Nana Akwasi Twumasi

Tribalism has been on the rise in our country and it appears to be permeating our national media. More specifically, the chasm between Ashantis and Ewes is widening at a rate never experienced heretofore. Ghanaweb.com, for the past several months and counting, has published the works of some authors, who, in their egregious pursuit of notoriety and battle against improprieties in our country, have engaged others in an all-out war of words. The “exchange” between Yaw Opare-Asamoa (The Ewe Factor In The Political Discourse Of Ghana, Ghanaweb.com, 01/30/09) and Daniel K. Pryce (Please, Leave Ewes Alone! Ghanaweb.com, 02/03/09) exemplifies what I am alluding to. Mr. Opare-Asamoa has written and published a rejoinder to Mr. Pryce’s article in an effort to correct the cornucopia of “inaccuracies” contained therein. I am yet to read a contrarian piece from Pryce on this subject, which, by the way, hasn’t appeared on this prime website as of this article’s completion. Perhaps, this is a symbol of good gesture on his part to de-escalate the diatribe. I may be incapable of delineating the origin of the animosity between Ashantis and Ewes but most, if not all, will agree with me that these two tribes have been at each others throat for quite some time. It is the hope of this author that this article and its sequels (Ashantis’ Insecurity and Our National Security; and Ewes and Ashantis: The Bridge to Somewhere) will attempt to touch on briefly the underbelly of the nasty attitudes on both sides and what may be done to remedy the situation or, at least, contain its down-ward spiral. In this endeavor, we should brace ourselves for what we may not want to hear about our contribution to this colossal problem. After all, what is the point in wishing for a cure for an ulcer of gastrointestinal etiology if one is uncomfortable telling a physician about having blood in ones excrement?

To begin, Daniel Pryce’s rejoinder to Opare-Asamoa’s article was anything but a factual argument. In fact, after reading his article, I was left wondering if Pryce was responding to another article altogether; or, possibly, he strung together a bunch of “colorful” words to create an ad hominem treatise for his fans. Without attacking his entire rejoinder (anybody with a brain should analyze both articles critically in terms of substance and dare me if he or she would not come to the same conclusion), I would, however, use certain thematic foci therefrom as a template for portions of this article. Initially, I thought about writing a full response to the article in question but decided against it, since that would defeat the very purpose I’m trying to achieve here. That said, Mr. Pryce often prides himself on the factuality and logicality of his articles — a flagrant exhibition of hubris that I find, ironically, lacking in some of his submissions. One important point, for example, which was presented as a fact in his article, based on my understanding, is that Rawlings’ name is not synonymous with the entire Ewe tribe. Parading this statement as a fact or an absolute truth is as ridiculous as telling someone that one plus one always equals two (If in doubt, read: Parigi V, Zavatta A, Kim M, Bellini M. Probing Quantum Commutation Rules by Addition and Subtraction of Single Photons to/from a Light Field. Science. 2007 Sep 28;317(5846):1890-3). As a matter of fact, a majority of Ewes have elevated Rawlings to the status of a god, and they’ve become inextricably bound to him, making the two indistinguishable.

Over the short period of time that I have published articles on this website, I have made one good observation: Any time Rawlings is accused, for whatever reason, expect most Ewes to be angry. As an example, I have been the recipient of a number of emails from angry Ewes who felt insulted because I wrote something about Rawlings they didn’t like. The truth is most Ewes see themselves as an extension of Rawlings and they cease to exist apart from him. In this case, it is not clear where Rawlings ends and Ewes begin. Maybe Pryce should start preaching to Ewes that they are not the same as Rawlings, for the onus is not on non-Ewes to make that distinction for them. If this is not clear, let me ask a question: Could anyone explain to me why Ewes inundate my e-mail account with anti-Ashanti, derogatory, and condescending remarks whenever I wrote about Rawlings? If my personal vendetta against Rawlings (for killing a relative of mine during his so-called revolution) is seen as an affront to the entire Ewe establishment, resulting in Ewes calling me all sort of names, don’t I — and other people, for that matter — have a valid argument lumping the two together? Better yet, could this be attributed to insecurity on the part of Ewes? Some of our authors need to conduct an etymological study of the words “fact” and “generalization,” as well as get tutoring in inductive and deductive logic, before they come to this website to accuse others ignorantly of writing without facts and making faulty generalizations. Do I get offended by reading a litany of anti-Ashanti sentiments directed at me via comments on this forum and e-mail? No, I enjoy them, to tell you the truth. What could be more exciting than reading comments from a bunch of Ewes who were pissed off because their supreme god (Rawlings) was denigrated? (I don’t plan to stop writing articles about that unrepentant murdering bastard anytime soon so anyone who sees the need to send me “nasty” emails after reading an article by me about Rawlings should feel free to do so).

Did Pryce mention that Rawlings is responsible for the democracy that we enjoy in Ghana today (i.e., under the Fourth Republic)? What was Pryce smoking (or inhaling) when he thought it wise to make such a statement? Is it because that piece of rubbish called the constitution was drafted under Rawlings’ leadership that he should be credited with our current democracy? By the same line of reasoning, should Christians credit Judas Iscariot with their salvation because his betrayal of the Christ resulted in his death, which brought about their salvation? What a load of hogwash! Did Rawlings know what democracy was? To what extent did he practice democracy as a president? What was the fate of those who were openly critical of his policies? (Folks, don’t get me wrong: I don’t dislike Daniel Pryce. I just happen to have fundamental differences with him on so many issues. That said, there is more that I like about the dude than I dislike. I guess if we can all focus on what we like about each other rather than what we dislike, we can make great strides in our efforts to curb tribalism.) Further, Pryce’s application of the story of the Jewish nation to the supposed plight of the Ewes as an anticlimactic theme in his treatise, was ill-conceived and, therefore, worth addressing. As far as I know, the Jews were wrongfully targeted by Hitler because he considered them as “pigs,” racially inferior, a threat to the German politico-socio-economic status etc. Hitler wiped out a huge chunk of them, because his demented mind led him to do so. Now, let’s rewind the record of our own history to 1957 and fast-forward to 1981 and draw a parallel to the Jewish “story”: Rawlings came to power via a successful coup and soon thereafter went on a killing spree, wiping out Akans whom he viewed as a threat, and stripped others of their wealth. Throughout our history, has there ever been an Akan president who went on a killing spree and targeted Ewes, in particular, or stripped successful Ewes of their wealth? No! In this sense, Akans are the “real” Jews of Ghana, not Ewes. We should be cognizant of the fact that even though other racial groups perished during the holocaust (even though Jews were the target), so did other ethnic groups die as a direct result of Rawlings’ atrocities (we should bear in mind that Akans were the target in this case). This should clear up any nonsense about a couple of Ewes who also died during this highway robbery commonly mistaken for a “revolution.” With respect to tribalism in Ghana, Ewes see a problem with everybody else but themselves; this is apparent in the writings of some of their authors. Kofi Amenyo’s article, “Can the NPP ever elect a non-Twi speaker as flag-bearer? (Ghanaweb.com, 01/12/09), is worth mentioning. According to Mr. Amenyo, the NPP lost last year’s election because of its history of “ethnic bias.” While I don’t totally disagree with him, I am compelled to quip that his way of thinking is akin to a child’s during his/her “concrete operational period.” A better question that should have been co-addressed in the said article, which would have exposed the author’s deep-seated tribalism, is this: Can the NDC ever elect a Twi-speaker as its flag-bearer? Or, “Will Ewes ever vote for the NPP with a non-Twi speaker as its flag-bearer in an election with the NDC (a party founded by one of their own) as a contender?” This, beyond the shadow of a doubt, shows how Ewes don’t want any responsibility for tribalism in our country relegated to them. The paramount question that underscores the idiocy of such ways of thinking is this: Who has ever seen a boxing match with only one fighter? As ridiculous as this may sound, Ewes believe Ashantis are the only “fighters” in this “boxing match.” Interestingly, some Ewes freely express anti-Ashanti sentiments on Ghanaweb daily, but Pryce and his cohorts wouldn’t want to be seen as heroes in this regard by writing articles to condemn such acts. They would, however, write to condemn anti-Ewe sentiments on this website. Obviously, they don’t see any wrong-doing on the part of Ewes on this subject, but they can see what’s wrong with everybody else. In another example, Nana Biakoye, an author who champions the views of Ewes, wrote an article about Grace Omaboe (aka maame Dokono), and heaped insults on her as a result of an alleged sodomy practice in one of her orphanages. Even though this allegation is more as a result of political vendetta than anything else, this article drew a lot of excitement from the Ewe community. If protecting the welfare of our children is the reason why this lady with a noble cause is being accused, then, I will argue unequivocally that Mills’ administration must do all that it can to transplant the entire Volta Region to the bottom of the Bermuda Triangle, since its trokosi practices put more children in danger than anything else in Ghana. Pryce’s last ditch to explain away what he thought was the reason behind the “unfair attack” on Ewes, came as a surprise to me. He asked, “Is it some nascent envy?” Well, I didn’t see that coming! Do Ashantis (Akans) have any reason to be envious of Ewes? How many Akans or Ashantis that we know of have Ewe names, and how many Ewes that we know of have Ashanti or Akan names? How many Ashantis live and work in the Volta Region? How many Ewes live and work in the Ashanti Region? Compare the socio-economic standing of the Ashanti Region to the Volta Region and ask yourself if Ashantis have any reason to be envious of the Volta Region. Maybe some of us need to visit some of the elite places in our capital—East Legon, Cantonments, Trasacco Valley, etc— and enquire about the owners of the mega-mansions in these localities. Who fought off the British invasion? Which of our chiefs/Kings is “recognized” by the British? Do Ashantis have any reason to be envious of Ewes, Mr. Pryce? Please, come again! (Whereas tribalism against Ewes is a documented and known fact in our culture, it should be noted that some of what is perceived to be anti-Ewe sentiments exists only in the heads of Ewes; this is nothing more than Ewes insecurity. In this sense, any article or view that even serves to highlight Ashantis’ contribution to Ghana’s history is interpreted by Ewes to mean Ashantis want to lord it over other tribes in Ghana. As an example, read Opare-Asamoa’s recent publication and Ewes interpretation of this good article [RE: Is Asantehene a “Super Chief”? Ghanaweb, 02/16/09].) In conjunction with the latter point, another example that comes to mind is a recent publication on this website captioned, “The hegemony is back and the password is …” (Harry Jonson Aggrey, Ghanaweb.com, 12/01/09). What a cerebral article! As great as this article was — a magnum opus for seekers of truth on the subject of tribalism in Ghana — it was met with heavy criticisms because Ewes did not want to accept their contribution to tribal-related problems in our country. Mr. Aggrey’s “mistakes,” as I gathered from this article, was two-fold: One, he denigrated Rawlings, a person that most Ewes venerate as a god. Two, he told some truths about Ewes, which they didn’t want to hear. It is so funny how some people yearn for the truth, but will never believe when they are presented with it. Most of the comments that I read from Ewes stemmed from the fact that they thought the author was biased towards them, while others didn’t appreciate the author’s efforts, because they simply felt uncomfortable with the content. As Oyokoba put it, “… I say it is easy to become fixated on the insults and forget about the full thrust or intent of the author… This Ewe bashing has the tendency to create siege mentality in [Ewes] that would rather make them stick strongly and tightly together…” That’s a piece of undiluted codswallop, since, clearly, that was not the authorial intent – at least, contextually. Did the author write about anything that was untrue? No! Was the content of the article factually wrong? No! How do we, as a nation, solve this monumental problem when Ewes don’t want to own up to their contribution? What is the best way to solve this problem, say nothing and hope the problem goes away---miraculously? That may work for an ostrich, but not for people who think with their brain. One of my father’s best friends (an Ewe) was killed by his own relatives simply because he married an Akan, and do some people think Ewes have no hand in this problem? Think again! In conclusion, I must say that the content of this article is far from an exhaustive list of how Ewes contribute to tribalism in Ghana. None of the examples employed here should be viewed by anyone as an isolated incident concocted to “discredit” Ewes, for it would be absurd to list all of my personal (as well as friends and relatives) experiences with Ewes. Also, some of the examples used here were deliberately truncated to avert the notion that I was trying to kill a dead horse e.g., the story about my father’s friend (a true story, if you care to know). Some may ask, "Why is Twumasi, the most “tribalistic” man on Ghanaweb (as I have been told in the past), writing about this topic?” I must admit I have made some off-the-cuff remarks about Ewes, which may have infuriated many people. Do I wish I had not uttered those words? Not exactly, since my actions were precipitated by remarks that were directed at me, which I considered to be an act of provocation. I may not be the type to append to my articles my graduate/postgraduate degree(s) and certifications, scholastic achievement(s), professional associations; or brag about how many houses I own, or cars that I drive (I hope you get the drift), but I can brag about one thing: I don’t back-down from a confrontation. On the subject of tribalism, I accept full responsibility for my actions and so should Ewes. My next article coming down the pipeline is “Ashantis’ Insecurity and Our National Security,” as I mentioned in the introductory paragraph. Readers may send me their specific concerns about Ashantis/Akans that they want addressed in the said article.

The author aka TROUBLEMAKER can be reached via nanaakwasitwumasi@googlemail.com