The untimely demise of the founder of the Ghana Freedom Party(GFP), Madam Akua Donkor has sent shock waves and sadness to the length and breadth of the country.

With all due respect and no offence intended on this occasion, although Madam Akua Donkor did not have a classroom education, she harboured no vestiges of slavery as evidenced in her previous pronouncements.

I must confess, I could not believe my ears when I once heard Madam Akua Donkor on the radio disclosing her inborn predilection for ‘Pan Africanism’.

Unlike the unliberated intellectuals who more often than not take solace in the foreign culture, Madam Akua Donkor was rather antipathetic to the Western way of life, judging from her solemn narratives.

According to Madam Akua Donkor, she was christened as ‘Victoria Donkor by her biological parents but after growing up and developing superior powers of the mind, she did not find the wisdom or the need in keeping ‘Whiteman’s’ name, hence changing her birth name to Akua Donkor.

Madam Akua Donkor boldly and passionately opined: “tell me why I should take a ‘Whiteman’s’ name?” “Don’t I have my own culture?” “Would a ‘Whiteman’ ever name his child after me (Akua Donkor)?”

I was indeed dumbfounded listening to someone who had had no classroom education, and yet so much liberated in the mind. Indeed, Madam Akua Donkor held no slavish mentality.

Juxtaposing Madam Akua Donkor’s emancipated mind or her refined disposition with a self-acclaimed intellectual’s thought process brings nothing but melancholy, so to speak.

Yes, we have self-acclaimed intellectuals, many of whom find it inappropriate to be called by their aboriginal names, but would rather take comfort in adopted ‘Western’ names. How bizarre?

It reminds me of a friend of mine who once questioned me of my reasons for refusing to give ‘English’ names to my boys.

According to my friend, the ‘English’ people will find it difficult to pronounce the names of my children, and therefore it was needless for me to give British born children the native Ghanaian names.

To be quite honest, I was deeply baffled upon listening to my friend’s seemingly weird thought process.

However, I contained my emotional intelligence and showed deference to my classroom educated friend, who is yet to liberate his mind to reach Madam Akua Donkor’s level.

My innocuous question to my friend was: “did our colonial Masters name their children after our great forefathers?

I proceeded: “Have you ever heard or seen any Englishman who has named his child after our rich African names such as ‘Bawumia, ‘Mahama, ‘Badu, Sarfo, Sakyi, Danso, Owusu, Mensah, Tetteh, Nkrumah, Busia, Danquah, Acheampong, Afrifa, Amu, Ayikwei, Quartey, Azumah, Gbedema, Atinga, Atuguba, Dramani, Kufuor, Addo, Akoto etc.???????????????????”
I enquired.

Unsurprisingly, my friend answered no and then added that he has realised why I have given African names to my three boys.

The historian, Herodotus, argued more than 2,000 years ago that culture and customs are sacrosanct and there are no universal ethics when it comes to culture and customs.

To buttress his point, Herodotus aptly told the story about the Persian king Darius. The king, according to Herodotus, summoned several Greeks and asked them how much money they would take in exchange for consuming the dead bodies of their fathers.

Extremely outraged, the Greeks declined to perform such a gruesome act at any price, adding that cremation of the dead was a sacred obligation.

According to Herodotus, King Darius then called upon some Indians, who allegedly by custom, ate their deceased parents, and asked them if they would consider burning the dead bodies of their fathers.

The Indians felt insulted. And, to ventilate their arousing disgust, the Indians retorted that such an act would be a heinous crime.

The moral lesson concluded by Herodotus, was simply that different group of people regard their own culture and customs as sacrosanct and superior (Herodotus1974; Ishay 2004).

Interestingly, we (Ghanaians) tend to ascribe transcendent intelligence to persons who have the grasp of Englishman’s language.

I am afraid, such a notion is spurious. Having a command of English language cannot be a cynosure of transcendent powers of the mind.

Of course, having a command of English language is an advantage to individuals, given its ecumenical recognition.

That being said, I take an exception to a school of thought that holds a view that having a mastery of the English language is a sign of nuanced intelligence.

Trust me, that is fallacious. For I have had the opportunity to give remedial instructions to a group of English indigenes who had learning disabilities(mentally incapacitated), and yet had unbelievable linguistic precision.

Paradoxically, in Ghana, individuals are held in high esteem for having superlative grasp of Englishman’s language. How bizarre, how romantic, and how ironic to attribute superior powers of the mind to individuals with a mastery of Englishman’s language?

Unfortunately, with such an innate proclivity, we tend to believe that a trained communicator for instance, can solve all our problems by virtue of his/her communication skills.

Let’s face it, having the precision of English language is neither a leadership quality nor a sign of superior intelligence.

In truth, it does not necessarily make one a great leader and thinker, but we, Ghanaians, are routinely lured by rhetoric devoid of substance.

Of course, individuals have their absolute right to speak the language (s) of their choice. However, I find it extremely abhorrent when bona fide Africans slavishly decide to scoff at the natives who speak their mother’s tongue superlatively.


May your soul rest in perfect peace, Madam Akua Donkor.

DAMIRIFA DUE DUE!!!

K. Badu, UK.

k.badu2011@gmail.com