The heir of this argument is a 'gentleman'. Here,we're not referring to an 'abrantie' as in Ghanaian parlance. In ancient Greece,a gentleman is one who is willing to stand up for, and defend his family and friends-not just the needs of the body. He is also concerned about defending the honor and safety of the polis (political community). He accepts the view that justice is 'giving to each what is owed' but he interprets it to mean a kind of loyalty to members of a family, friends, team or group. Doing maximum good to your friends and harm to your enemies. This gentleman see justice as a form of 'patriotic sentiment' that citizens of one polis feels for one another as opposed to others. Justice for him is devotion to one's own. And one's own is the good. One's own is the just.
Challenge from Another philosopher who thinks that:
Loyalty to a group cannot be a virtue in itself.He asked 'Do we ever make mistakes? Of course yes...Isn't the distinction between friend and foe based on a perception, a kind of knowledge on who is a friend and who is a foe? Have we ever mistaken a foe for a friend? Ofcourse yes... So how can we say that justice is doing good to our friends and harm to our enemies when we don't even know and cannot be sure who our friends or enemies are? Isn't such an unreflective attachment to one's own bound to result in injustice to others?
But the gentleman has an answer. The best polis knows who it's real enemies or friends are. The best city may be characterised by peace and harmony at home.
With such an unsatisfactory answer from the gentleman, he certainly needs some help from another who thinks he has some form of knowledge about justice and intends to teach it.
Justice he says is the interest of the stronger.Every polity is based on the distinction between the ruled and the rulers.Justice consists of the rules that are made by and for the interest and benefit of the ruling class. For him, the rulers determine the laws of justice. He believes that we're essentially beings who are first and foremost dominated by the desire for power and control. Power and domination is all we care about. This distinguishes the real man or the 'alpha man' from the slave.And what is true for the individual is also true for the collective things, states or cities.
Politics is a 'zero sum game'. There are winners and there are losers. The more someone wins, the more someone looses. And the rules of justice are simply the laws set up by the winners of the game to protect and promote their own interest.
Even as this gentleman seems to be making a good point, he has a challenge.
The question is repeated. Do we ever make mistakes? Of course yes...We agree that it is not self evident what our interests are. And if justice is truly in the interest of the ruler or strongest,then doesn't that require some kind of knowledge or reflection on the part of those in power to know what is really and truly in their interests?
The ancient Greece 'abrantie' replies that if a ruler makes a mistake concerning his true interests, then he is not a true ruler. A true ruler knows his true interests.
But he is still challenged. Justice is not power alone. Justice requires knowledge and reflection. Indeed, all virtue requires knowledge and reflection.
The gentleman refuses to give up. He replies that justice consists of convincing people to obey the rules that may interest others because of the fear of the consequences of injustice. Therefore, justice is only respected by the weak that fear injustice. A true ruler in some ways is one who has the courage to act unjustly for his own interest. A true ruler is like a shepherd with a flock but he rules NOT in the benefit of the flock but acts in his own interest. Justice is a virtue.
But what kind of justice is it to deceive andexploit other people?
Well, the ancient Greece 'abrantie' believes that a just person is a fool for obeying laws that are not beneficial to him. What do you believe Ghana 'abrantie'?
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL general secretary)
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
Methodist Bishop's comments-Liberation theology or just a clearance of tainted conscience?
There has been great controversy over comments purportedly made by a 'man on the pulpit' in the Methodist church of Ghana during a visit to that church by opposition leader Nana Akuffo Addo of the NPP last Sunday. His comments were varied but suffice it to say that the man on the pulpit publicly declared himself a member of the opposition new patriotic party during sermon time on the pulpit whiles asking for the rejection of the ruling NDCgovernment in the next general election in 2012. Whiles many members of the NPP are gloating over what they perceive to be a political plus, many others especially the supporters of the ruling NDC have been embittered greatly by his remarks. Some have expressed disappointment in the 'man of God' for dabbling in party politics. Government spokesman and deputy information minister Okudzeto Ablakwa was the first to lament over his comments from government-expressing absolute disappointment in his 'lack of neutrality' onthe pulpit. I have also heard supporters of the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi former President of the Methodist church of Ghana say that what the man did was engaginging in 'liberation theology'.
I have my own view of this situation that has been variously observed by different schools of thought.
First, I don't believe this is the first time a 'man on the pulpit' has engaged in government criticism.And this particular man is widely known to have been an open critic of Chairman RAWLINGS during the reviving days of the PNDC. He was also reported in 2008 to have put on his cell phone a ringing tone that also served as a campaign signature tune for Nana Akuffo Addo-making him an open supporter of the opposition NPP. Just this time, he was more pronounced in his declaration of support for the opposition and indeed, his disdain for the ruling party.
Nobody can convince me that his utterances on the pulpit last Sunday represent liberation theology.
Why? What does liberation theology teach? It teaches that 'Christians must work for social and economic justice for all people'. If The Rev. Minister is really espousing a liberation theology, then he ought to be learning from Jean Bertrand Aristide of Haiti whose liberation theology led to his ex-communication from the Roman catholic church as a Salesian priest and who continually organized mass protests against the Jean Claude Duvalier regime and protecting the rights of the poor in Haiti. Better still, he could take inspiration from the Zapatistas of Mexico who in 1994 took over official buildings in the state capital and proclaiming war for the 'looting ofour natural resources'. Or again, this 'man on the pulpit' can draw some lessons from the Sandinistas in Nicaragua where some priests who professed 'liberation theology' decided to join Daniel Ortega and the urban resistance campaign to oust Anastasio Somoza in 1979. That was pure concrete liberation theology.
That is how far liberation theology has been espoused and practiced in other jurisdictions. And I do not think that the Rev. will want to begin his liberation theology only after he retired as the president of the Methodist church Ghana. Besides,where was his liberation theology when President Kuffour's NPP government proclaimed themselves 'enemies of the poor' in Ghana under a 'property owning democracy'? Indeed, liberation theology and property owning democracy are running parallel to each other. Where was his liberation theology when the military turned Ghana into an experimental state where coups had become so fashionable and poor people got poorer and social justice got buried until a certain chairman RAWLINGS came to halt it all with his version of 'liberation theology'? where was Asante Antwi when other clergy joined J.J Rawlings and his colleagues to work for economic and social justice for all in Ghana?
Having said all that, I do want to say that I have nothing in principle against any man on the pulpit actively and openly engaging in party politics like the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi. Indeed, many of them-if not all-are already engaged covertly in party politics. And as a political youth activists, I have enough experience to conclude that the real political actors aren't necessarily the ones who are loud on the campaign platform. There are many 'hidden hands' whose works for political parties are more strategic than what Chairman Rawlings, Kuffour, Atta Mills or Akuffo Addo will do on the campaign platform.
This Rev. has obviously been one of those 'hidden hands' that has influenced a lot of support for the NPP in that Methodist denomination in Ghana. Is he the only one? Absolutely no! I know one 'man on the pulpit' who used his sermon times during the 2008 general elections to campaign for the NPP. How do I know? Of course I was not in the congregation but my party member who was also a member of this church left the church in a loud protest-The church lost a member-and the NPP didn't win more votes a sa result.
As I have indicated, there are also other 'men on the pulpit' who were a part of the PNDC movement in 1979 and are still a part of it now. Just recently, a priest from east Africa-who espouses liberation theology-joined believers and adherents to the AFRC/PNDC movement to commemorate 31 years of the june4 uprising in Tamale. I didn't see anything wrong with it. Indeed, I loved it.
Severally, many lovers of our true democracy have denounced our religious leaders for hypocritically keeping mute over glaring social and economic injustice in Ghana. I have heard the former President Rawlings and many others asking the 'clergy' to not keep quiet over social injustices or during political upheavals. Interestingly, many of them have decided to make 'selective comments' as and when it suits them and their interests. And for me,that behavior by our religious leaders smacks off hypocrisy in the highest order akin to the biblical Pharisees. It will be really useful and progressive for our religious leaders to get loud on issues bordering on social and economic injustice. They must get political when the need arises but they cannot engage in the usual NPP-NDC politics and call it 'liberation theology'.They must speak against injustice whether perpetuated by NDC or NPP. After all,they're already covertly engaged in politics as I have stated already.
People will make arguments about separating church and state. Yes. Let's separate them by all means but we can only have a cosmetic separation like the one between our 'legislooters' and our executive.We all know that there is no such real separation of powers between the three arms of government in Ghana or Africa at large. And i doubt if there is any such thing in the so-called solid democracies like the US OF A and Britain. So my argument is that all the 'men on the pulpit' must begin to speak openly about what they feel or see wrong with our social,economic or political order. If for nothing at all, they will be enriching our democratic debate, plus, they will be clearing their tainted and 'pharisaic conscience'. But let no one even try to convince me that the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi, the retired Methodist bishop is pursuing liberation theology with a sycophantic praise of the opposition leader. For all you know, this man is covertly negotiating with Nana Akuffo Addo for council of state position in the unlikely event that he ever becomes president of Ghana in 2012. That will just be a prudent move by the man on the pulpit and a testimony to the nature of our 'stomach politics' in Ghana!
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL General secretary)
I have my own view of this situation that has been variously observed by different schools of thought.
First, I don't believe this is the first time a 'man on the pulpit' has engaged in government criticism.And this particular man is widely known to have been an open critic of Chairman RAWLINGS during the reviving days of the PNDC. He was also reported in 2008 to have put on his cell phone a ringing tone that also served as a campaign signature tune for Nana Akuffo Addo-making him an open supporter of the opposition NPP. Just this time, he was more pronounced in his declaration of support for the opposition and indeed, his disdain for the ruling party.
Nobody can convince me that his utterances on the pulpit last Sunday represent liberation theology.
Why? What does liberation theology teach? It teaches that 'Christians must work for social and economic justice for all people'. If The Rev. Minister is really espousing a liberation theology, then he ought to be learning from Jean Bertrand Aristide of Haiti whose liberation theology led to his ex-communication from the Roman catholic church as a Salesian priest and who continually organized mass protests against the Jean Claude Duvalier regime and protecting the rights of the poor in Haiti. Better still, he could take inspiration from the Zapatistas of Mexico who in 1994 took over official buildings in the state capital and proclaiming war for the 'looting ofour natural resources'. Or again, this 'man on the pulpit' can draw some lessons from the Sandinistas in Nicaragua where some priests who professed 'liberation theology' decided to join Daniel Ortega and the urban resistance campaign to oust Anastasio Somoza in 1979. That was pure concrete liberation theology.
That is how far liberation theology has been espoused and practiced in other jurisdictions. And I do not think that the Rev. will want to begin his liberation theology only after he retired as the president of the Methodist church Ghana. Besides,where was his liberation theology when President Kuffour's NPP government proclaimed themselves 'enemies of the poor' in Ghana under a 'property owning democracy'? Indeed, liberation theology and property owning democracy are running parallel to each other. Where was his liberation theology when the military turned Ghana into an experimental state where coups had become so fashionable and poor people got poorer and social justice got buried until a certain chairman RAWLINGS came to halt it all with his version of 'liberation theology'? where was Asante Antwi when other clergy joined J.J Rawlings and his colleagues to work for economic and social justice for all in Ghana?
Having said all that, I do want to say that I have nothing in principle against any man on the pulpit actively and openly engaging in party politics like the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi. Indeed, many of them-if not all-are already engaged covertly in party politics. And as a political youth activists, I have enough experience to conclude that the real political actors aren't necessarily the ones who are loud on the campaign platform. There are many 'hidden hands' whose works for political parties are more strategic than what Chairman Rawlings, Kuffour, Atta Mills or Akuffo Addo will do on the campaign platform.
This Rev. has obviously been one of those 'hidden hands' that has influenced a lot of support for the NPP in that Methodist denomination in Ghana. Is he the only one? Absolutely no! I know one 'man on the pulpit' who used his sermon times during the 2008 general elections to campaign for the NPP. How do I know? Of course I was not in the congregation but my party member who was also a member of this church left the church in a loud protest-The church lost a member-and the NPP didn't win more votes a sa result.
As I have indicated, there are also other 'men on the pulpit' who were a part of the PNDC movement in 1979 and are still a part of it now. Just recently, a priest from east Africa-who espouses liberation theology-joined believers and adherents to the AFRC/PNDC movement to commemorate 31 years of the june4 uprising in Tamale. I didn't see anything wrong with it. Indeed, I loved it.
Severally, many lovers of our true democracy have denounced our religious leaders for hypocritically keeping mute over glaring social and economic injustice in Ghana. I have heard the former President Rawlings and many others asking the 'clergy' to not keep quiet over social injustices or during political upheavals. Interestingly, many of them have decided to make 'selective comments' as and when it suits them and their interests. And for me,that behavior by our religious leaders smacks off hypocrisy in the highest order akin to the biblical Pharisees. It will be really useful and progressive for our religious leaders to get loud on issues bordering on social and economic injustice. They must get political when the need arises but they cannot engage in the usual NPP-NDC politics and call it 'liberation theology'.They must speak against injustice whether perpetuated by NDC or NPP. After all,they're already covertly engaged in politics as I have stated already.
People will make arguments about separating church and state. Yes. Let's separate them by all means but we can only have a cosmetic separation like the one between our 'legislooters' and our executive.We all know that there is no such real separation of powers between the three arms of government in Ghana or Africa at large. And i doubt if there is any such thing in the so-called solid democracies like the US OF A and Britain. So my argument is that all the 'men on the pulpit' must begin to speak openly about what they feel or see wrong with our social,economic or political order. If for nothing at all, they will be enriching our democratic debate, plus, they will be clearing their tainted and 'pharisaic conscience'. But let no one even try to convince me that the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi, the retired Methodist bishop is pursuing liberation theology with a sycophantic praise of the opposition leader. For all you know, this man is covertly negotiating with Nana Akuffo Addo for council of state position in the unlikely event that he ever becomes president of Ghana in 2012. That will just be a prudent move by the man on the pulpit and a testimony to the nature of our 'stomach politics' in Ghana!
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL General secretary)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)