PLPN

Silence of the Nats

There’s an eerie, deafening silence coming from the PN HQ in Pietà. Yesterday night Joyce Cassar of the No to Divorce people did her flipping utmost to try to divorce her movement (tee-hee) from any association with the priests, the nuns, or the church (as she put it not so mildly). And she also did her damndest to underline the fact that she is not working in cognito for any political party. Damn right she isn’t. On the other hand the PN silence of the matter is as politically absurd as Joseph Muscat’s attempt to get his testicle-less Labour linked in some way to any possible achievement of the YES vote without doing anything.

JPO has introduced one of the greatest minefields that Gonzi’s PN ever had to face. The feeble, abstract party line opposing the introduction of divorce pales in comparison with the numerous activists and natural blue-voters who are all out in favour of the introduction of Liz Taylor’s second favourite right (up there with inheritance). Speculation is rife about whether a YES or a NO vote can benefit one or another party. Only in Malta. The PN has taken the best tactical position – it is slowly vanishing into nothingness. Notice. Vociferous party flag wavers and even party sympathisers have gone AWOL. The usual suspects have supposedly “had enough” of the divorce debate. Others, who are all noisy and cantankerously irritating when it comes to womens’ lib and the like have suddenly taken a sabbatical (apart from the random swipe at the levels of nothingness the NO camp can reach).

The PN cannot cope with the fact that the intelligent voter – in a civic sense – would have no qualms with voting YES any day. Not being in control of the critical swinger (who might be scared away from voting AD but is less easily bullied into voting on some misinterpreted principle that only the current batch of neo-catholicmullahs would understand) is very very scary for the PN crowd. They just don’t want to alienate him or her. Thankfully the intelligent voter will also not fall for Joseph Muscat’s false bravado and his empty no-progress brigade. Which means that the less the PN gets associated with any decision the better the chances to keep the status quo.

Hence the silence.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

The Political Class

One of my current “thinking post” books (i.e. books read while spending time in the restroom) is “The Triumph of the Political Class” by Peter Oborne. The book is a damning exposure of the mechanics of the political system in 21st century Britain. As I read through Oborne’s thesis I cannot help replacing the term “Political Class” with PLPN and apply the reasoning to analogous circumstances in Malta – and I am surprised with the results. It’s a perfect fit.

Oborne uses the term “Political Class” constantly with capitalised P and C with reference to the new class of cross-party political careerists and examines their impact on the magical democracy that is Britain.

Here is an excerpt from the chapter entitled “The Ideology of the Political Class”:

For most of the twentieth century governing elites brought with them to Westminster a set of principles, tightly aligned to general party political thought and beliefs, which they sought to apply in government. When they felt the temptation to strike cross-party deals or renege on commitments, they were liable to be met with accusations of betrayal by the party membership. Today, political ideas no longer emerge from within the party structures and belief systems. They are manufactured. Rather than referring inward to the party membership, politicians look outward to the general public. Instead of engaging with voters directly, however, marketing experts and political ‘consultants’ are employed to discern popular will. Policies are constructed and later marketed in exactly the same way as consumer products and very often by the same set of experts. The evolution of ideas becomes an essentially private form of activity, associated with a specialist elite whose primary purpose is not putting into practice any system of ideologies or beliefs but rather the shaping of policy for the mass market.

Ideas in the era of the Political class are therefore converted into weapons or tools to be deployed or used for tactical convenience. The key function is the denial of territory to opponents, the strategy of ‘triangulation’ first associated with the Democrat presidency of Bill Clinton and identified in particular with his consultant Dick Morris. This technique was first used, and with especially gratifying effect, in the presidential election of 1992, and involved a series of forays into Republican issues, above all law and order.

The over-riding purpose was the conquest of the central ground of politics, forcing political opponents to take up territory which could then be labelled extremist. The overwhelming aim of this form of tactical positioning was emphatically not to win the the battle of ideas. Rather it lay in the ability to lay claim to a positional victory at the end of the day.

Oborne leads on to an analysis of the cult of “modernisation” – devised by the Political Class as “a strategic device to distance the Political Class from what it saw as out-of-date or antiquated ideologies. It was meant to appear sensible, managerial, pragmatic, in touch. But in due course it became a powerful ideology on its own. It presented the British ruling elite with a conceptual structure which was based on a dislike of the past, a contempt for traditional institutions, a unique insight into the future, and a guide to ethics”.

Oborne’s thesis has not ceased to surprise me. Above all it is evident that the path trodden by our Political Class (the class of PLPN) is the very same that has been trodden twenty years back in the US/UK. It is all there… like some latter-day Nostradamus prediction. You will find all you need to know (and foresee) about the predictable activities of our Political Class – and sadly, you will become aware that the writing is on the wall as to our future development in line with very European trends of neutering of political values, aims and ideologies: in the name of a Polticial Elite.

Foyles Synopsis:
Both an extension of and a companion to his acclaimed expose of political mendacity, THE RISE OF POLITICAL LYING, Peter Oborne’s new book reveals in devastating fashion just how far we have left behind us the idea of people going into politics for that quaint reason, to serve the public. Notions of the greater good and “putting something back” now seem absurdly idealistic, such is the pervasiveness of cynicism in our politics and politicians. Of course, self-interest has always played a part, and Oborne will show how our current climate owes much to the venality of the eighteenth century. But in these allegedly enlightened times should we not know better? Do we not deserve better from those who seek our electoral approval? Full of revealing and insightful stories and anecdotes to support his case, and with a passionate call for reform, THE TRIUMPH OF THE POLITICAL CLASS is destined to be the defining political book of 2007.

J'accuse : Pontius Pilate

In this time of pageants, processions and crucifixions one character of the paschal narrative tends to get less attention than all the rest and yet I believe that this country owes him much more attention. This man happened to be prefect of Judea at the time when one of humankind’s most important stories was unfolding and much has been written about him. I believe that one matter about the equestrian Pontius of the Pilati family has been overlooked by scholars: he HAD to have been a Maltese citizen who had been transferred for some work in the Middle East.

It is quite a pity that only the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has recognised Pontius Pilate (and his wife) as a saint for I believe that statues of the prefect would be very apt in many places around the islands − chief among which would be our House of Representatives. A Saint Pontius picture would be a mandatory part of the civil servants’ uniform in this country that has huge difficulties separating the religious from the civic and social. It’s all about the washing of hands after all…

The Divine Comedy

Depending on which gospel you follow, Pontius Pilate has different levels of responsibility for the condemnation and crucifixion of Christ. Christian lore through the ages − from the early Councils to Mel Gibson has shifted between the responsibility of the Roman masters and that of the Jewish participants in the passion. No matter who you follow, the personality of Pontius sticks out as one who wants to put a huge distance between himself and the destiny of the man who appears before him under the spurious accusation of having claimed to be King of the Jews.

Pontius is the kind of man who performs logistical somersaults and carries a bag with a multiplicity of excuses so long as he can wash his hands of the decision to inculpate the man from Nazareth. He will forever be tied with the symbolic idea of washing his hands in order that he may hopefully sleep with a clean conscience. Blame, if any, for a mistake, is to be laid at the feet of someone other than this prefect. John reports the torment faced by Pontius: the man bold enough to ask of Ieshua of Nazareth: “What is the truth?” Having interrogated Jesus at length, Pontius famously proclaims “I find no fault in him”(John 18:38). And yet…

Master and the Margarita

And yet… Finding no fault is not enough for the man who holds the highest seat of temporal power in Judea at the time. He is after all a bureaucrat who has to feel the pulse of the people he rules. He senses that the political powers that be are not very much in Ieshua’s favour and that he needs a way out. It is only then, and after having offered a feeble alternative (release the criminal?), that he chooses to wash his hands. As he washes his hands of the fate of one individual − “I am innocent of this man’s blood − you will see” − it’s clear that Pontius has his own conscience at the top of his agenda.

And that, you see is the crux. Saint Pontius is every civil servant who allows the political masters to oblige him to twist the application of the law to fit their needs and statistics. It is those civil servants who turn their administrative jobs into a little fiefdom of bureaucratic pen-pushing, toying with the rights of individuals in order to get the thrill of “power”.

There are Pontius Pilates all over the place − those who either apply the “work to rule” on a day-to-day basis. Then there are the 69 special Pontius Pilates who sit in Parliament and who will wash their hands of the responsibility to decide for or against divorce legislation in a responsible manner. They will seek refuge behind their “conscience” − like Pilate, it is their conscience that trumps the right of the individual.

Claudia Procula

In today’s world, the search for the truth that so tormented Pilate has become more convoluted. Those whose responsibility it is to serve the needs of social justice are becoming more and more used to economising with the truth. Whenever necessary, they have become used to the ritual of washing their hands. In their personal balance of truths, the main reconciling element is the idea that their conscience remains clean whenever they wash their hands.

“M’ghandix x’naqsam” (I’ve got nothing to do with it). “Dak mhux xoghli” (That’s not my job). “Hekk qalulna naghmlu” (That’s what they told us to do). A legal immigrant in possession of a long term residence permit who is trying to get his family to join him in Malta might find the stone wall of civil service Pontius Pilates too hard to overcome. A person in need of proper treatment in radiology might find that there have been too many Pontius Pilate politicians since the last equipment was purchased. And so it goes…

Il Uomo Vivo

It might be very distasteful of cynical J’accuse to raise this matter of Pilates on the day when most of Malta celebrates the return of the king. But not as distasteful as the GRTU’s sudden newfound holiness when faced with the possibility of a supermarket chain opening its doors on Good Friday. This had nothing to do with social or religious conscience − it is the way of things in this country. A businessman threatened with competition will suddenly become holier than Annas and Caiaphas put together and will seek out the local version of a Pontius Pilate who will easily appease the baying hounds so long as he thinks that his conscience is clear.

The problem in this country is not that it seems to be full of hypocritical bible bashers but that the very bible bashers rarely take some time to sit down and learn the lessons that may be found within their weapon of choice. Happy Easter from the island where time stood still.

www.akkuza.com listening to Il Uomo Vivo this Easter Sunday.

J'accuse : Pulses

The metaphor is normally “il-polz tal-poplu” − the people’s pulse. It’s the measure that most politicians used to go by for a long time. Ever since a few avant-garde British colonials decided to experiment with the classic idea of a republic and created a charter for “We the people”, the question of what people want was upped a few echelons on the political scale. It would only be a few years before the apocryphal uttering of “Let them eat cake” would signal the final straw for those who dared think that the man in the street’s opinion counted for utter pish.

We’ve gone full circle since then, and the equally metaphorical ear on the ground has become the staple food for many a budding politician. Too much so in fact, since the efforts to appease the masses and to pander to popular demand risks making a prostitute of our Madame Republic. The people’s pulse has become the bread and butter of every politician in the post-9/11 world. Values and party principles count for naught and the old -isms have become fantasies and fiction.

Thusly, a modern and progressive politician will praise a fascist Italian decision to not comply with international rules in the name of the national interest. “Mhux fl-interess nazzjonali” − now that’s a big one. If the “people’s pulse” leads to prostitution of political values then the modern concept of “national interest” and “common good” is an open invitation to a free-for-all in a whorehouse. J’accuse has bemoaned the dilution of party political values for years now − only to be derided as an “armchair critic” or self-important pontificator. It is only now that the mud is falling away from their fawning eyes that the former critics have begun to notice that our political “elite” is stuffed with the crème de la crème of incompetent lackeys.

Lima

Deprived as I am of first hand contact, I am dependent on the feedback provided by social networks. I am fully aware that they are not the full picture of the goings on in Malta but they do provide a particular snapshot and perspective. Take today for example. I gleaned from a quick perusal of online updates that the general mood on the island was a grumpy one that befits the religious occasion that was being celebrated. “A typical Our Lady of Sorrows day” wrote one punter − and it seems that the clouds were out and about in order to provide the right ambience for the solemn occasion.

It must be because Luxembourg is no longer as Catholic a nation as it once proudly was, but the deities that are failed to provide the same setting of decorum in this corner of the world. This week’s Le Jeudi (a weekly Luxo newspaper) carried a special report about the plight of immigrants. The series of articles was entitled “The frontiers of solidarity” and highlighted the issues surrounding the “politique d’urgence”. Luxembourg’s asylum seekers come mostly from the Balkans but the difference in nationality of origin does not mean that they face different problems than those we face in the Mediterranean.

The biggest worry is that the “massive influx” of asylum seekers from the Balkans would highlight the lack of receiving structures and that this would lead to the Immigration Ministry taking “hurried decisions on the fate of asylum seekers”. Sound familiar? Well, that’s not all. Luxembourg is also not very happy with the EU level of collaboration. NGOs in Luxembourg are angry that notwithstanding previous lessons that should have been learnt, nothing much has changed recently.

Lentil

On the one hand they will discuss the “Marshall Plan” for the Maghreb. On the other they will mention that in the case of the Sudanese, Erithreans and Somalis going to Malta it is not a simple issue of sending them back. The pulse in Luxembourg is clearly on cue. They are much more on the game than some of the politicians closer to the scene. Pulse-wise, there is something wrong when a progressive politician suggests taking advantage of the Arab Spring to boost national tourism. It gets worse when the same politician lauds Italy’s heavy-handed nationalism on the matter of immigration. All we needed was a Christian Democrat minister announcing new oil drilling projects while any potential Libyan protestors are distracted.

The pulse of the people is twisted. It is twisted because of an elaborate machinery that translates to GIGO (garbage in garbage out) in modern talk − or “you reap what you sow” in Luddite parlance. We are unable to see the hopelessness of a situation like a uniformed policeman telling dark skinned men to “Go back to Africa” but we will harp and harp on the “freedom of expression and need for censorship”. We have collectively fallen for the dupe that is “public consultation” in the divorce debate. We are struggling to cope with the idea of a modern open society when our instinct and upbringing keeps raising the ghosts of a nanny-state past.

47 varieties

And then there are our representatives. Our politicians of the future are deceiving themselves (and others) by unearthing the unwilling complicity of long dead heroes of another era. Only today I had a tiff with a Labour exponent who tried to link Manwel Dimech to today’s progressives. Neither Manwel Dimech nor Nerik Mizzi nor Don Luigi Sturzo would be falling over themselves to be a part of this political mess that we call parties nowadays. It is no secret to anyone, but the most baffling part of it is that most of us are content to continue to propagate the lie.

At the rate we are going, the political vultures will be pecking at a carcass that has offered a pulse too many for its hungry mouths.

Appendix

I almost forgot. This article is due an appendix of its own. The chief at the Maltese Translation Unit at the Court of Justice asked me to plug the next round of concours for lawyer-linguists. What does that mean? It means that suitably qualified individuals (yep, you do need a law degree among other things) should be on the lookout on the EPSO website as an open exam for the new intake will shortly be announced.

www.akkuza.com On the island for the Easter break.

Fault Li(n)es

Distractions, attractions and more. How easily we get waylaid by some mountainous pile of bull conjured up by the PLPN charade. Here’s the two videos made by both sides – each laying the blame squarely at the foot of the other with regards to the disenfranchised 2,800. They must both be seeing this issue as manna falling from heaven… yet another distraction to add to the referendum farce: all in the name of “consultation”. Remember – the real votes that count will be the 69 votes in parliament – and no matter what you or I say it’s the INDIVIDUAL CONSCIENCES of 69 citizens that will decide whether divorce legislation is enacted or not.

PL

PN

the Beatles

J'accuse : The Lost Boys (and Girls)

For the second time in a few weeks, Joseph Muscat’s spin office has been producing promotional video clips for the divorce referendum that are about everything but divorce. This week Inhobbkom’s little video clip was about the 2,800 Lost Boys and Girls who will not be allowed to cast their frijvowt (free vote) in the referendum. Joseph says he does not care how they would vote − if and when they are allowed to vote − and his inadvertent frankness on that particular point is rather moving.

What Labour’s Peter Pan fails to stress in his little bit of propaganda is that the outcome of the divorce issue has nothing to do with whether 2,800 youths apparate or disapparate on the electoral register thanks to the latest antic from the PLPN bag of tricks. Peter Pan is right though: his party does not care which way those 2,800 votes would go. It’s not those 2,800 votes that will determine whether or not divorce legislation gets through Parliament. It’s the 69 free votes of conscience that will do the trick.

Right now it pays Peter Pan to don his best suit and shed crocodile tears for the Lost Boys and their votes. It pays him to spin the latest of fables in our Fairy Tale politics where the Evil Gonzi is depicted as the villain who taketh away the votes and aspirations of the youth of the day. It’s revolting. Peter Pan’s party is on the same side as Gonzi’s on this one. Together they have contrived to leave the fate of the introduction of crucial legislation in the hands of 69 individual consciences − even after the outcome of the divorce referendum is known. Even Joseph thinks he is dragging us into Europe will eventually “respect the vote of the people” which means that a “No” vote in the referendum is one more No vote in Parliament as far as Joseph is concerned.

I’ll repeat this ad nauseam if I have to: The Labour Party has no position on divorce. The Nationalist Party has a position against divorce. Both parties have abdicated their representative responsibility by allowing a free vote in Parliament independently of what 2,800 youths, their constituencies or the whole electoral franchise thinks about the issue. Now that should make you sit down and weep.

Tinker Bell

Then there was the business of the Attorney General’s appeal in the Realtà case. The gut reaction was one of astonished disgust coupled with rhetorical questions as to whether the AG office’s timetable is not sufficiently stocked with interesting distractions. A second, more political, reaction targeted the occupier of Castille blaming him for allowing the AG to get on with this nonsense.

Writing in MaltaToday, James Debono tried to find out who was “politically responsible” for the Realtà case. As a nation we are beginning to demonstrate an acute inability to cope with the underpinnings of the rule of law and why we need it. Perhaps the knee-jerk reaction to dismissing a coherent set of arguments as “lawyer-speak” while reverting to the chaotic world of Maltese relativism has much to do with it. Sure we know the laws are there but hey − they must be twisted to make more sense in this day and age right? And why didn’t Lawrence Gonzi do just that with the Realtà case? It’s the 21st century no − what do we need laws and regulations for?

It’s the same thing for Joseph Muscat’s beef with the referendum motion and dates. Joseph’s solution was for the electoral commission to sit on the President’s writ for 18 days, just in time for the new electoral register to come into effect. You know that type of “I’ll close an eye just for this time” suggestion. As for the AG − many speculated that the Prime Minister should have intervened and prevented him from appealing. Sure. When would that be right and when would that be wrong? Who would decide? Laws and rules are not suggestions or guidelines − they are laws for a reason. They give us a sense of order and continuity as the old cliché goes: we are servants of the law so that we may be free.

Wendy Darling

Even though I do not find myself in agreement with the AG’s arguments as made in the appeal − particularly with his choice of inconveniencing deities once again (wasn’t divorce enough?) − I am still comfortable with the knowledge that this appeal forms part of a greater mechanism of interpretation and clarification of the law that is necessary for our society to work. The alternative is chaos and anarchy based on relative values. This appreciation should be part of every body’s civic conscience and not just of those who have gone through six years of law at university.

Understanding this objectively becomes even harder every day when the paladins of representative democracy twist and turn the picture to their own needs and devices. It is useless talking of “hidden rules of society” or conspiracy theories of some theocratic plot in some quarters if we are unable to get the message across about the usefulness of the rule of law that transforms − to the best of its imperfect capabilities − the will of the people into a working social system.

Nana

It’s a fine line between on the one hand a real society based on real laws and on the other a sham set of rules behind which hides the arch-democratic dictator. We’ve been very close to the latter before; I like to think we can still aspire towards the first… despite our politicians.

“All the world is made of faith, and trust, and pixie dust.” − J.M. Barrie

www.akkuza.com − this column has been short-listed as a finalist in the Opinion Article section of the XXIst Malta Journalism Awards.