I want to make it clear at the beginning that it is my cherished principle never to defend the indefensible at anytime or anywhere, and it is just to tell the truth, without concealing the part which may hurt. Having said thus, I am making the claim that Brantuo’s understanding of vandalism is myopic; that he does not understand the full force of Vandalism. But before I proceed to justify my claim, I would like to point out a fallacy in his take on the recent ‘murder’ case at Commonwealth Hall (hereinafter C/H).
The ‘Murder Incident at Commonwealth Hall’
Brantuo uses the current ‘alleged murder’ incident at C/H. On Saturday, 9th December, 2017, as a starting point to draw the attention of the general public to some alleged irregularities he claims to have seen in C/H. In his view, “This latest news, though sad, comes as no surprise, except the death, which has only enriched the tall public profile of vandalism of students admitted into commonwealth Hall of the University of Ghana, Legon, who are better identified as VANDALS.” But the fallacy of hasty generalization is easy to determine: two individuals are seen fighting in C/H, and one is allegedly ‘murdered’ by the other. Since all vandals are in C/H, it follows, to the mind of Brantuo, that the suspect is a vandal or an associate vandal (see below). Brantuo claims to know better than the University Management who has made it clear that the suspect is never a student, let alone a vandal. The following interview between the Vice Chancellor of the University, Prof. Emmanuel Oduro, and Citi News will clarify my point.
“When Citi News’ Caleb Kudah pointed out that suspicions were that the suspect was never a student of the school, the Vice-Chancellor [Prof Ebenezer Oduro] said, “That is the information we have and it is absolutely true.”” https://citifmonline.com/2017/12/11/old-vandal-killer-has-never-been-our-student-legon-vc/
From the foregoing, it is illogical for Brantuo to associate the incident which happened in C/H with Vandalism, since the action was committed by a non-student, let alone a vandal (it will be mischievous to call this person an Associated Vandal, an expression used to refer to those students of UG who are not affiliated to the hall, but share in the ideals of Vandalism). Thus noted, let me proceed to respond to Brantuo’s claims. I will like to begin with what Vandalism means?
What is Vandalism?
The noun form “vandalism” derives from its adjective ‘vandal.’ We are told the expression “vandal” was first used by a certain female academic doctor to refer to some students from C/H who were making noise at a particular academic conference or seminar. The then students gladly took the term (in its pejorative denotation) and subsequently referred themselves by it. The rationale for taking the term in good faith had not been to perpetrate violence, but to churn out something positive out of it—a feat which they could subsequently achieve. So, the term ‘vandal’ underwent semantic reorientation and fine-tuning to assume a positive meaning. Vandalism, which is the tradition or activities associated with vandals, must be understood in the light of the positive meaning which the expression ‘vandal’ later assumed. This point is very crucial for the benefit of those who want to rely on the elliptical dictionary meaning to understand vandalism (you will be disappointed). What positive meaning has the term vandalism assumed? The positive meaning can be understood in the light of the normative values vandalism exudes, which are best captured as an acronym of the adjectival VANDAL. As Bernard Oduro Takyi has rightly pointed out, Vandalism “as a tradition seeks to project 5 pillars of hope…,” namely,
V-Vivaciousness
A-Altruism
N-Neighborliness
D-Dedication/Dynamism
A-Affability
L-Loyalty
But the obvious question is this: Is this not mere rhetoric? The answer is in the negative. I justify in what follows. I want to proceed with the claim that these five pillars have been the ideological and justificatory bases for the thriving of members of the hall before and after school. Let me preliminarily begin with how the ideology of vandalism helps students affiliated to C/H to thrive.
Egalitarianism and Altruism
C/H is a hall for students of any social status: the rich, the poor, the disabled, etc. Coterminous with the ideology of Vandalism is egalitarianism (equality of social classes, classless). Unlike in other halls, it was normal for a fellow vandal to take his spoon, go to any room and dine with other fellows; such a fellow will equally and gladly welcome other fellows to dine with him. Again, unlike in other halls, it was more customary to wear “chale wote” to lecture. I remember I wore chale wote throughout my level 200 (I had to send my timberland, airforce and other expensive footwears home). Almost everyone wore chale wote, so it was a norm to wear same. It brings the sense of simplicity out of fellows, and again saves students from the pretentiousness which is characteristic of most students to unduly live up to what is purported to be the ‘standard’ university life.
Again, in the period when accommodation was woefully inadequate on campus, C/H was the hub of ‘perchers’. It is not that fellow vandals could not report such students, but the spirit of vandalism commanded the fellow to be altruistic toward the neighbour. Personally, I opted to learn all night because my bed was occupied by two perchers (I’m talking about a period when the room could accommodate close to 11 people on the average). To add to this, some students were even sleeping in TV rooms (some of whom are big men today), and they were never looked down upon. Such classless and altruistic traits were exhibited because the school was seen as a passage way to future greatness, but never a permanent home. So if vandals are occupying big positions in this country today, then it is indicative of the fact altruism and neighbourliness are expensive values that will not be taught at the lecture hall, but are learnt from Vandalism. As a matter of fact, most students could finish school because they were affiliated to C/H. So if we want to talk about vandalism these are the things we should let the public know.
Vandalism and Student Activism
As a matter of fact, Commonwealth Hall has been the point of contact for students whenever there is a problem facing the school, especially that which directly affects students. When the call is made, the Chief Vandal and his outfit lead vandals and the rest of students to agitate for what is right, usually at the detriment of their lives and academics. It is on record that some Chief Vandals have been incarcerated simply because they were fighting for the right of students. A clear case is in 2007 or so when students were agitating against the killer accommodation policy of IN-OUT-OUT-OUT. The then Chief Vandal and others were beaten and incarcerated following a misunderstanding between them and the security forces at Parliament, when they presented their case. Other vandals have personally had their certificates confiscated because they agitated for what is right, in challenging obnoxious policies. Honourable Okudzeto Ablakwa, the Former Deputy Minister of Education and current Member of Parliament for the North Tongu in the Volta Region, had his Bachelor certificate confiscated because he led a demonstration in fighting for the rights of Ghanaian students, in the capacity of NUGS President. Similarly, Vandal Labai had his certificate confiscated because he led a demonstration to create the awareness of the university authority over the deplorable state of the Psychology Department, when he was the UNIGAP President. A lot of vandals have faced similar fates because they were Dedicated to champion students’ interest.
Now the point to note here is that if students from Commonwealth Hall, Vandals, will seize the residence of a Vice-Chancellor, the justificatory basis would be nothing but the quest for what is right to be done. And it is not surprising to hear this. It is on record that TEWU executives and their members confronted Prof Asenso Okyere, a Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ghana, because they were agitating for what they think was their right. It is never wrong to employ civil disobedience as an agitating instrument to get what you want. And it will be sheer mischief and ungrateful if those who benefitted from such undertakings of vandals now tout them as hooligans and violent people. In that case Vandals are only seen as instruments for change and transformation, but never individual humans with respect and dignity of their own. Vandals are never means or instruments, but end in themselves.
Is Vandalism Occultism?
In the light of such empirical truths adumbrated above, it is now appropriate to respond to the allegation that Vandalism is Occultism. Here I want to state Brantuo’s claim: “The Hall and its corporate image must urgently be rescued from the hands of a bunch of occult and evil worshippers, who successfully passed on their evil practices to successive generations for the last for decades.” He thinks that “History has it that those who started the practice of occultism in the hall are mainly royals from some Akan tribes who today, are respectable chiefs in this country.” And he proposes as a recommendation that, among others, “Spiritual exercise of Christians on campuses must be intensified.” Apparently, it is easy to detect that Brantuo is only resurrecting the age-old controversy between traditional religion or belief systems and Christianity. Anything which is not Christian is seen as barbaric, evil, devilish. So it is not unexpected when he claims that Vandalism is occultic, because (1) rites and rituals are performed to initiate the rulers to assume traditional roles in the hall (a description he does best), and (2) the resultant effect is moral bankruptcy for both the initiated rulers and the ruled: “there is a surge in immorality such as homosexuality, alcoholism, violence, womanizing, vulgarism, plain stupidity, etc in our students.”
Let me begin with (1). When Brantuo thinks of Vandalism as occultic, he has in mind the rites appealed to in initiating new traditional leaders of the Hall. And I have pointed out that such thinking only reignites the controversy between traditional African belief system and Christianity. He is bold to assert that the occultism was started with some Akans who are now prominent chiefs in this country. I will not want to mention names here, but Nana Akouko Sarpong, Omanhene of Agogo and first Chief Vandal comes to mind. Every chief in Ghana undergoes rites of purification before they are enthroned or enskinned. What is done at C/H is a miniature of what happens in our historical traditional settings. Not only does Brantuo look askance at such rites as evil and devilish, but he equally affronts our Ghanaian culture. This is because such rites are integral part of our politico-cultural establishment, traditional political institutions. We can establish here that if per the rites and installation of chiefs at C/H vandalism is touted as occultic, then all our traditional chieftaincy is occultic because they undergo a more substantive and deeper rituals and rites than what happens at C/H.
But the question may be asked: Why are students who are sent to learn engage in such activity? The answer is simple. No student is sent to University of Ghana to become SRC President, JCR President, Church Leaders. Once we understand that chieftaincy at C/H is a form of student leadership, there’s no qualms. Akuafo has a chieftaincy institution, just as Mensah Sarbah has Okpo Lord. But do the Chief Vandals not face academic challenges, given that it is alleged they do not attend lectures? The answer is this: they face the same challenges as other student leaders; they even do better than them.
Vandalism and Morality
Now let me respond to (2). As a principle of charity, I may have to agree with Brantuo that there are of course moral problems confronting students from Commonwealth Hall. But it is difficult to establish that Vandalism is the cause of these moral problems. For, it is absurd to think that students in other halls in UG or in other universities in Ghana are free from these moral problems. I personally know of womanisers, violent youth, the vulgar, alcohol addicts in other halls. It is illogical and fallacy of the first class to think that all vandals, including the chiefs, are alcohol addicts, womanizers, hooligans. The fallacy is that Brantuo wants to tell the general public that should Commonwealth be closed today, there will not be any student on UG Campus who perpetrates any of such immorality. So, let me put it on record that vandals, qua humans, exhibit all kinds of behaviours, both positive and negative. There are well-behaved vandals who take active part in the Hall’s activities but are never womanizers, alcohol addicts, hooligans, vulgar, or violent. And of course there are those who exhibit such negative behavioural tendencies. The point to establish here is that vandals, just as any other humans, exhibit all kinds of human behavioural tendencies. Hence, to equate vandalism only with negative behavioural tendency is a clear mischief.
Christianity and Morality
It is laughable for Brantuo to suggest Christianity as the best exhaustive alternative and antidote to his perceived moral problems in C/H. For it is doubtful whether Christianity is devoid of such moral problems. There are womanizers, alcohol addicts, homosexuals, hooligans, very violent people in Christianity. And there are Vandals who behave much better than so-called Christians. Most people claim to be Christians in this country, but corruption is mostly perpetrated by these individuals. So, if I’m to assume, here, without admitting, that Vandalism is a form of religion or occultism, Christianity isn’t better than it in terms of ensuring good moral rectitude.
Conclusion
To conclude, let me reiterate that Brantuo is only reigniting the controversy between traditional religion and Christianity: anything apart from Christianity is evil, dogmatic and devilish and must be abhorred at all cost. Such thinking is puerile and needs to be discarded as soon as possible, for Christianity has its own moral challenges. In the history of humanity, Christianity has committed the most blunder against humanity (check the activities of the Crusaders).
But one thing should be made clear: if Vandalism can let me love my neighbour and contribute meaningfully to his progress, dedicate myself to the course of my community, defend the defenseless, always stand for the truth, then I will gladly welcome it as a religion or occultic. And if Brantuo sees nothing positive about vandalism, but only the negative, he may be justified to point out the imperfections, and Vandals will gladly accept the criticisms in hope to perfect vandalism, for it is a human institution and not immune from mistakes and criticism. But one thing he should bear in mind is that if he claims he has seen the light, he should know that the discovery of light does not make candle useless, for the candle will still be relevant for some others who are not privileged to have light.
Long live His Eminent and Royal Majesty Chief Vandal
Long live Vandalism
Long live Commonwealth
Short live Haters
Vandalism:Beautiful piece by Kwame PhiloSocratos Peprah