Democracy and Choice: Do These Mean Anything to the Average Ghanaian?

Abstract

The concept of “African democracy” invokes James and Stuart Rachels’ (2003) treatise against “Cultural Relativism”. That is to say, it is generally assumed that there is democracy relative to Africa and therefore, there is a concept of “African Democracy Relativism”. Due to this, democracy in Africa oughts to be different from democracy everywhere else. “Choice” as an ethical value subsists and emanates from autonomy and freedom. When people are free in the democracy, they also have the freedom of “choice” in their functionings. There are many limitations on the right to choose in Africa due to the general limitations placed on freedoms. This paper proposes that there is but one type of democracy in the world, which offers individuals the same kind of freedom of choice and wellbeing, provided it is also accepted that the African is an indivisible part of the universal man or woman. What may have given rise to the erroneous concept of an “African democracy type” is the general assumption that Africa is familiar and understands democratic principles. It was further mistakenly assumed that Africa considered all human beings as equal based on some resplendent intellectual expositions on democracy, which was accepted and known to all. Therefore, all had equal rights, freedom of choice and privileges before the law and man, and that “due process” was part of the mundane administration of justice articulated in a systematic and reviewable medium such as a tablet, stone, book or film or other archival systems. Africa’s unwritten history is subject to the revisionist manipulation, prevarication, and unsupported by the cultural norms of the respective nations. These concepts as used in this paper would be defined and discussed accordingly and present a different view point on this matter, using Ghana as a case.