THE INSIGHT FRIDAY 4TH –SUNDAY 6TH SEPTEMBER, 2009, PAGE 8
Contextualising The Anti-Nkrumah Criticisms. An honest attempt to view Nkrumah’s personal contradictions must take account of the fact that in seeking to defend himself from the intense pressure of all kinds of assaults up to and including more that ten assassination attempts –he made mistakes. It is obvious that the repeated attempts to end his life, coupled with all the other undermine activities targeted against him, had a profound impact on both his political and personal judgement. It is known for instance that the repeated assassination attempts reduced Nkrumah to tears just months before the illegal overthrow of his government (socialist forum of Ghana, 2006, pg 8 and 86).
The military wings of since of the Ghanaian state were know to be at the heart of many of the assassination attempts, it is hardly surprising that Nkrumah decided to put these organs under his direct control.
It is important to remember that in addition to defending himself, Nkrumah was simultaneously defending against imperialism ‘s ongoing attempts to undermine both (i)the independence of Ghana; (ii)his agenda and strategy aimed at achieving a genuine African continental-wide super state structure. He was therefore defending ideas, principles and entities bigger than himself. The magnitude of these responsibilities clearly had an impact on Nkrumah’s responses and decisions.
Nkrumah made uniting the newly formed nation of the Ghana one of his key priorities; he introduces the one party state into Ghana because he saw it as the best political mode of operation to advance his agenda of unity. He took the view that the introduction of a multi-party system into an African continent newly emerging from colonialism was likely to result in the perpetuation of feudalism, tribalism and rivalry (Nkrumah 1980b, p372).
He saw the multiparty system as a process by which external ‘hidden hand’ of imperialism could engineer a situation where the ‘haves’ dominated the ‘have not’s (Nkrumah, 1970, p.102)
Indeed, Nkrumah was clear that regardless of whether a parliamentary, multi-party , one-party or an open military dictatorship is in operation, the state reflects the interest of a dominant class or classes in society. (Nkrumah, 1980a)