Feeds:
Posts
Comments

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

THE CALL FOR A SOCIALIST UNITED AFRICA UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF MARXISM-NKRUMAISM

OSAGYEFO GR. KWAME NKRUMAHThe call of Africa booms across the African continent for a socialist united Africa. It is the final call of the calls from Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois and Marcus Garvey, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah and Ahmed Sekou Toure, Gamel Abdel Nasser and Ben Bella, Muammar Gaddafi and Robert Mugabe, etc., for a truly independent Africa. And a truly independent Africa is not only a united people but also one based on the socialist system as projected by Dr. Kwame Nkrumah on the basis of a scientific study of the African situation; that is, if Africa should never again lose its independence. Let all Africans on the continent and the Diaspora hear this call and stand up to be counted.

While the Centre for Consciencist Studies and Analyses (CENCSA) acknowledges the proliferation of different perspectives on the ideological and organizational question regarding Pan-Africanism it boldly asserts that Revolutionary Pan-Africanism, as pronounced by Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, remains the most consistent and viable perspective. CENCSA is fortified in its conviction that the neo-colonial states are not to be taken over but replaced through a process of building a single African State in correspondence with the African Nation. In this respect, it observes with pride the self-criticism of Dr. Nkrumah on particular occasions to heighten clarity on the way forward for professional African revolutionaries and the masses of the African people.

CUBAN REVOLUTIONARY

ERNESTO CHE GUEVARA

The CENCSA is left in no doubt that the contributions of  internationalist Cuban revolutionary forces, for instance, cannot be trivialized in the history of the African Revolution. It is in this respect that it urges upon African revolutionary forces not only to acknowledge those contributions but also take inspiration from them for their own engagement in all theatres of struggle on the African continent. While reactionary and neo-colonial states gang up to retain the status quo it stands to reason that African revolutionary forces spread their wings over the African continent to establish their ubiquitousness for the ultimate anti-neo-colonial confrontation. For, therein lies the worldwide victory over imperialism, neo-colonialism and international impunity. Aluta continua!

UNDER THE REVOLUTIONARY BANNER

That the African Nation might
unfold its wings to embrace
So its myriad opportunities 
unearth the gem embedded
In the bosom of African Youth
that might know no waste
A socialist People’s Republican State of Africa
that Nation bears
Under the revolutionary banner
of Marxism-Nkrumaism.*

*Inspired by Raymond Nkrumah Kgagudi, a
son of the soil

MOTHER AFRICA! HERE I COME

In the distance far off
Through the eyes of the harmattan fog
Do I see her in that glittering yellow 
Beckoning that I come closer.

The excitement wells in my heart to behold her
Physically but also gingerly
O! What a sight I behold!
Is it for real or a mirage?

Only she can tell
When that embrace does occur
At that moment long expected.
I’m coming dear at that call

I can no longer hold my peace
I refuse so to do
In hunger for the warmth of thy peace
Mother Africa! here I come …

And I hear her voice now
Glory be to him
Who gets me closer.*

* In dedication to Diana.

CLICK THE BLUE COLOUR FOR THE JOURNAL OF MARXISM-NKRUMAISM OUR THEORETICAL ORGAN IN PROJECTION OF OUR PERSPECTIVE OF THE AFRICAN REVOLUTION

 

JOURNAL OF MARXISM-NKRUMAISM

JOURNAL OF MARXISM-NKRUMAISM

Please, click here: Horus Africanus I

A Critique In Socialist Policy Direction Development In Africa

Ms CHRISTINA SAMIA YABA NKRUMAH

IN A DIFFICULT TRANSITION TO MARXISM-NKRUMAISM

By

Lang T.K.A. Nubuor

(A Sympathizer of the CPP)

SAMIA GOES WILD

SAMIA GOES WILD

Reading through Ms Christina Samia Yaba Nkrumah’s January 11, 2013 statement on the way forward for the Convention People’s Party (CPP), one is immediately struck with a sudden spirit of urgency in the Chairperson’s tone. Such urgency was impressed on her continually for years for as many times that we ever had the occasion to comment on the way she goes about the business of running the party; but without a semblance of response from her.

It is unfortunate that it is now (after losing the Jomoro seat) that she awakens to that urgency; but it is too late for her. Her sudden call for self-criticism within the party is indeed belated. She truly never made intra-party self-criticism a tool for organizational development. And, yet, that instrument has always been the source and seat of organizational strength and advancement.

All the same it is possible to understand her previous but silent rejection of self-criticism. For, self-criticism is that tool which scientific socialists (Marxist-Nkrumaists) consciously employ in their organizational work; unlike bourgeois parties which see it negatively as a communist construct and avoid it as an anathema. Samia has never been a socialist, not to talk about her being a scientific socialist of the Marxist-Nkrumaist breed. Hence her reject.

Her sudden romance with the concept is yet to be bone-deep. For, while she now calls for its application she continues in her old ways of being silent on the question of socialism the adoption of which is the only means of coming into grips with the practical dynamics and the politico-philosophical principles animating that concept – self-criticism. We are saying that the true application of self-criticism cannot be and is not outside the socialist framework.

As it is, this sudden romance with the concept of self-criticism remains at the periphery of Marxism-Nkrumaism – the expression of scientific socialism within the conditions of Africa. We are not helped by such knee jerk reactions bordering on the romantic. A scientific appreciation of the party’s condition on the basis of the principles enunciated by the Foremost Pan-Africanist, Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, is the impeccable requisite now.

In this respect, we can proceed here to point out that Samia’s proclamation of the CPP as a ‘Democratic Party’ can only be understood in its bourgeois framework. We are here in reference to her call for the CPP to, ‘without delay’, organize ‘from the centre’. A People’s Party is surely not organized ‘from the centre’ but from the grassroots. It is bourgeois parties that are organized ‘from the centre’. The name is Convention People’s Party. And its historical origins explain clearly to us that it originated from the grassroots.

It is the abandonment of the grassroots approach and concentration on the top-to-bottom strategy that have today brought the CPP to its toes. Currently, we can only see Samia well-positioned in the bourgeois framework. We cannot, however, deny that she has made statements suggestive of a certain desire to jump out of that framework. In her Christmas greetings in a text message on December 25, 2012, for instance, she states that ‘We will organise together to help our people liberate themselves from poverty’.

That organizationally and ideologically correct statement stands in contrast with the bourgeois top-to-bottom (from the centre) strategy. The point, however, is that such a statement appears to be coming out of the blues of her native bourgeois ideological bent of mind. Else, how could she suddenly abandon that correct statement within a period of less than three weeks and return to talks about ‘from the centre’? Our lady is reluctantly in a transition occasioned by her electoral defeat throwing her into populist knee jerk reactions.

In this transition, she still does not see anything wrong about her old bourgeois anti-Marxist-Nkrumaist ideas and sincerely believes that Ghanaians love those ideas although they have their doubts as to the CPP’s organizational strength. This is her take: ‘Ghanaians … like our ideas but they do not consider us sufficiently organized to be given political power and govern.’ The weight of her bourgeois education, which she still carries around, unfortunately blinds her to the linkage between ideological and organizational choices.

And Samia has an interesting conception of Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’s vision. She restricts that vision to the ‘distribution of opportunities’. No Sir, Madam. Osagyefo’s scientific socialist vision of a socialist united Africa is fundamentally concerned with the production of opportunities by the people themselves on the basis of which they will determine the system of distribution to their benefit. That is why her text message makes better sense since it is by such means that the people liberate themselves from poverty and do not give political power to anybody to be governed – they govern themselves.

Osagyefo’s vision of a socialist united Africa does not project Ghana as ‘a self-reliant, dignified and culturally confident nation’ (something it can never be) separately from ‘the cause of African unity’; in fact, the vision projects not African nations but a single African Nation with the obstructionist barriers removed and thus making it possible for any African to settle anywhere in Africa just in the same way that any Ga or Asante can settle anywhere in Ghana without being asked to produce residence permit or passport.

Anyway, when Samia says that ‘We cannot and will never abandon our ideals and the vision of our mentor, the great Pan-Africanist, Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’, does she mean to separate OUR ideals from OSAGYEFO’S vision? Please, in case she visualizes something to that effect she must quickly drop it as if some extremely foul excreta has just been deposited unto her honourable head. We have only one revolutionary ideology in Africa. It is Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’s initiated Marxism-Nkrumaism. It spells out our ideals and vision.

In this piece of commentary, on the basis of her own statements, we have drawn out a picture of a Samia Nkrumah in a tedious transition to Marxism-Nkrumaism. She is experiencing difficulties to change and is resisting change. We believe that when she crosses the transition she could be a great asset to Africa. For now, however, the way forward requires that she be sacked for non-performance to enable a younger person with impeccable Marxist-Nkrumaist credentials to assume the Chairmanship.

That is the very first step in the CPP’s way forward. Good luck and God bless.

THE STATEMENT FROM Ms CHRISTINA SAMIA YABA NKRUMAH

January 11, 2013

My dear Comrades and Friends,

It is not unusual to engage in heated discussions and debates on the way forward after an electoral defeat. We are a Democratic Party and we welcome self-criticism and reflection by all members. We, the leaders of the Party, are totally committed to protecting the solidarity and unity of our political force. In no way will some of us engage in public arguments nor will we be dragged into petty squabbles in the media. The right place to discuss our problems is within not outside the party.

I strongly urge all CPP executives, members, and sympathizers to remain focused on what we need to do in this period. We must without delay and beginning from the centre, organize ourselves. All national, regional and constituency executives are documenting our experiences and collating views as to what went wrong for us in the 2012 elections. Many of us have made serious sacrifices in terms of time, energy and resources to improve our fortunes. Although the harvest was potentially plentiful, the laborers were few at the end of the day. Ours is the typical challenge of a minority party trying to make its voice heard.

Ghanaians have told us what they think. They like our ideas but they do not consider us sufficiently organized to be given political power and govern. We have heard them clearly. We are not broken, we are not giving up and since the elections, we have spent every minute charting the way forward.

There is always resistance to an idea that threatens the status quo, that seeks to make genuine change in a society. But the light of patriotism cannot be extinguished. Truth cannot be silenced forever. Sincerity cannot be destroyed. Those values that we want to inject into our politics are more required today than ever and nothing will deter us in our mission to make our country a more just and humane place.

We cannot and will never abandon our ideals and the vision of our mentor, the great Pan-Africanist, Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah. This vision remains the realization of fair distribution of opportunities for all Ghanaians, to meet the basic needs of our citizens, to become a self-reliant, dignified and culturally confident nation, and to further the cause of African unity, our only way to become economically viable for the well-being of our people.

We do not want to get distracted with petty internal wrangling and forget our mission to serve Ghana with our ideas and our vision. We have dedicated our lives to this mission.

Please stand firm and help us to, within 6 months, present Ghanaians with a well-organized Party, however small, which is worthy of being associated with the unmatched achievements of modern Ghana’s founder, Kwame Nkrumah.

Forward Ever!

Samia Nkrumah

 

SALE OF GOVERNMENT ASSETS

A Presentation at the Freedom Centre

on November 28, 2012

By

 Kweku Dadzie

POLITICAL COORDINATOR

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL SECRETARY

CONVENTION PEOPLE’S PARTY

The struggle for the ownership of property as an essential means of production varies in time and place and has remained the source of conflict and tension between the few ruling-property owning classes and the majority exploited classes. The bourgeois State forms part of the neo-colonial arrangements, maintaining and consolidating a dependent economic structure for political and social influence of the few ruling elites over the larger populace.

As you are well aware, arguments over the sale of state assets or divestiture have been a major feature of the struggle for the ownership of property among classes.  Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, socialist countries have undergone pressures to implement unprecedented privatization of State assets. It has been presented that the largest privatization in history took place in Russia between 1992 and 1995 when as many as 75,000 small and medium scale enterprises were auctioned, 14,000 medium to large scale firms were sold and 130 to 140 million new shareholders were created (IFC 1995).[1]

However, to a lesser extent, the same phenomenon occurred in all former socialist countries with the exception of Cuba and China, even though in the case of China, a guarded promotion of liberalisation is ongoing.

According to Stephen Adei on his “Governance, State-ownership and Divestiture – the Ghanaian Experience”[2], he notes that “the immediate post-colonial economy era in Ghana was characterized by high levels of government ownership of enterprises, high levels of economic regulation, and explicit suppression of financial markets and exchange. This trend continued for most parts of the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s when Ghana began to change course with the adoption of the Structural Adjustment Program. Most of these programs included the transfer of state enterprises into the private sector”.

In this discussion, it is important to ask whether poor performance of some of the state enterprises could be attributed to the bourgeois nature of Governance of the Civilian government of PP, NDC, and NPP and also military governments of NLC, SMC, AFRC, and PNDC. Did Nkrumah’s administration succeed in his formative years of establishing and managing state enterprises because the underpinning ideological framework was scientific-socialist driven and therefore appropriate to the pursuit of its corresponding economic policies?

If, from 1957 to the early 60s, Ghana’s increase in productivity in the agriculture and manufacturing sectors was the result of efforts toward strengthening the State’s share and increase in ownership of productive assets, then, the Five Year Development Plan, the Consolidated Plan and the truncated Seven Year Development Plan point to a significant fact: that a growing conflict of the internal and the external was expected to confront the CPP Government heavily in no time.

Pomadze Tomatoe Factory, Komenda Sugar Factory, Asutsuare Sugar Factory, Bolgatanga Meat Factory, Kumasi Jute Factory, Kumasi Shoe Factory, Ghana Railways Corporation, Ghana Airways, Tema Dry Dock,  Tema Sanyo, Tema Steel Works, Tema Batteries,  Tema Paints Factory, Tema Cold Stores, Tema Food Complex, Abosso Glass Factory, Bonsa Tyres, Kade Match Factory, Suhum Garment Factory, Ghana Fishing Corporation with 21 Trawlers, SSNIT, ADB, NIB, Ghana Commercial Bank, State Insurance Company, State Distilleries, Takoradi Boatyard, Takoradi Cocoa Processing Corporation, Tema Cocoa Processing Corporation and many, many of them which were established by the State with controlling interests, posed an economic threat to Western economic interests in Ghana. From this emerging progressive pattern of economic production and property relations in Ghana, a major source of wealth for financing free education and delivery of quality health care became materialized in Ghana.

The State’s effort in accumulating capital, aimed at productive growth for social good, suffered severely from 1966. Naked implementation of neo-liberal policies of Capitalism, lack of foresight in leadership and unwarranted military takeovers depleted Government’s assets in its own establishment. The private-sector as the engine of growth became dominant in the actions of Governments.  Through the ERPs of the 1980s and GPRSs in the 2000s, the sale of Government assets remained the main source of fruit for the survival of the private sector.

It is important to mention that the sales of Government assets have included the following:

(1) sale of whole or part shares/assets of an enterprise, established by the State or in partnership with a private entity, to a private entity. This is commonly referred to as divestiture;

(2) transfer of ownership of public Lands to private interests.

Both form part of a broader notion of Privatization which further involves the promotion of market liberalisation through policies and legislations.

Many times we are confused by the subtle distinctions of definitions of these neo-liberal phrases. But they are arguably all offspring and extensions of Capitalism.

Generally, some underlining reasons usually given over the years by Government functionaries, reactionary think-tanks and the neo-colonial academia, set-up for the justification of the sale of Government assets, have included:

a.      Filling in budget potholes

b.      Fulfilling IMF/World Bank conditionalities

c.      Increasing Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) targets

d.      Re-capitalisation of loss-making state enterprise.

e.       Expansion of economy etc.

On the other side of the leaf, one major argument presented by Marxist-Nkrumaists for state-control and management of productive resources has been that, in order to accelerate development after long periods of colonial exploitation and slavery, Governments must intervene decisively by policy, creation of socio-economic infrastructure and ownership of productive assets to bridge income gaps, break barriers of economic and social injustices and accelerate growth of the human resource base of an underdeveloped country. The aim is also to reduce economic dependency on the metropolis.

In 1983, the PNDC Government launched the Economic Review Programme which became the key policy tool for neo-liberal approach to recovering the economy of Ghana.

Among several measures that the PNDC Government took was the disposal of loss-making state enterprises.  In order to give legislative enforcement to this neo-colonial arrangement, the PNDC passed the Divestiture of State Interest (Implementation) Law, 1993(PNDCL, 326), which was deemed to have come into force on 1st January 1988, to divest, thus by the State, of any of its interests in any statutory corporation or any corporate body incorporated under the Companies Code, 1963 (Act 179) or under the Incorporated Private Partnership Act, 1962 (Act 152). Note that Section (1) of the Decree, allowed directives of divesture to be carried in accordance with policy directives as the PNDC may from time to time determine.

The Divestiture Implementation Committee, which develops a criteria for the selection of enterprises to be divested and assume such responsibility as they may deem fit over bodies earmarked for divestiture in order to prepare such enterprises for sale, was established.

At the beginning of the divestiture programme, over 300 state-owned enterprises (SOEs) were operating in all sectors of the economy. Whilst a large number of them were in manufacturing and agriculture (including cocoa and coffee plantations, poultry and fishing), others were in the mining, hotel and timber sectors.

Some of the enterprises which were affected by the divestiture programme included the following:

        Ghacem Cement    (Shares sold to Norwegians)

        Ghana Telecom     (Shares sold to Malaysians)

        Kwame Nkrumah Catering Rest Houses – Atlantic Houses (Sold to private individuals)

         Nsawam Cannery  (Sold to 31st DWM)

         Kanda GNTC          (Sold to private individuals)

         Atlantic Hotel, Meridian and Star Hotels (Sold to private entities)

         Abosso Glass Factory (Sold to private individual)

         Continental Hotel (Sold to Golden Tulip)

         West Africa Mills Company

         Tema Steel Company

         Ghana Agro Food Company –formerly TFCC

         GIHOC Bottling– (became The Coca Cola Bottling Company of Ghana Ltd)

         Gliksen W/A Company (acquired by SUHUMA Timber Company Ltd)

         Ghana Oil Palm Development Company (Sold in 1995)

It is necessary to draw a lesson from the political effect of the sale of many of these assets; as an inclusive factor in the deepening of tension and political unrest between pro-democratic groups and the PNDC government. Note that the left in the pro-democratic movement raised questions about the selling of some of these state assets to private foreigners.

Let us now consider few selected cases of recent sale of national assets under the Fourth Republican constitution in the following areas.

Mining Sector

In the mining sector, today, Ghanaians have lost their majority shares in AngloGold Ashanti to nothing. In 2007, the NPP Government sold Ghana’s non-controlling interests of 5% to Anglogold Ashanti Ltd. The NDC Government under the Mills Administration in January 2011 also sold the nation’s last shares of 2.5% to Anglogold Ashanti which generated an amount of US $215million, whereas accounts of its utilization was not clearly provided.

Public Lands as a Primary National Asset

According to the laws of Ghana, lands acquired by the government are supposed to be used only in the public interest or for the public purpose for which it was acquired. (Article 20(5) of the 1992 Constitution).

The selling of public lands under a disguised policy of re-zoning of lands for redevelopment of the capital city was embarked by the first NDC Government.

Under Phase 1 of the first NDC Government’s Accra Redevelopment Policy in 2000, the proceeds from the sale of 67 plots of land (sold mostly to companies and private individuals), enabled them to build 83 replacement bungalows and 169 residential units.

However, the Government then did not take into account the Constitutional provision which requires that “the owner of the property immediately before the compulsory acquisition shall be given the first option for acquiring the property” (Article 20: Clause 6).

In 2009, the NPP continued with the running of economic liberalization of the past PNDC and NDC, under a disguised framework of Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy I and II, placing the private sector as the vehicle for development and growth.

During the NPP’s administration, the Government decided to ignore laid-down procedures, such as open bidding and going for Cabinet approval of allocations, as stipulated in the State Lands Regulations, 1962 (L.I. 230). Instead, between 2003 and 2008, the NPP Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing, in his individual capacity proceeded to allocate 46.85 acres of residential plots and houses without subjecting the allocation to competitive bidding or the laid-down guideline established by the cabinet.

According to the Committee for Joint Action, a lead campaigner against unlawful and arbitrary sale of public lands, the implementation of the redevelopment scheme under the NPP was so arbitrary and haphazard that even persons who were allocated with the plots did not complete the Application for Leases/Licenses for Government Plots (Form 5) as stipulated in LI 230.

The pressure group identified that the Kuffuor Government’s exclusive and restrictive bidding process created and allocated 103 plots to NPP members and supporters. 88 plots of land located in prime areas at Ridge, Cantonments and Airport were sold under protocol arrangements with premiums ranging between six thousand and eight thousand Ghana Cedis (GH¢ 6, 000/GH¢ 8, 000) per plot.

This sharply brings into light the opportunities opened to a category of people on the basis of their class interest as against the majority interest whether under NDC or NPP.

Ghana Telecom as a National Asset

As part of the privatization policy, the first NDC Government offloaded shares in Ghana Telecom to the Malaysians to restructure and re-capitalize.  Before then GT had retrogressively continued to suffer from mismanagement, political manipulation and eventual breakdown in competitive operation.

The Kuffuor Government, on July 3, 2008, signed a Sale and Purchase Agreement with Vodafone International to sell off 70% of the Government’s stake in GT to Vodafone, at an approximate value of US$1.3 billion, plus an expected cash injection of US$500 million, totaling US$1.8 billion. Among several components of what was described as the “Enlarged GT” was the fibre optic. It is public knowledge that documents presented to the Inter-Ministerial Committee showed that the Social Security and National Investment Trust (SSNIT) had expressed its desire to operate a Fibre-optic network in the country but was not allowed to do so. Volta River authority had interest in the utilization of the fibre optic. However, several assets of GT were sold to Vodafone without, firstly, considering local interest. The only reason why these Governments would ignore all available options for an equitable national advantage was/is what some individuals in them would benefit from the transaction.

Notwithstanding the fact we can still wait for the Accra Commercial Court to decide as some members of the CPP still seeking from the court a declaration that the agreement, entered into by the Kuffuor government, was not in accordance with the due process of the law and was therefore a nullity, the case of GT sale to Vodafone is a clear example of the difficulty of neo-colonial regimes in effectively managing state enterprises, since their ideological interest conflicts with the framework of managing state enterprises.

The Agriculture Development Bank and Merchant Bank have similarly attracted the interest of Governments for sale to foreign private investors.

However, it is most welcoming that the Mills-Mahama administration pursued some national effort in the capital re-acquisition of state assets in the Volta Aluminium Company Ltd (VALCO) and Tema Drydock Ltd.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the sale of Government assets has evolved through all successive civilian and military Governments after 1966. This neo-colonial process has affected all productive sectors of the economy: mining, agriculture, banking, transportation etc.

Whereas on one hand, at the start of Ghana’s privatization drive, the sale of Government assets have led to significant retrenchment of labour and strengthening of capital markets for the benefit of few private individuals and firms, on the other hand state-ownership has provided 55% of employment in the formal sector excluding the civil service, and accounted for 25% of domestic investment.[3] It is worth raising the awareness of the direct and overall effects of the sale of Government assets on Ghanaian economic life in order to fast track organised mass revolt against the phenomenon for a better replacement with a dominant public ownership and prudent management of national resources.

NOTES 


[1] IFC. 1995. Privatization Principles and Practice, Washington D.C.

[2] Visit: http://www.my-world-guide.com/upload/File/Reports/g/ghana/Governance,%20StateOwnership%20and%20Divestiture%20The%20Ghanian%20Experience.pdf

He is a known reactionary and was a Professor of Leadership, and Rector of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA)

[3] Ebenezer Akuete. 1992. Privatization in Ghana. Presented at Conference on “Privatization Strategies in Africa,

Mount Clair College, N. Jersey

LIBERTY AYIVI MEMORIAL MANGO PLANTATION

Co-operation But Not Competition For Production & Defence

Oswald The Poet

Poetry Is The Soul Of Literary Writing- Oswald O. Okaitei

Moorbey'z Blog

From a Nu-Afrikan perspective, Red For The Blood That We Have Shed In The Freedom Struggle Black Is For Our People & The Origin Of All Things In The Universe Green Is For Mother Afrika & The Rebirth Of Life And For Our Children

Iconic Photos

Famous, Infamous and Iconic Photos

The Charnel-House

From Bauhaus to Beinhaus

Sena Quashie

third culture adult

Nii-Teiko

kwakuo se, ‘m’asusuo nyinaa wo me tiri mu...

The Kente Weaver

Ghanaba. Oheneba. Nyameba. "Dadaba". Mamaba. Osofoba. Maame Aba. Ewuraba. Osibisaba. Bibiniba. Akwaaba.

J.J. Rawlings

Ghana's former President J.J. Rawlings in the spotlight

CENTRE FOR CONSCIENCIST STUDIES AND ANALYSES (CENCSA)

Taking Consciencism From The Centre To The Utmost Edges Of The Universe

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 175 other followers