Druckschrift 
Forty years of promoting democracy, social justice and peace in Ghana :
(1969 - 2009)
Entstehung
Einzelbild herunterladen
 

Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung@ 40 in Ghana a result, most of the interventions to develop a democratic culture were at the level of elite politicians, academics, business leaders and influential NGOs to the exclusion of the youth. This attitude prevailed as much in politics as in civil society. The elite held considerable doubt about the capacity of the youth to help frame thebig issues. And even if they could, their relevance. There was also a cultural dimension, less spoken about but strongly felt that the propriety of putting young people at the same table with their fathers to argue about something the older generation believed the youth had little knowledge about was questionable. After all, it was believed, that the history that defined the democratic experiment was lived by the elders and only read by the youth. It was therefore thought the two generations had no shared experience to dialogue about. There was also the concern thatyouth was a motley collection of people, an amorphous amalgam, usually unemployed and flaunting a tag just to excuse themselves from responsibility. They could not be defined for purposes of representation. From a confused set of definitions that included an age bracket from 12 to 45 years and one that hinged on one's state of mind, critics chided just the process of selection made youth representation and participation unrealistic. In other words, the youth were poorly organised and had no national form to participate in the democratic discourse. The National Union of Ghana Students which had in the past led the youth movement was experiencing internal crisis. Initiating a youth leadership programme under such a context posed considerable challenges. The situation was much worse in the political parties where youth exclusion had a practical even if debatable explanation. The long spells of military intervention had frustrated the political ambitions of older politicians who saw the reemergence of democratic rule as the last opportunity of their generation. If they missed this time, 54