POLITICS, HISTORY AND EDUCATION

“In the hands of rabid partisans, the study of history is mangled by linear, one-eyed reductionists. Facts are subordinated to propaganda; no connection of the dots!” – Yaw Nsarkoh

It is no denying the fact that history is as political as politics itself. Throughout the ages, scholars with differing opinions have competed for the authority to write history and how to write history. I have had a rather interesting time on social media in the week I was supposed to resume work from my annual leave.

I spent considerable time online reading about an alleged attempt by the government of the NPP to rewrite the history of the country in the revised school curriculum. The arguments were similar to those espoused during the arguments for the introduction of new public holidays. I heard the same arguments with regards to the draft public universities bill and the new public holidays’ bill.

I understand there is an attempt to project J.B. Danquah ahead of Nkrumah as the protagonist of Ghana’s independence struggle. Isn’t that amazing? I’d have usually stayed off this subject because I learnt from a very young age that when it comes to Nkrumah and Danquah, Ghanaians usually prefer to debate on emotions than substance. But this particular debate roused my curiosity.

What is it with these two personalities that we need to split hairs over? Don’t we have enough space in the public arena to celebrate both without antagonizing the other?

I’m an admirer of both men in different ways. I admire Nkrumah for his political astuteness and vision. I admire Danquah as a philosopher and public intellectual. It is however fate that would place them along the ends of two different political spectrums in the struggle for independence.

Nkrumah came out tops in that fierce contest and no amount of vilification or revisionism would change that. History favours the victors more often than not so it is understandable the central role Nkrumah occupies in our political history. Danquah was terrible at party politics and miscalculated the vision required for the struggle for independence.

Nkrumah understood what was required for the struggle to be won and he eventually won independence for us. It is however important to also say others like; Wilson-Sey, Aggrey, Sarbah, Grant, Danquah etc. played various roles in our history that must also be celebrated.

One commentator bemoaned what he calls an attempt at indoctrination in the new history curriculum. His simple reason was the President was attempting to project the image of his uncle in the political history of Ghana. I must say I find that position quite ludicrous. I’m struggling to come to terms with that assertion.

Indeed, it got me wondering if my Marxist-Nkrumaist leaning teachers indoctrinated me. Some of my most favourite teachers in both secondary school and university where people who espoused views that I considered outrageous but I would never say they indoctrinated me. Some of them were among the most brilliant teachers I ever encountered.

The history of Ghana especially the political history of Ghana encompasses hundreds of people and among the multitude stands the gigantic status of Nkrumah. The addition of new perspective in the new curriculum cannot wash away that fact.

I would therefore implore on my fellows on the left to tune down on the political vitriolic in their assessment of the new curriculum and look at the bigger picture. We have a country to build. Our task is to complete the quest for prosperity in honour of both Nkrumah and Danquah.