2019 (Sasu, 2020).
Higher Education Policy
Globally, higher education is projected as a hub for knowledge generation, skills development, and the enhancing of competencies essential for socioeconomic development. While this may be true in many regards, these outcomes are not necessarily guaranteed once a university is established. Kenway, Bullen, and Robb (2004) remind us that achieving meaningful outcomes of higher education rests on an explicit higher education policy and the political will to realize the policy directives.
Ghana’s Constitution (1992) provides the superstructure for all education initiatives. Article 25 Section 1a recommends equal educational rights to citizens. Section 1c postulates that “higher education shall be made equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means, and in particular, by progressive introduction of free education.” Article 38(1) postulates that “the State shall provide educational facilities at all levels and in all the Regions of Ghana, and shall, to the greatest extent feasible, make those facilities available to all citizens.” Ghana lacks an explicit policy on higher education. However, the Education Act, 2008 (Act 778) offers some higher education policy objectives that are not significantly different from those of the University Rationalization Committee (URC) in 1991 under the Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) government. The work had the following reform intentions:
(1) unification of the existing institutions into a coordinated tertiary education system, and the establishment of new bodies and mechanisms to provide system management and control;
(2) measures to ensure the system’s overall financial sustainability (including cost-recovery, cost-sharing with both students and the private sector, a norm-based approach to institutional management, and a new block grant funding mechanism);
(3) measures to improve the quality and relevance of Ghanaian tertiary education;
(4) significant expansion of the tertiary education system as a whole, to meet the demands of school leavers and the needs of employers, and to provide greater opportunity of access to those previously denied it (whether through poverty or gender) (Girdwood, 1999, p. ix).
The tertiary education reform of 1991 thus sought to enhance access, quality, and relevance of higher education in Ghana. Furthermore, the suggested shift in direction led to the emergence of new universities, especially in the private space. An outcome of this reform was an 80% surge in enrollment between 1993 and 1998 (Girdwood, 1999). In spite of the increase in enrollment, the Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) in tertiary education was 17.2% in 2019 (UNESCO, n. d).
The main policy goals in Ghana’s current Education Act are situated safely within the broad framework of the iron triangle: access, quality, and funding. Other goals border on relevance, regulation, management, planning, research and collaborations, and the promotion of Science, Technology, and Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET). Government remains the main financier, albeit the quantum has been dwindling over the years (Newman & Mahama, 2015). With regards to challenges, UNESCO’s World Conference on Higher Education in 1998 mentioned the lack of resources, poor working conditions, and brain drain as significant challenges (see Morley, Leach & Lugg, 2009). These variables remain valid today in Ghana.
Enslavement, Colonialism, and Capitalism
Whether by design or sheer coincidence, modern capitalism emerged in the era of European expansionism in the 16th century (Callaghy, 2019). According to Coles (1957), most historians place the origins of the modern state in Europe circa 15th to 16th century (see also Potter, 1946). These were periods where Africa was under siege from European imperialism. The consequent conquest and domination forced Africans into an alien state and capitalist systems. The latter is an economic scheme where private individuals or businesses own capital goods and the means of production of goods and services. It therefore does not come as a surprise that Max Weber cites the emergence of the modern bureaucratic state as being pivotal to the rise of modern capitalism (Callaghy, 2019). Capitalism thrived on the exploitation of the means of production to make profits and amass wealth. In this regard, a historical link can be established between the development of capitalism and the enslavement of Africans in the West, where Africans were dehumanized as chattel (see Johnson, 2018; Inikori, 2020). Whereas contemporary capitalism seems to thrive on cheap labor, its foundations were built on coerced labor, and an African-centered discussion of European capitalism should not discount this association.
The end of the enslavement era birthed colonialism, ostensibly to perpetuate the emerging economic system. Colonialism served as a leverage to provide the raw materials required to fuel industries in the colonial metropolis built on enslaved labor (see Jalata, 2013). Enslavement, colonialism, and capitalism forcefully “dragged African labour itself into the emerging international capitalist system” (Mazrui, 1986, p. 12) that propelled the development of countries across Europe and North America. African colonies became the raw material base for industries in the colonial metropolis. The products of these Western industries were then sent back to colonies for sale. This system and its subsequent economic policies destroyed the manufacturing base of these colonized societies, and thereby thwarted their development. In Ghana, for instance, a factory to manufacture soaps had to be closed because it could not compete with those produced in Britain even though Ghana produced the raw materials (Nkrumah, 1963). Situations like this facilitated importation from Britain (Nkrumah, 1963). To sustain the exploitative system, Frantz Fanon argues, “the colonies have become a market” and “the colonial population is a consumer market” (2004, p. 26).
In addition, the colonial capitalist arrangement sustained its values and ethos through a system of socialization. This colonial form of socialization shaped the social, cultural, political, and economic consciousnesses of the colonized. This is the school system; created to advance capitalism in order to sustain colonial relationships by nurturing the local human capital (Nyamnjoh, 2012; Fanon, 2004; Nkrumah, 1973; Senghor, 1974). The wheel of the colonial capitalist machinery was thus set in motion. It is therefore not surprising that the ethos of white supremacy mirrors the global economic system. These supremacist thoughts are embedded in Ghana’s education because the “educated” is the “most exposed to European colonial ideologies of all groups of Africans” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 96). This explains the disrespect Ghanaian leaders exhibit toward the citizenry. According to Ekeh (1975) the “educated”, “although native to Africa … depends on colonialism for its legitimacy,” and as a result is compelled to consent to “the principles implicit in colonialism but it rejects the foreign personnel that ruled Africa” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 96).
The essence and foundations of these colonial structures of education have barely changed in Africa after independence. Ekeh (1975) argues that although the “educated” have “no traditional legitimacy” (p. 96) they use their schooling as the basis to lay claim to be “competent enough to rule” (p. 96). Therefore, “in order to replace the colonizers and rule its own people it has invented a number of interest-begotten theories to justify that rule” (p. 96). To this end, Ekeh contends that it is pathetic and intellectually inept for the African bourgeoisie to seek to only overthrow the European colonists but not act to destroy the colonial structures. This “intellectual poverty,” bereft of “issue of differences of ideas regarding moral principles but rather the issue of which bourgeois class should rule Africans” (p. 102), remains rife. It is out of this colonial relationship that complex behavioral inclinations and values exhibited toward different publics have emerged.
Interplay of Ekeh’s Publics
Ekeh (1975) implicates “educated” Africans in perpetuating the colonial cycle of exploitation. One of the two publics that emerged out of European colonialism “is closely identified with primordial groupings, sentiments, and activities, which nevertheless impinge on the public interest” (p. 92). Ekeh calls this public “primordial” and extends from an extended family unit to an ethnic group. I refer to it as the original or indigenous public. The other is the sociopolitical and economic structures instituted by European colonists to advance the colonial enterprise: for example, “the military, the civil service, the police, etc.” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 92). Ekeh calls this the civic public, but I will call it the colonial public.
There are moral and amoral attachments to the original and colonial publics, respectively (Ekeh, 1975). The contemporary African state and a significant amount of its endeavors operate within these publics because “the colonial experience itself has had a massive impact on modern Africa. It is to the colonial experience that any valid conceptualization of the unique nature of African politics must look” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 93). Whereas the disposition to the original public is hard work, diligence, and loyalty devoid of material expectations, these attributes are absent in relation to the colonial public. The amoral attitudes the colonists exhibited toward the civic public was assumed by the “educated” post-colonial African heirs. The school exposed them to European colonial ideals and they, consciously or unconsciously, accepted the principles implicit in colonialism. Even though the dynamics of Ekeh’s publics have become a bit complicated, the essence of his classification remains valid. As we will see further in this article, I make a case that political parties are fast assuming the status of the primordial public and relishing in the privileges and values expressed to it.
Touching on the interplay of colonial factors that influence and shape politics and governance in Africa, Ekeh (1975) indicated that, first, there are two groups operating in this relationship: the emerging European bourgeoisie (during colonialism) and their nurtured African bourgeoisie (post-independence). These groups shape the two publics philosophically to authenticate their governance of the masses. While Europeans promoted their ideologies to justify their subjugation of Africans, the African bourgeoisies’ ideologies had a binary focus—first, as a means of supplanting European colonialists and second, legitimizing their leadership. The contrasting relationships and ethos of these publics have wide-ranging effects as the notion of citizenship differ in both publics. In traditional African societies, citizenship, just like leadership and kingship, operates on moral terms: people perform duties as a moral obligation and “although the African gives materially as part of his duties … what he gains back is not material. He gains back intangible, immaterial benefits in the form of identity or psychological security” (p. 107). Furthermore, “… like most moral spheres, the relationship between the individual and his primordial public cannot be exhausted by economic equations. There is more to all moral duties than the material worth of the duties themselves” (p. 107).
In contrast, the relationship toward the colonial public is amoral and “is measured in material terms—but with a bias” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 107). The state is seen as an item for exploitation where responsibilities “are de- emphasized while rights are squeezed out of the civic public with the amorality of an artful dodger” (p. 107). The manipulative ideological underpinnings of these bourgeoisie groups give “credence to the myth among the ordinary African that the civic public can never be impoverished. On the other hand, the primordial public is pictured as needful of care—in fact from the civic public” (p. 108). This complex relationship continues, although nuanced. The belief that the state would never be penurious is probably reflected by the incessant borrowing plaguing African countries. According to the World Bank, the total external debt of African countries south of the Sahara shot up approximately 150% in 2018—from US$236 billion a decade ago to US$583 billion (World Bank, 2020). Ghana’s debt at the end of March 2020 was US$43.17 billion (Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning [MOFEP], 2020). Even though some economists may argue that national debt is not necessarily bad, depending on its utilization (Krugman, 2015; Blanchard & Summers, 2017), Africa’s debt burden is toxic and is a potent recolonizing tool because such a debt burden makes the countries vulnerable to lenders, often former colonists. It is not surprising that Ghana’s Minister of Finance and President have both been pleading for debt forgiveness (Adombila, 2020; Africa Briefing, 2021). Nkrumah (1963) and Fanon (2004) have cautioned Africans to remain alert in identifying the guises under which the colonist would want to reintroduce colonialism. In doing so, they explicitly emphasized that Bretton Woods Institutions would be established to sustain the colonial exploitation of the other and possible re-colonization. These institutions advance the creeds of capitalism, and by design, favor the colonial metropolis. The consequence of this neocolonial dictate is reflected in John Mahama’s (a former president of Ghana, 2012–2016) indictment of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund for unfair trading policies against African governments. To quote him, “They came with policies that said that we should allow the farmers to compete. We were made to remove subsidies … while they continued subsidizing farmers in the Western countries. The African farmer was left to himself” (Myjoyonline, 2014, para. 2). Decades of sourcing funds from these colonial entities have yielded insignificant results for Ghana as it remains in an economic quagmire and is further disintegrating because of the economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic (see Yeboah, 2021). Ghana is currently seeking an IMF bailout for its shattered economy, the 18th of such arrangements (Mombrial, 2022).
To further illustrate how the civic public is consistently exploited, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2020) reports that Africa loses US$88.6 billion annually through illicit financial flows. This is nearly the sum of Official Development Assistance (ODA) and Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) to Africa. Commenting on how the world economic system collaborates to prey on Africa, former Ghanaian president Jerry Rawlings states that while multiple factors enable this exploitation, a fundamental reason is that “some members of a minority elite connive to rape the continent and ensure that the positive economic indices are only on paper and do not reach the pockets of the ordinary people at the grassroots” (Yeboah, 2013, para. 31). These acts demonstrate the myth that the “civic public can never be impoverished” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 108).
The “educated” Ghanaian operates in these publics and contributes to both the alienation and prominence of the colonial public and the original public, respectively. To highlight how in-built relationships play out requires the examination of the dialectic of these publics. Ekeh (1975) explained that the logical tensions and conflicts existing in these publics “constitute the uniqueness of modern African” relations (p. 108). The reason is that “a good citizen of the primordial public gives out and asks for nothing in return; a lucky citizen of the civic public gains from the civic public but enjoys escaping giving anything in return whenever he can” (p. 108). However, this lucky person would not be seen worthy if he channeled his “lucky gains to his private purse” (p. 108). Being a worthy citizen means continuing to channel a share of the “largesse from the civic public to the primordial public”—this is the “logic of the dialectics” according to Ekeh (p. 108). Furthermore, the “unwritten law of the dialectics is that it is legitimate to rob the civic public in order to strengthen the primordial public” (p. 108).
The need to legitimately rob the civic public and any other public worth exploiting seems to drive the intense desire and competition for political power in Ghana. The amoral relationship toward the civic public presents undesirable consequences for national development, not that those who created it wanted the exploited developed, in any case. The quest to exploit seems to have built a superficial relationship among state institutions in Ghana without any real intent to coordinate and ensure the effective and efficient functioning of the polity. The predisposition of the average worker is, “What can I get out of this office?” Schemes are thus devised to exploit these offices to the holder’s advantage, leading to public sector corruption (see Appiah & Abdulai, 2017). The masses also find ways to abuse the state, as the state does not exist to serve their interests. In Ghana, it is common to hear, “It is for the state, don’t worry.” As a result, out of an approximate population of thirty million with the adult population constituting at least 10 million, only 1.5 million Ghanaian citizens are registered to pay taxes and 1.3 million pay income tax (Ohene, 2018).
Another dialectical tension and contradiction that Ekeh highlights is the dialectics of wrong and right. Amorality is abhorred in the original public and severely punished. However, attempts are made to justify amorality in the civic public. Using Nigeria as an example, he stated that “strange” is a person who “demands bribes from individuals or who engages in embezzlement in the performance of his duties to his primordial public” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 110). However, this individually risks “serious sanctions from members of his own primordial public if he seeks to extend the honesty and integrity with which he performs his duties in the primordial public to his duties in the civic public by employing universalistic criteria of impartiality” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 110). Commenting on this illogicality, Nketsia (2013) submits that the highly schooled African is wedged in a dilemma between two worlds: a quandary between two cultural worldviews, sometimes three (when Islam is factored in) (see Mazrui, 1986), and, ultimately, which one of these three outlooks to honor. Ekeh (1975) therefore suggests that “the simultaneous adaptation to two mentally contra posing orders” (p. 100) creates the collaborative attitudes of the “educated” African, because “the Western educated African was a greater victim of their [colonial] intensity than the non-literate African” (Ekeh, 1975, p. 101).
Reflections
On Education
Human beings cannot overlook the agents of their socialization, especially when social realities require transformation. However, absorption of colonial classification makes the school the primary determinant of education and of who constitute the “educated” in Ghana. Ghanaians are yet to realize that this colonially created system of socialization traps them at a disadvantaged position in capitalism. The politics of Eurocentrism radiate wretched notions of Africa and Africans. “Whiteness,” on the other hand, should be revered and its values apprised. Embracing Eurocentric ideals offers paths of “escaping” Africanness and the conferment of pseudo-notions of elitism in Ghana (Amuzu, 2019). To further evade the imprinted “wretchedness” of the African, the unwritten rule is to endeavor not to disrupt the colonial bureaucracies. According to Olowu (1988), “No African country today has proposed alternative standards of public service morality; rather, they have each striven to ensure that their public bureaucracies conform to the ethical standards and codes inherited from their erstwhile colonial masters” (p. 215). The worsening plight of these polities has engaged the thoughts of academics (see Appiah & Abdulai, 2017; Hamilton & Hudson, 2014; Fosu & Aryeetey, 2008); nevertheless, the material bait of this public is generally the seduction of higher education. The essence of what is called education in Ghana is the socialization that propels a person into these bureaucracies. The worth of that education is equally judged by how quickly it offers opportunities in those arenas and the quantum of material benefits it bestows. This is how these irrational colonial relations have been rationalized and normalized. It is an error that needs redress because it perpetuates these complex relations demonstrated in different spaces. Ghana should rethink what it calls education and engage in a thorough re-examination of the values conferred through schooling. There is the need to interrogate citizens’ reasons for pursuing an education because, as it stands, the notion of education and the “educated” is perverted and tied to the vagaries of the exploitative colonial and neo-colonial structures and systems. The legitimacy and privilege derived through this education is subservient, dysfunctional, and counterproductive to nation-building.
On Leadership
Ghana is currently governed by the 1992 constitution that stipulates three arms for the governance process—the legislature, judiciary, and executive. Theoretically, they are all independent, although the executive exercises enormous power over the judiciary and the legislature in its operation. Nevertheless, the country is seen to have established democratic structures with a multi-party system. The reality, however, is that Ghana is largely a duopoly between the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and National Democratic Congress (NDC).
The custom is largely for the ruling party to adopt a wholesale defense of its actions. The opposition obstructs, yet an accord is struck in mutually beneficial instances. Regrettably, partisan interest has supplanted national interest, and contests for political power remain at a premium, with an ultimate goal to exploit the common wealth to benefit the partisan. The enormous influence of the government is demonstrated by the fact that it is the largest employer and spender in Ghana. Even private sector players establish a parasitic relationship with the state to survive. This amoral relationship to the state led former President Jerry Rawlings to caution that such abuses make African democracy fragile (Yeboah, 2013). Nevertheless, the status quo prevails because African values (as projected in Ekeh’s conception of the primordial public) are alien to the current notions of democracy in Africa. To Rawlings,
[African] societies are borne out of a strong traditional political framework of monarchies that wielded both spiritual and political power as well as judicial authority. Many of these societies still look up to traditional authority for moral fortitude while our “imported” democratic and secular leadership is seen unfortunately as synonymous to immorality and corruption. With such perceptions how do we expect our emerging democracies to evolve? (Yeboah, 2013, para. 16).
Democracy, like other concepts, can exude so great a plurality of meanings such that its comprehension can be vague (see Kurki, 2010; Alvarez & Welzel, 2014; Jacobsen & Fuchs, 2020). Nonetheless, democracy has become “the world’s new universal religion” (Corcoran, 1983, p. 14). Ghana has been touched by the proselytizing and the country is often touted as a “beacon of democracy” in Africa despite the definitional concerns. Kurki (2010) however argues that “pluralization and contextualization” can help to make meaning of the “conceptions of democracy” (p. 362). I do not intend to belabor these definitional and conceptual issues; rather, I aim to employ commentaries of Ghana’s former presidents and some actors in the political space to initiate conversations on governance situated within the scope of Ekeh’s publics. Overall, it is a call to rethink governance in Ghana.
Ghana has managed four decades of political stability (1981–2020)—a commendable feat considering the level of political instability hovering across Africa. Rawlings seems to agree to the multifaceted nature in conceiving democracy. He, however, disagrees that Ghana became democratic in 1992. Instead, he asserts that democracy already existed. By contrast, 1992 ushered Ghana into another constitutional regime because constitutionalism “is not necessarily synonymous with democracy” (Yeboah, 2013, para. 6). His claim is based on the fact that there are “leaders across the world who are practicing constitutional dictatorships. I must emphasize that this is not unique to Africa” (Yeboah, 2013, para. 6). In furtherance to what should constitute a democracy, Rawlings says that it must involve effective participation and representation of all citizens in governance. Democracy is not all about elections because:
Government, irrespective of its mode of appointment, which gives ear to the people and approaches decision-making and policy implementation from a human-centred and continued consultative process is closer to democracy than a duly elected government that fails to consult and also treats the opinion of the legislature—the elected representatives of the people—as of little value. (Yeboah, 2013, para. 5)
Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah (1973) similarly articulated that, although democratic principles and practice transcend a mere technique, colonial Western education develops Africans for subservience and extinguishes self-sufficient traits. Rawlings, for his part, argues that the nature of Western democracy adopted by Ghanaians suffocates “the respect and values inherent in our culture, which allowed for people-centered participatory democracy and communication. The window to breathe sense into our everyday lives has been forcefully shut” (Graphic Online, 2016, para. 8). He adds that Ghana has “adopted democracy from the textbook without recognising and appreciating the intrinsic values of democracy in our own culture” (Graphic Online, 2016, para. 6). A subsequent Ghanaian president, John Dramani Mahama, thus warns Western powers to move cautiously in “proselytizing democracy across the continent” because “democracy is not a one size fits all system” and thus “cannot be forced on the people” (Allotey, 2016, para. 3).
Ghanaian leaders seem to have become comfortable with self- governance, forgetting the perilous colonial past and consequent anti-colonial struggles. In relation to Ekeh’s two publics, political parties in Ghana seem to be assuming the status of the primordial public; people exhibit altruistic attitudes toward them, and ethnic associations also seem to influence allegiances. The ultimate goal of the political parties is to capture the civic public for abuse. As a result, people are increasingly more devoted to political parties than to the state, making the partisan space a complex and complicated terrain to navigate. Onuoha (2014), for instance, highlights that the amoral attacks have been extended to the once revered primordial public. The unhealthy relationship between the partisans and the state caught the attention of Kwabena Agyapong, then-General Secretary of the then-opposition NPP. Delivering a solidarity speech at the 8th Delegates Congress of the then-ruling NDC in 2014, Mr. Agyapong advocated for mature politicking and prioritizing the needs of the masses. He encouraged liaisons between politicians and political parties premised on decency, maturity, and nationalism because of the public’s dwindling trust in politicians. Mr. Agyapong encouraged the ruling party to elect leaders who would help promote Ghanaian cultural values of respect and truth, and advocated for the rejuvenation of love for country. To him, politicians needed do more to serve society on the tenets of altruism and sacrifice, since political leadership is a privilege. They had to exude tolerance, honesty, and discipline to restore optimism in the country (Ali, 2014).
John Agyekum Kufuor (president of Ghana from 2001 to 2009) echoed the role of universities and the educated in helping to transform society when he addressed a graduating cohort of a university. He said, “As you leave this citadel of learning, you will undoubtedly be called upon to offer leadership in all spheres of social life” (Ashesi University, 2013). For these graduates to meaningfully influence society requires an understanding of past geopolitical events and value systems that established the African and Ghanaian polity; something I contend the prevailing school systems fails to bequeath.
A Preying People
The post-colonial state in Africa, owing to its historical antecedents, has become a very fertile path to wealth, just as enslavement and colonialism generated enormous wealth for their architects. The exploitative economic system and resulting attitudes seem to have permeated all aspects of human endeavors in Ghana. Nearly anyone in any position of power seeks to prey on others. This attitude poses an existential threat to the country and necessitates a critical and immediate examination of the governance structures. A critical analysis of the Ghanaian educational system, particularly the universities, will reveal that these systems and structures of formalized socialization have neither failed nor lost their mission. Rather, they are fulfilling their unexamined original mission: to confer Eurocentric colonial values to perpetuate and sustain the hegemony of global capitalism. Education and the inability of the “educated” to meaningfully comprehend these realities impedes any revolutionary contribution toward African political leadership and socioeconomic development. Furthermore, since dominant persuasions often influence education systems, exploitative colonial values are bound to beget colonial education. To quote Molefi Asante (2006),
Education normally follows the dominant political lines in a country, where you have colonial political principles you will find colonial education. If you have the vestiges of past colonial practices, you will see those practices reflected in the educational system (2006, p. x).
Ghanaians have become a preying people, exploiting each other either to survive or live in luxury.1
Revisiting and Mainstreaming of African Thoughts
Advocates of African-centered worldviews are often labeled as revisionists, romanticizing, and reactive, among others. Their arguments tend not to be offered the consideration they may deserve. They are seen as being caught in the past, even though postmodern realities underscore the diversity of human experience and profusion of standpoints. Indigenous African outlooks still exist, albeit compromised and marginalized. There are numerous values contemporary institutions of higher learning can pick from the primordial public. The central defining elements of the values that shape the primordial public are empathy and a concord between personal interest and collective interest. Wiredu (1994) refers to this as “sympathetic impartiality” (p. 194). Such consciousness must be engrained in the schooling process because colonial values tend to “project value of ‘might is right’ which teaches the propriety of power and wealth, and announces the vulnerability and cheapness of the less privileged” (Avoseh, 2001, p. 485). This asymmetric relationship becomes dangerous and counterproductive because it creates a situation where “an active citizen is most likely to see being active as being tantamount to the acquisition of wealth and power” (Avoseh, 2001, p. 485).
Institutions of higher learning must build reciprocal relationships with their communities because meaningful learning encompasses the ecosystem of the society. It is through these means that a society’s value system is defined, enhanced, and sustained. It may call for ways to create avenues to transfer the altruistic dispositions in the primordial public to the civic public in order to inspire sensitivity toward the citizenry and to act in the public interest. These are issues that border on curriculum. However, a potent threat to this aspiration is the increasing cost of higher education and the general commodification of education. Ghana possibly needs a model university established on the values of the primordial public to kick-start a truly humane system of education and society.
Critical University Studies
Ghanaian universities, as part of the rethinking and evaluation of their mandate, should focus discussions on curriculum and further channel resources into the area of critical university studies. Although a relatively new field of study, it examines the role of higher education in contemporary society and the role of universities as sites of contestation over slavery, colonialism, culture, class, and politics. Furthermore, discourses have centered on the progressive commercialization of higher education and commodification of knowledge (see Boggs & Mitchell, 2018). Ghana could focus on African-centered perspectives on enslavement, colonialism and its vestiges, and anti-colonialism, and explore how these phenomena ensure structural discriminations, entrenched acts of corruption, and marginalization. Such studies would bring more insight into the workings of Ekeh’s publics and further bequeath to students the political consciousness needed in Africa to devise ways to confront these injustices. Although a complex matrix, studies of this nature would be worthy initiatives toward change.
#FixTheCountry #FixTheSystem
In April 2021, the hashtag #FixTheCountry seemed to have caused a stir in the corridors of power in Ghana (Krippahl, 2021). The growing sense of awakening in Ghana is visible; citizens are demanding governments honor their part of the social contract. The “system” (the civic public and its actors) is dysfunctional and has, over the decades, taken citizens for granted. This dysfunctionality, without a doubt, favors influencers and the partisan. Universities and university colleges have increased exponentially, from three in 1990 to over 70 currently. However, unemployment rates among university graduates are high. Oxfam reports that the “wealthiest 10% of Ghana now share 32% of Ghana’s total consumption—more than is consumed by the bottom 60% of the population combined, while the very poorest 10% of the population consumes only 2%” (Kamran, Liang & Trines, 2019). These asymmetrical realities, coupled with the growing sense of despondency among the populace, makes the threat of a social upheaval imminent (see Kasapa, 2021; Korankye, 2021; Myjoyonline, 2021). It is time for leaders across all facets of society to earnestly engage in critical introspection because Ghanaians are becoming more “woke” by the day.
Simmons and Dei (2012) offer a caveat by suggesting that people with colonial power—and those benefiting from colonial privilege—should initiate a decolonization process through conscientious acts and accountability. Similarly, Kempf (2010), cited in Simmons and Dei (2012), proposes that “dominant bodies must work primarily against the oppression by which they are privileged and in which they thus participate” (p. 76). This is crucial because a system of education cannot rise above the dominant ideals of society. The prominence given to materialism and economic power in Ghana is a consequence of capitalism. As a result, people are preoccupied with acquiring certificates, yet unwilling to commit to the rigors of the learning process. Some prominent people’s (politicians, media practitioners, business leaders, and pastors) quest for often dubious honorary doctorates are all credentialization schemes designed to wield colonial power and privilege (see Appiah, 2021).
Conclusion
This article provides a conceptual explanation of how Ghana’s educational system generally—and universities in particular—sustains colonially established exploitative bureaucracies. This interpretation is sought through the lens of Ekeh’s civic and primordial publics. This discourse has attempted to illustrate how these complex relationships manifest politically, socially, economically, and even aesthetically in both publics. Overall, Africa’s inability to establish a “hegemonic order” prior to European colonization accounts for the continuous entanglement with the challenges of the two publics (Onuoha, 2014, p. 333). The challenge now is how to nurture worthy attitudes of dedication, altruism, and selflessness among others in the educated actors in these publics. This task is important because “colonially-induced mentalities of government are related to the emergent form of postcolonial governmentality in Africa” (Adebanwi, 2017, p. 66). Remedying these mindsets requires a re-examination of the higher education process as education, ultimately, is a value transmission system. Attaining this feat would help universities to contribute to the creative transformation of African leadership, and Africa’s sociocultural and politico-economic development. Until then, Ghana’s higher education system, designed to foster structural inequalities, exploitation, and marginalization, will continue to nurture people who demonstrate amoral attitudes not only to the civic public, but any public they can abuse for personal gratification.
Acknowledgments
I wish to thank Dr Edward Nhyira Okai for his comments on an earlier version of this paper. I am also heavily indebted to the anonymous reviewers and editors at Ghana Studies for their detailed, constructive, and thought-provoking critiques.
Footnotes
↵1. Examples of this preying attitude are foregrounded in the section titled “Interplay of Ekeh’s publics.”
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.