California’s vote counting process has often been criticized for its duration compared to other regions, including India, which is known for its efficiency in handling large-scale elections:  In recent elections, California has taken significantly longer to count votes compared to the immediate results seen in some other states. 

California has a high percentage of mail-in ballots, which require additional steps for verification, including signature checking, which delays the counting process. Ballots can be counted if postmarked by Election Day and received up to a week later, extending the counting period. Efforts to increase voter accessibility, like same-day registration and provisional ballots, add to the complexity and time needed for vote tallying. There are set deadlines for when results must be certified, which can extend past the day of the election, contributing to the perception of slow counting.

In contrast, India manages to count votes for its massive electorate with notable speed, India’s election process for its 640 million voters (in some elections) is completed in a single day for the counting phase, thanks to a highly organized system with extensive manpower and technology, despite the logistical challenges posed by its size and diversity.

The use of electronic voting machines (EVMs) since the early 2000s has significantly sped up the counting process. These machines are counted manually but at a rapid pace because of the sheer number of counters involved. There’s a growing frustration among the public and political figures in California regarding the slow pace of vote counting. Some have suggested adopting technologies or systems similar to those used in India to streamline the process, although this would require significant changes in election laws and infrastructure.

The extended vote count in California has been linked to increased distrust among some voters, as the delay in final results can lead to speculation and conspiracy theories about the integrity of the election process. Efforts are underway to possibly speed up the process through legal changes, like earlier processing of mail-in ballots and better voter education on timely ballot submission. This comparison highlights a contrast in election management philosophies; California prioritizes voter accessibility and security, which inherently slows down the counting, whereas India’s system is geared towards rapid, large-scale execution with a different approach to technology and human resources.

In the wake of the supposed tribal supremacy and tribal bigotry happening in Ghana, i take you to the colonial and post colonial dichotomies of it.

The Akan group believed to have been the first people of the present day Ghana constitute over 47%. The functions amongst the Akan began to fight themselves for supremacy, others continued to migrates to other parts. Popular battles fought were the Denkyiras and Asantes, Fantse and Asantes, Fantses and Nzemas etc. The Fantse as a result of their involvement with the Brits joined forces with them to fight the Asantes (noted as one of the fearsome tribes).

The Fight For Independence

The Asantes had fought the British for their independence and had won in most of the battles until the Sagrenti war where the Asantes attempted to conquere the British and seize the Cape Coast Castle (seat of the British rule). Together with the Fantse, Mende (Sierra Leone) and Igbo military forces and the British, the Asantes were conquered along the coast.

Diplomatic Independence 

The talks for Independence had since started amongst the Asantes and the British in 1935/1936.

The other Akan diplomats led by J.B Danquah had met the Fantse chiefs and other dignitaries in Saltpond to agree on the road map for the fight for independence. Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, who insisted on “Independence now or never”, moved ahead to convince the Asantes (who were near independence in 1936), the northern tribes and the Togoland (Ewes) to join forces to push for a joint independence. There were certain conditions to met before all parties joined in. The Asantes opted to still be recognized as it state with homage paid to it King. The Northern tribes were promised developments and education (to be inline with the southern tribes).

Post Independence Rule and Tribal Bigotry

Kwame Nkrumah focused on Free Formal Education in the North to be at pair with the south. Military power capture fueled by selfishness ignited a lot of tribal bigotry as tribesmen wanted to be in charge of government. Democratic governments played on the cards of tribalism to win favour and propagate their agenda.

Conclusion

Power struggle has always been a powered struggle with tribal bigotry playing a key role. In the Rwandan genocide, it was the majority Hutus who called the Tutsis “ cockroaches” and as such be “killed”. Naturally tribes feel supirior over other tribes these natural instincts fuel the hatred. Generally, marriages with certain tribes are frowns upon. Well! Maybe thats how it was supposed to be “stay in your lane and don’t mingle with outsiders”. Who brought us together?. Just like religion, these man-made decision breeds divisions

The trend of using toy guns in Kumasi has sparked a mix of reactions, reflecting broader discussions on the implications of such play.

Toy guns have traditionally been a part of children’s play worldwide, often seen as a means to encourage imaginative play, creativity, and even role-playing scenarios that can teach about morality, teamwork, and decision-making. In Kumasi, as in many places, toy guns might be viewed by some as harmless fun, providing entertainment and a sense of camaraderie among children and sometimes even adults during leisure activities. There is a significant concern that this trend could be perilous due to several reasons; The confusion between toy and real firearms could lead to dangerous situations.

In Ghana, where real gun violence has been an issue, toy guns might contribute to a culture that trivializes the seriousness of firearms. There’s a fear that toy guns could be misused or misunderstood, potentially leading to accidents or confrontations. The lack of clear regulations on toy guns might exacerbate this risk.  The trend could complicate law enforcement efforts if toy guns are mistaken for real ones, potentially leading to unnecessary escalations in tense situations.

Some individuals and social commentators on platforms like X have expressed worry, pointing out that this trend could normalize gun culture among the youth, potentially desensitizing them to the real-life consequences of gun violence. They argue for oversight or regulations to ensure that these toys are used safely and do not contribute to a broader societal issue.

Conversely, others might argue that with proper education about the difference between toys and real weapons, such activities can remain within the realm of safe, supervised play. There seems to be a growing call for intervention by authorities or community leaders in Kumasi to address this trend.

This might involve setting guidelines on how toy guns should be manufactured (e.g., with distinctive colors or designs to differentiate them from real firearms), sold, and used, perhaps similar to what has been implemented in other countries. The situation in Kumasi reflects a global debate on the role of toy guns in society, weighing the benefits of imaginative play against the potential for real-world confusion and danger.

The trend underscores the need for a balanced approach where the playful nature of toy guns is preserved while ensuring that safety and societal values are not compromised.