There are Ghanaian engineers at NASA.
Ghanaian surgeons running hospital departments in London.
Ghanaian economists at the IMF and World Bank, some of them administering the very programs that have failed their home country.
Ghanaian mathematicians. Ghanaian architects. Ghanaian writers who have won international literary prizes.
Ghanaian tech entrepreneurs building companies that work.
When given access to resources, institutions, and an enabling environment, Ghanaians perform at the highest levels of every field.
This is not an argument that individual talent solves structural problems.
It is a refutation of the claim that the problem is the people.
The problem is never the people.
The people are everywhere.
The talent is everywhere.
The ambition is everywhere.
The capacity is everywhere.
What is not everywhere is the policy space, the institutional support, the geopolitical backing, the market access, and the freedom from externally imposed economic programs that systematically prevent the conversion of human capacity into collective industrial development.
The difference between a Ghanaian running a department at a London hospital and Ghana having a functioning public health system is not the Ghanaian.
It is everything around the Ghanaian.
1. NPP leaves a mess at cocobod
2. NPP lost elections and become opposition
3. NPP Protests in “solidarity” to the cocoa farmers they somehow wrecked
4. Score political points via the theatrics
6. Bring Bawumia as 2028 national redeemer
7. Lose 2028 yet ORAL will still not work
8. Still refuse to learn or change
9. Push more youths online to gaslight & deflect on political matters
10. NDC’s goodwill gets stretched to its fullest elasticity cos Galamsey clearly won’t end by 2028
11. Ghanaians get tired all over again and crave change.
12. Vote again in 2032 to another government that will still not service their best interests - by then we’ll have children in primary school
.🔄
.🔄
.🔄
.🔄
.🔄
Jesus finally comes. Yeah we’re cooked 🇬🇭💔
This makes me a little uncomfortable. Hear me out ok
There are two ways to look at “posts” (or “prestige offices”, as I like to call them). You can look at them as jobs or you can look at them as privileges. Most people look at them as some combination of the two, and that’s valid, but the tilt matters.
People who want them because they view it more as a privilege than as a job (even if they view them as both) usually aren’t very good in the role. And those who do well in the role tend to be those that viewed them as jobs.
And I believe strongly also that people who vote with the intent to bestow a privilege on someone as opposed to vote based on the perceived ability of the person to do the job tend to make bad recruitment choices.
The general tenor of this tweet worries me because of the suggestion that it would be unfair not to give Dr. Bawumia a chance. But, help me out here, unfair to who exactly?
I would argue that we must always hire the person who we, individually, believe has the higher likelihood of doing a stellar job. That is what should guide the decision.
And hey…if you believe that’s Bawumia, that’s fine. I can’t fault that. Well I mean I can but you know… I still appreciate that you have a view that’s different from mine, and I respect that.
What we cannot do is hire someone because we believe it’s fair that they also “enjoy” the privilege, because it’s their time now or because they’ve tried a long time, or because someone else too was given, or whatever else. That cannot be how we make that decision.
I know that’s what people do a lot, but I really do feel it’s the wrong way to look at it. You’d only be optimizing for the worst outcomes with an approach like that.
i saw a quote that said, "if you don't clear your misunderstandings in time, they become the reason for permanent distance." and that's realest shit ever.