All societies have in one way or the other created social
classes consciously or unconsciously.
The Indian caste system is an example of a consciously created social
class system based on religious beliefs that have persisted till today. The
aristocracy and commoners is a class system created in the middle ages based
along political and economic lines. Even in our African societies there were
class systems. Class systems are an inherent part of every society. It is there
even though it is not acknowledged most times. Even when Marx envisaged a
classless society, that never happened in communist Soviet Union and China.
History has taught us that class revolt occurs when there is
a wide economic inequality between the haves and have-nots; when the
aristocrats flaunt their wealth while the common herd wallows in abject
poverty. In other cases class conflict
is deepened by the absolute suppression of one class by the other denying the
victim the dignity of being a human being. The Arab Spring is a modern example
of this.
However, in most cases the common herd lacks the initiative
to undertake a class rebellion until a savior comes around; an enigmatic
individual who is more aware of the circumstances of the suffering masses than
they the masses themselves. Albeit sometimes for his own selfish pursuits, he
becomes a hero in the eyes of the masses because he identifies himself with the
common people. In the 1980s, this phenomenon swept across the African country
with the emergence of leaders like J.J. Rawlings and Thomas Sankara.
The painful truth is that we cannot all be ‘equal’. But this
does not mean while some people have others should not have. Every human being
has the right to be treated with dignity and must have access to the basic
needs of life: food, shelter, cloth, health and education. And in all organized
societies it is the responsibility of the rulers to provide the conditions, the
enabling environment for every citizen to have access to all of these. The
failure of any government to harness the resources under their disposal for the
provision of basic needs to her citizens so that they can also live in dignity
is a crime to which these governments must be held accountable.
Moreover it is worse when the rulers live in glass houses,
drive expensive cars, drink fine wine and eat good food while their citizen
roam about scraping for a living. Such leaders are unwise. Thomas More in his
Utopia argued that it is better a leader is poorer than the lead.
So it is alright if the citizenry once in a while demands
responsible governance from the leaders of their country. It is the collective
responsibility of all of us to talk about the ills of government. Because such
ills cost us much more than the bailouts and handouts we receive from our
colonial masters and development partners.
The emergence of a middle class purporting to demand a better
Ghana from the government, an agenda that brought the government to power in
the first place, should be commended and signal the government that certain
things are not working well. The derision and contempt expressed by government
officials towards the actions of this group spells amateurism. It underscores the apparent lack of
discipline that characterize the actions and utterance of some government
officials without regard to retrospection. This form of exuberance to please a higher
power without thought to what is expedient is one of our problems in
leadership.
But to what end? To what end will the sycophancy bring the
rest of us? The crowding of critical minds by a small minority of the
population can be a boiling point for revolt. Again the Arab spring should be a
lesson. People should be allowed to express their anger and frustration the
constitutional way provided by the constitution. It is an outlet to diffuse
pain and anger. But this also does not mean we should engage in wanton
disrespect for authority with insults. It is not an African value to insult
elders.
However, the momentum of this group in articulating the
course of the have-nots has died down. One reason for this could be the label;
middle class they gave themselves. In
fact listening to the reasons some of them stated in going on the first
demonstration one can construe that if their personal circumstances change they
will be become oblivious to the plight of the majority.
By labeling themselves as middle class they alienate
themselves from the majority of the people who are really feeling the brunt of
the economic conditions. The middle class is just a small fraction of the
populace just like the ruling class. Their needs do not supersede the needs of
others. Though one will acknowledge that their success will have a ripple
effect on the rest of the populace it is a fact also that our political elite
today were also once middle class. One is skeptical to identify himself with
them because their label is seen as a means to make transition to the political
elite of this country. When they get there then they will close their ears to
the incessant cries of the struggling majority because they are now satisfied
and have opportunity to amass wealth for themselves. This is evident
everywhere, both in government and in the opposition parties.
So though we are all not equal we need to fight to have what
everyone else deserves. But in my opinion it is wrong to think that fight
belongs to a particular class. That creates division and apathy in the majority
and a recipe for the ruling class to interpret our actions as political no
matter how hard we try to alienate ourselves from any political party.
These are my personal
views and should not be attributed to anyone or group.
No comments:
Post a Comment