A little bit of lipstick goes a long way
Joseph Muscat has announced great changes within the Labour Party. It will have a new name. It will have a new emblem. And it will have a new way of electing its leader.
Gosh, I am so impressed. A new logo will really change the party and make it fit for government. A new name will go a long way towards obfuscating the fact that Anglu Farrugia and Toni Abela are deputy leaders. A new way of electing the party leader, when Muscat resigns or is ousted, might just about make up for the absence of any policies or ideas. I don’t think.
What stuns me about the Labour Party is that it is obsessed with image and appearance. Content is as nothing to its big cheeses. It is as though they think that the reason Malta has been systematically rejecting Labour at the polls since 1976 is because the party has a poor image. If Lorry Sant had been slimmer or charming, if Dom Mintoff had been tall and handsome, if Joe Debono Grech looked like Daniel Craig (the cinema was full of drooling women the other night) we might have overlooked the violence, the corruption, and the crass ineptitude.
It’s easy for the Labour Party to blame its image for its routine failure at the polls, rather than facing up to its real shortcomings and doing something about them. Let’s put it this way, it’s a whole lot simpler to change an emblem and a name than it is to work out some real policies. And it’s a whole lot simpler than governing, which starts with being fit to govern. A new emblem might bring to an end the Pavlovian response that many of us have to the present Labour flag, but it’s not going to stop me looking at Anglu Farrugia and shaking my head, or looking at Toni Abela and laughing. The day a party emblem can sit in the prime minister’s chair and take decisions on running the country is the day I will vote for a political party on the basis of what its emblem looks like.
The changes are not going to be amazing, in any case. The party will be called the Labour Party, rather than the Malta Labour Party, and in Maltese it will be Il-Partit Laburista. Well, that’s what we’ve been calling it for years, anyway. I have yet to meet anyone who says, with a straight face, ‘the Malta Labour Party’ or ‘il-Partit tal-Haddiema’. As for that emblem, it appears that the ‘iconic’ torch is being kept on, to remind us that Labour is a trail-blazer – or rather, to remind us that it is not. And the changes to the leader-election system? We might be forgiven a cynical laugh: they’re the very ones proposed by Marlene Pullicino and rejected by the delegates, and which would have almost certainly resulted in the election of George Abela. Having used the old system to get himself elected, Muscat is now going to dispense with it.
In many ways, all this change is about going back to the future. Joseph Muscat has got a buzzing bee in his bonnet about being ‘progressive’. Progressive politics is a dim hangover from the 1960s and 1970s. The things to wear when talking about progressive politics are hip-hugging flares and a Jim Croce moustache, while listening to the cool sounds of Traffic and channelling some really happening vibes, man.
Muscat’s mentor Mario Vella thought of himself as progressive way back in the days of the OPEC oil crisis. I imagine that he still hasn’t got over himself, and that his protégé Muscat is too uninformed to know about all that. Only somebody who thinks that Armistice Day is xi haga tal-Inglizi, and consequently of no particular importance if you are a Maltese political leader, wouldn’t understand that the term ‘progressive politics’ smacks, and resoundingly so, of the days when Mick Jagger and Marianne Faithful were in trouble with the police for lewd acts involving a Mars bar. And so the legend ‘Progressivi’ is now emblazoned above the party name on the podium from which Joseph Muscat has been addressing the nation of late.
There’s more back-to-the-future with his choice of terminology, which references the days of Dom Mintoff at every twist and turn. Well, he did tell us what great respect he has for Joe Debono Grech, so much so that he dispatched him to the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday is his stead, probably on the understanding that a party veteran is the right choice to stand among war veterans, rather than a thrillingly young person like himself.
“This is the time to discuss change and face challenges, and I need soldiers of steel behind me,” Muscat told his people a few days ago, referencing the suldati tal-azzar of those days we’d prefer to forget. “Let us give people the proof that this is a new Labour Party.” What – with soldiers of steel and a new logo? That’s going to convince only the most chicken-brained or those who are wholly overcome by desperation for an alternative to the Nationalist Party. It would be a bit like telling the fire “Oh, you look nice. And this frying-pan has really had its day.”
Muscat was speaking at the first session of a konferenza generali straordinarja. He described it as “historic”. That didn’t surprise me, as the man seems to think that everything he does is momentous, and has no reservations about telling us so. The conference was called – of course – Progressivi, a word that those of my generation associate with the communist regimes languishing behind the Iron Curtain and not with the liberal movements of northern and western Europe, which were the true agents of social change.
Muscat is keen to appeal to voters beyond Labour’s traditional base. This is an admirable if obvious aim: let’s put it this way, he’s not going to become prime minister with the votes only of those who are keen on Labour because they grew up in Labour-supporting households. And though he has a good chance of getting elected on the strength of the pika and hdura vote, in commercial terms this doesn’t count as building a strong customer base, but only as one-off sales. Muscat says he wants to appeal to those who have never voted for the Labour Party but who share its principles. First, he has to spell out to us what those principles might possibly be. In 30 years, I haven’t been able to work that one out for myself.
A lover of labels, he keeps telling us that the Labour Party is socio-democratic, or social democratic, having failed to realise that the Nationalist Party pulled this particular rug out from under the Labour Party’s feet way back in 1987. The only stumbling-block is divorce, but divorce does not a socio-democratic party make, just as the absence of commitment to divorce legislation does not obviate the Nationalist Party’s socio-democratic credentials and achievements.
Malta’s Labour Party is a curious oxymoron, in that it is right-wing, ultra-conservative, and xenophobic. Joseph Muscat may not be those things himself (he isn’t, at all), but he is not running a one-man band here, and while the leader may have changed, the party has not. It is about as easy to turn a xenophobic, suspicious, conservative right-winger into a progressive liberal as it is to turn a progressive liberal into somebody who thinks like Josie Muscat of the ANR, who is currently the political leader closest in sentiment to the real Labour Party.
Mass parties in Malta have the thankless task of reconciling a wide variety of conflicting interests if they wish to get elected to government. Muscat is not going to do this with his back-to-the-future stance on making what he is now calling ‘the new movement’ a haven for those who are struggling to make ends meet. The vast majority of people have a tough time making ends meet, with many of us having to work all the hours God sends. It all depends on the definition of making ends meet. Standards of living have risen enormously over the last 15 years, even over the last 10 years, and making ends meet is no longer just a matter of paying the utilities bills and making sure you aren’t eating bread and cheese at the end of the month.
People now expect a whole lot more, and they’re doing whatever they can to make sure they get it. The real problem that Muscat must address, if we are to take him seriously on the ‘progressive’ bit and not conclude that he has succumbed to the right-wing, conservative pressures within his party, is the widespread belief in Malta that a household of four, five or even six people should be able to survive comfortably, thank you very much, on a single average salary brought in by the man of the house, with travel, clothes, cars, meals in restaurants, and presents for the children.
This happens nowhere else that I can think of. I was at the post office on a week-day morning when I overheard two women who were clearly nisa tad-dar grumbling to each other in the queue, about how the paga tar-ragel doesn’t stretch to all the things they want to buy now that they have to pay this kind of money for water and electricity. And my first thought was not “jahasra, msieken”, but “why don’t the lazy so-and-sos get off their butts and bring in some money themselves”. Times have changed in this country and standards of living have risen, but Maltese women’s belief that they deserve by right to live off their husband’s salary even if they marry a low-level employee has not changed at all.
I admire people with initiative, and I admire even more those who encourage initiative in others. I like people with a positive attitude to life, go-getters, and not those who sit about and whine, or who encourage others to do so. And I especially don’t like those who, instead of trying their hand at some success for themselves, spend their lives clawing at the faces of others who have achieved the things they haven’t. If I were living in the hey-man hey-day of progressive Mario Vella, I would use the words negative karma in their regard, but that’s another matter and I’m sure they know who they are and are even now waiting to pounce on this and bitch about it like the loser girls in the school-playground and the loser boys at the school disco. You’d think it’s my fault that they’re disappointed with how their lives are panning out, that I’m to blame for the fact that they never got all of what they wanted (nobody does), or that some of what they had was taken away from them. That’s a loser attitude and it’s anathema to me.
Joseph Muscat doesn’t have a loser’s attitude to life. He’s got a positive one, which is largely why he’s been on a consistent winning streak. I would have admired that about him had it also been coupled with brains, depth and ability. Every politician is a bit of an opportunist, but this one takes matters too far.
The gap between what he says he believes and what he does is just too great. He calls himself progressive, yet instead of encouraging women to be economically productive, I can see that he is going to fall into the same old trap of consolidating women’s belief in their right to raise a family of three children, pay all the bills, travel, buy clothes, and run a household and one or two cars comfortably on €1,000 a month. In this he is as one with the Curia. Somebody truly progressive would be encouraging women to help themselves instead of sitting around and kvetching while counting the euro-cents, but I rather suspect this isn’t going to happen, because Muscat sees progressive politics as just another label with no real meaning.
This article is published in The Malta Independent today.
41 Comments Comment
Reply to M. Brincat Click here to cancel reply
Oh my God … all this bantering and clucking! Dear Daphne – not worth 2 dimes. I wonder why the guys at TMI still pay you to fill a page of theirs with “demel”, when they can get all the “demel” they want for free from any cattle farm! And it smells better too! When are you going to give us a break – preferably a long one my dear? Why don’t you tell us about the magical abilities of the PN in government? Once you come back from your break I mean …The magical abilities of the PN … those who manage to illusion the larger minority in the country that they are good politicians when in fact what they really excel in is marketing! They can – really – sell “demel” and make it appear like mannah from Heaven …Daphne, give us a break. We deserve it.
[Daphne – Quite obviously, you’re addicted. Otherwise you would know that you could give yourself a break, by not reading what I write. What do you do when you want a break from, say, a television show? Write to the producer and broadcaster and ask them to take it off the air because you don’t want to watch it? Or turn off the television and stop watching? Since I started this blog, I haven’t got more than a couple of intelligent comments from Labour supporters with a good argument to make, and then you wonder why my general impression is not positive.]
In what way is the MLP…woops I meant PL, right-wing and ultra-conservative? Xenophobic maybe, but I cannot see how they’re conservative.
[Daphne – I’m not going into a great big disquisition here. Conservative parties vary from country to country, but the unifying factor in their attitude, which some dress up as political philosophy, is fear of change and opposition to change (in the country, its culture, and its way of doing things, rather than in the political party itself, but that too). Basically, what you’re talking about is a strong wish to preserve the status quo or return to the status quo ante. The greatest example of this conservative attitude was in the arguments brought out in opposition to EU membership, and to all the other changes instituted over the last 20 years. Conservatism, right-wing thinking and xenophobia go hand-in-hand because they are all rooted in the fear that things might change, and that change by definition cannot be good. Right now, the Labour Party is agitating for change, but its not the change that makes them progressive. What they want is a change in government so that they can go back to doing things the way they were. The Nationalist Party is non-conservative, and has been the main agent of great change over the last 20 years. I don’t think even its detractors can deny that.]
M. Brincat you’re perfectly free to set up your own blog about PN shortcomings – and they are many. I’d be glad to contribute. But your knee-jerk reaction to criticism about the (M)LP – ‘SHUT UP’ – shows intolerance and an inability to argue. Ironically, you are adding weight to Daphne’s arguments by doing this. Having said that, I’d like to see Daphne apply her talents to keeping the government on its toes, for the general benefit of the country. It’s her blog and her option, though. How about it, Daphne?
[Daphne – I have always done so, as and when I see fit. And right now, I don’t see fit. I think this is the right time to remind people that I am completely independent, earn my income through private business, and don’t give a stuff what people think. This means that you will never find me criticising the government (or the opposition, for that matter) when I don’t mean it, just for the sake of some weird notion called ‘balance’, and to seem ‘independent’, like some of the sillier columnists do. What I write is my considered opinion, paid for by nobody but the newspaper I work for (and in this case, paid for by nobody at all). Some people find this hard to take. They cannot accept the fact that somebody who is clearly not intellectually challenged, as political correctness puts it, sees far more that is wrong with the opposition that she does with the government. It doesn’t occur to them for one minute that it is precisely because I am not intellectually challenged and am wholly independent (unlike them, who are Laburisti ippatentati) that I can see things pretty clearly. What I see is that, thanks to some very sound decisions taken over the last few years, we are relatively safe despite the huge pressures within and without. A small item appeared in the newspaper a couple of days ago, and went past unnoticed and unremarked upon: number of jobless DOWN. Number of jobless down? Where else is that happening right now? Because the Labour Party has been allowed to set the agenda – and this is where my main quibble is with the government – all we are getting is the bad notes on water and electricity. Nobody is saying: hey, things are actually pretty good apart from that. Huge amounts of money are sloshing around looking for a home; ok, so none of that is mine/yours, but it’s there, and it’s going to be invested and not kept under the mattress or in the bank, and that’s good news. Do you know how many igaming companies are operating through Malta? 224. It’s huge. They’re employing large numbers of people, renting flats and houses, spending in restaurants and shops. Through my work, I meet many different sorts of people in different areas of business. Yes, higher costs are a big pressure, but one of the biggest pressures of all is not being able to find the right kind of people to engage. The IT companies are headhunting from one to another. Everyone who comes out of IT training is snatched up. The inability to speak and write English remains a problem, but surely that can be resolved. What would have happened had we gone with Labour’s policy and stayed out of the EU? We would have been in very serious trouble by now. In fact, it is with hindsight that we can see how really crazy that policy was. Even Joseph Muscat sees it. But in government you have to use foresight, not hindsight. Despite the fact that everyone thinks I am a real akkanita Nazzjonalista, I am anything but. As I have had occasion to point out before, I didn’t grow up in a Nationalist household, at all. My entire extended family on both my mother’s side and my father’s supported the Constitutional Party and had a dim view of the Nationalist Party (though not as dim a view as they had of Labour). As a result, those members of my family who vote Nationalist now do so out of conviction and not tradition, based on the excellent track record of the last 20 years, and particularly because of EU membership. I have arrived at my own conclusions, based on what I see and have worked out for myself. And what I see is this: people using two weights and two measures to assess the performance of the two main political parties. The threshold for Labour is much, much lower than the extremely high threshold set for the Nationalist Party. Put simply, we expect far more from the Nationalists than we do from Labour, and while we discuss the relatively minor shortcomings of the government party in tones of horror, we brush over the really major shortcomings of the opposition party with a degree of tolerance that is quite astounding. Can you imagine if the Nationalist Party were to elect Toni Abela and Anglu Farrugia as its deputy leaders? There would be an outcry. But we know it would never happen. And how do we know that? Because we know, and even Labour supporters know, that the Nationalist Party’s standards are much higher. I don’t share many of Tonio Borg’s views and he is too old-fashioned for my liking, but hemm bahar x’taqsam bejn Borg u Abela/Farrugia.]
While it is true that traditionally conservatism has been simply a support for the status-quo, I think today conservativism today is more closely linked to neoliberal/free market economic policies and restrictions on personal freedom. Clearly the PN, along with most other Conservative parties, fits this description quite well. Obviously there are divergences because of cultural context. For example if the PN had to contest the US elections, it would quite possibly be considered extreme-left and Socialist. However I think it is wrong to classify parties along these simplistic black/white terms. The Political Compass does a great job at explaining the complexities of the political spectrum. I wonder where you stand, Daphne…
http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
[Daphne – Not at all. Conservatism is an English noun with a specific, non-ambiguous meaning. Conservatism is rooted in opposition to change. The degree to which conservative parties oppose change varies from place to place and party to party, but the desire to preserve the status quo is at the root of it all. In the early 1970s, the Nationalist Party was conservative and the Labour Party was anything but, though sadly, the changes it pushed for were not for the good of the country. Since the early 1980s, there has been a ‘swap’, with the Nationalist Party forging change through progressive policies and the Labour Party becoming more and more deeply conservative, fighting change at every step of the way. Where do I stand? That’s simple. I’m a liberal, and the closest I can get to finding what I want in Malta is the modern-day Nationalist Party, give or take a few bones of contention. My family’s political roots are liberal, not conservative or socialist, so there was a very strong likelihood that I would grow up inclined towards liberal politics, just as those who grew up in Labour households are that way inclined. Of course, there wasn’t an obvious liberal party to support, so I had to work all that out for myself. I started with AD, realised they were utter rubbish, and moved on to support the Nationalist Party when I saw the changes being made, but what finally clinched it was EU membership.]
Daphne, I, like many other on our tiny island, like to inflict self damage. Otherwise we would not have the PN in government, would we? It’s not a question of addiction, really. It’s a question, as I mentioned before, of the smell of manure … no one loves it, but we can’t do much to refrain from smelling it when driving close by fields, can we, my dear? I tried to ask you to give us a break … but as you rightly put it … you can’t ask manure not to smell ugly … I have to agree with that. But having said so, you can’t blame for politely asking you to give us a break!
[Daphne – You can’t avoid driving past manure, but you can certainly avoid logging on to this blog repeatedly. Or has somebody devised a new form of erotic sado-masochism that I have yet to hear about? Has some woman (or man) tied you to the bedposts with fluffy handcuffs – one for Anthony Zammit, I imagine – while holding a laptop to your face, logged on to my blog?]
Daphne,
Over the years, (almost 20 now) I have always refrained from commenting on the local political scene. However, since I am now blessed with two Maltese/Canadian grandchildren, whose future is at risk, I feel that I can, maybe, contribute to your article without enduring the usual blast of ‘go home’.
To my mind, the vast majority of Labour supporters are ‘unthinking’ people who would rather be ‘told’ how to vote. Then there is a small minority of ‘thinking’ people who are, I would term, ‘schemers’, one of whom is the new leader. Then there are ‘true thinkers’. I can think of two or three, two of whom are failed leadership candidates.
Since Labour is so highly reliant on the ‘unthinkers’, the past (and present) leadership schemers would not dare present valid and positive alternative policies because they would not be understood by the people they rely upon. Bombast and bluster are necessary to retain their base. A classic ‘catch 22’ situation.
I humbly admit I am addicted to your opinions,or shall I say your thought process. Thursdays or Sundays never had much importance to my family but lately they have become the days we look forward to….’It’s Thursday or Sunday,I wonder what Daphne is writing about’. I happen to admire the art of communication, a skill that is very difficult to acquire. By far you are a great communicator. A priceless gift that every leader needs,political or not, to succeed but very few have. Peggy Noonan and George Will also have your writing skills. With your pen you meticulously expose in a clear way the problems of the Labour Party. No wonder Labourites dislike you. I am convinced, just like myself, Labour’s top brass are also addicted to your opinions. Instead of scratching their heads, they would be wise to hire you as their only consultant. So please keep tapping away the key board for you have become part of my family…..
[Daphne – Thank you.]
Dear, if you tell me politely not to log on to your blog because I’m getting on your nerves, then I will oblige. But since I believe that Malta is a free country, thanks also to the PN government, I don’t mind coming here every now and then. You have a mind? Good, I have one too. Maybe not as full of hatred like yours, but I have one too. Maybe not as tied to historic events that have ruined my personal and social life as yours, but I have a mind as well. And I use it – sometimes.
I’m not here to teach, nor preach. I know it perfectly – I would be spending my time very unwisely and inefficiently. People like you who waste all their mental energy and spit all their venom in trying to annihilate someone or something they loathe – aren’t the perfect alumni ;)
@Matt …
“It’s Thursday or Sunday,I wonder what Daphne is writing about.” duuuuh … the topic is always the same – MLP. Day in day out. Article after article. Column after column … that’s why I’m fed up … change is good after all!
[Daphne – You guys just don’t get it, do you? You’ll still on a learning curve where democracy, the right to free speech, and private property are concerned. This blog is my private property. You do not have the right to comment here. You have the privilege of commenting here, which is different. I have as much right to delete your comments or block them as I have not to allow you into my home or my car. The fact that Malta is a free country (no thanks to the party that delights you) does not give you any rights you did not possess before, like the right to use another person’s property without that person’s consent. I have no desire to tell you not to come here and comment. I am merely reminding you that you are a guest here, and that visiting a person’s blog to insult the person who owns and writes it is the equivalent of being a guest in somebody’s home and doing the same thing to their face. If you want to insult me, go and do it on one of the forums which serve that express purpose, run by those who have an obsession with me that is now verging on the pathological, given that I am not a politician, not standing for election, and not paid out of public funds, but merely an entertainer. It takes somebody entirely devoid of a sense of humour to mistake a sense of hilarity at the highly amusing ineptitude of the Labour Party for hatred. I don’t hate anyone, though some hate me and self-degradingly parade their obsessive hatred publicly. In the case of two other women columnists, Marie Benoit and Claire Bonello, this obsession has dragged on for years and years, and is now verging on the point of stalking. It comes with the territory, so I put up with it. And no, I don’t waste all my energy spitting venom. I spend my energy productively, entertaining people in a variety of ways (ironically, I am even entertaining you, given that you keep coming back for more).
As for your message to Matt, who I don’t know: you think that I write only about Labour because you are obsessed with Labour. I write about a great variety of things, but the only articles that strike you are the ones about the Labour Party, precisely because you are obsessed.]
i think you should revert to not bold font to comments by people and bold font for your comments.
[Daphne – That’s what I’m doing.]
[Daphne – OK, I see what you mean. I couldn’t see it from this end but I just checked it as you would see it. Done.]
M. Brincat: your attitude that what is in fact a privilege (having your comments published on somebody else’s blog) should be a right is unfortunately typical of many Labour Party supporters.
DCG “I am merely reminding you that you are a guest here, and that visiting a person’s blog to insult the person who owns and writes it is the equivalent of being a guest in somebody’s home and doing the same thing to their face.”
You’re talking to w@*kers who support a party which condoned breaking into EFA’s house – and breaking into the Curia etc etc.. so insulting the owner of a blog who doesn’t share their views isn’t exactly going to make them question their ethics.
Whew! What a response to my comment. I hope it was for general consumption and not aimed personally because I know all that. I think I’ve been misunderstood. I’m not thinking about some misconceived idea of ‘balance’ at all. Ho hum…no time to elaborate now. Maybe another day…
[Daphne – No, of course it wasn’t intended for you personally.]
1. Your talk doesn’t impress me. I’m not obsessed with the MLP. Not obsessed with the PL. Not with the PN nor with politics. In fact since Dr. Muscat has mentioned the introduction of divorce, I’m forced not to vote next election. Plain and simple! I’m a catholic before anything and everything. If there’s someone obsessed with something is YOU with MLP’s past, since you keep ranting over it again and again …
2. I’m not talking AGAINST you behind your back. I’m talking TO you – “face to face”. I even gave you my email address – if you want, email me privately and we can continue the discussion “off the record”. Not that I have anything about putting our ideas here, but if you seriously intend to show me the door, then I’d gladly continue discussing elsewhere. But, yes, I know that. You’re a diva. Flaunting your charm where no one can admire your artistry with the pen or keyboard simply doesn’t – and cannot – satisfy your ego. I never spoke about you in other fora. No, I’m not that kind. Sorry for disappointing you.
3. And yes, you do waste all your energy spitting venom. But, as Dr. Muscat said – he loves you as well, and wants you to love us as well :)
Peace!
Amen.
[Daphne – ??????????]
Hey Daphne,
Who is this Brincat guy? Is he related to the other Labour Brincats? Don’t think his elevator goes all the way to the top. Scary.
[Daphne – I’m as mystified as you are.]
Harry, in fact we have to use the stairs to go to the roof … what the hell mate? Am I commenting against someone who’s untouchable? Should I be called insane for expressing my beliefs against your goddess? Come on Purdie … get a life. They’re getting cheaper now since the recession ;)
M.Brincat
“Daphne, give us a break. We deserve it”
The MLP (sorry, il-Partit Laburista) has been given a very long break from governing this country and, believe me, they deserve it.
A@ Matt
I have also ‘discovered’ Peggy Noonan recently during the US presidential campaign. She is very good, blunt and to the point.
@M. Brincat
If you are fed up with this blog & column, you are free to read other columns by Josanne Cassar, Marie Benoit and the Malta Today gang. However, after reading them for a couple of weeks, I can assure you that you will be appalled at the low level of quality, and lack of decent arguments. You will give up after a couple of weeks, as I did.
Quoting Brincat
“In fact since Dr. Muscat has mentioned the introduction of divorce, I’m forced not to vote next election”
Unquote
The sooner people like you stop hijacking what is supposed to have been a left-of-center party, the better. Through your voting numbers (probably increased due to the fact that you breed like hormonally enhanced rabbits) you have been holding hostage one or other of the political parties and have continually messed up my life. In the 80’s through restriction of movement and unreasonable fiscal control. In the 90’s through the inability to choose competent leadership and tilting at false windmills. In the 21st century by being more conservative than the bloody pope and giving false hopes to the few thinking people that could at one point or other have actually tolerated being linked to idiots like you. And the sad thing is that you probably think I am a nationalist party supporter. Well Daphne at least knows better.
as George Bush would put it, read my lips:
GO TO HELL YOU UNCOUTH BASTARDS! YOU ARE WORSE THAN USELESS!
[Daphne – Somebody posted a comment yesterday asking why I say the Labour Party is Malta’s right-wing conservative party, and not Malta’s progressive party. The fact is that this Mr Brincat sums up its thinking precisely. Joseph Muscat believes that divorce is a civil right, but he wants to give his MPs a free vote on a civil right (appalling – imagine a free vote on ending apartheid) precisely because he knows that this is the predominant attitude in his party. The free-vote bit will allow him to straddle the fence, or so he thinks. And yes, I do know that you are not a Nationalist Party supporter.]
Daph, it seems you have touched quite a few nerves here! I cannot understand what makes these people tick. They are purposely oblivious to their Party’s past in the belief that it never happened.
Now, the ‘new beginning’ (the 3rd sequel) is nothing but a rehash of the past. With Gowzef inviting back the likes of Sceberras Trigona and the tearful reunion with Debono Grech, he reintroduced elements from the scary past. This is no new beginning. As you mentioned, changing the flag does not give a new beginning to a party with no progressive policies.
They are retaining the flaming torch?! I wonder why, maybe because its flame has been giving their ass that warm fuzzy feeling for decades.
The changes to the statute are not a done deal yet. Now, if they change the method of electing a leader to the one which would have elected George Abela, would George continue to be a member of a party which has deprived him personally of a democratic chance of being elected leader?
More interesting times ahead!
I am in fact a bit disappointed with myself for blowing off like that. My apologies. I can only try and mitigate the effects of my lack of self-control by saying that I hadn’t had coffee yet.
Still, what I wanted to put across is that some people do more harm than good when they spout their inanities on open fora/blogs. I know that they can’t help it, seeing that the people they look up to within their chosen party are more inconsistent then a severely battered weather vane. Moreover, these same party leaders come over as having the ideological and political back-bone of a constipated worm, so its hardly surprising that their followers can’t put together a single cogent argument.
I do try and empathise, and I do understand that there is such a thing as a small-island mentality, wherein well-established ideas in other countries take on a cloistered and truncated form once adapted to a 300 square kilometre nation state surrounded by water, and which still has a considerable part of its population who has never lived elsewhere.
But really, let’s face it; at the moment these people are an embarrassment.
Rant over. Apologies again, and maybe Daphne will some day be able to say that she’s had more than one or two good comments from “those others”.
[Daphne – Pueblo chico, infierno grande.]
@Guzeppi … can you please explain what you mean by “The sooner people like you …” when referring to me? I have no problem in sitting for an IQ test (if you know what it is of course) head to head with you mate … let’s see who derides who after. I laugh at your attitude, you all, coz it reminds me little kiddies – the ball is mine and I play football my way. Take it or leave.You’re infantile! Grow up and discuss like grown ups if you believe you are grown ups. Otherwise go and get breast fed … seems most of you have not touched a tit for quite some time!
[Daphne – Another cogent argument from a supporter of Joseph Muscat.]
Looks like we have another Blogus Trollus!
[Daphne – No, this one’s for real.]
See, Daphne, you’re daphnetely thinking from your farthole rather than using your brainz. I’m no Joe Muscat supporter! I was – and still am – all out in favour of George Abela!
When you want I can send you my discussions on various fora in favour of Abela and against Muscat, my emails to Muscat himself, Alfred Mifsud and more!
However, that’s not the point. Not at all! Even if I were an avid Muscat supporter – why should I be treated like a nincompoop by you people? That’s not the way a logic, free and adult discussion should be!
@ Guzeppi … I just took my first coffee now as well … apologies accepted.
[Daphne – You’re treated like a nincompoop because you reason and write like one, regardless of who you support.]
Daphne,
Again, I ask, who is this Brincat guy? He should audition for ‘Saturday Nite Live’. Think he’s talking into a mirror.
If I’m allowed, I’d like to go back to the serious part of the discussion.
Daphne, the title of this article hit right on the argument I had within myself recently. I am of the opinion that our Parliament abounds with pseudo politicians whose real expertise lies is sales and marketing. They get elected not because of how they can perform as politicians but how well they can sell and market their way in.
This, of course, is my humble opinion, but ties with what I stated back in March – GonziPN won the race between the two “asses” (in the sense of donkeys). I don’t consider Dr. Gonzi to be a fine politician. Not that Dr. Sant is, mind you. It wasn’t a race between two pure bred race horses, that’s for sure. If Dr. Gonzi was a good politician, he wouldn’t have won with only a handful of votes. But, yes, he’s far better than Sant in politics. That goes without a doubt.
In my opinion, we need new and fresh politicians, the kind that you wouldn’t go through sleepless nights should their party be elected in government.
But maybe my thoughts are wrong from their roots, and we’re living in heaven on earth …
[Daphne – Gonzi won by just a few votes not because he is sub-standard or because his party’s performance in government was poor, but because in this country, lots of people don’t think clearly, if they think at all. Nobody who, given a choice between Sant and Gonzi as prime minister, chooses Sant is thinking clearly, or even thinking. As for those who didn’t vote because of hdura or pika (and there were many) or who voted for AD, and stuff the consequences because they didn’t care, they deserved to be pilloried, as they were. What did they mean, when they said they didn’t care who is prime minister? Are they nuts, detached from reality or what? Better that they chose Sant than that they were unable or too uncaring to make a decision.]
[Daphne – You’re treated like a nincompoop because you reason and write like one, regardless of who you support.]
lol. OK. I got it … I don’t agree with you so I’m a nincompoop … I saw the liggggght!!!!
And you call this a free country … lol … way to go my dear, way to go …
[Daphne – Read my remark again. You’re treated like a nincompoop because you argue and write like one, and not because I don’t agree with you. You said you admire George Abela. Did you not notice that I don’t think he’s a nincompoop?]
[Nobody who, given a choice between Sant and Gonzi as prime minister, chooses Sant is thinking clearly, or even thinking. As for those who didn’t vote because of hdura or pika (and there were many) or who voted for AD, and stuff the consequences because they didn’t care, they deserved to be pilloried, as they were. What did they mean, when they said they didn’t care who is prime minister? Are they nuts, detached from reality or what?]
Again, your attitude of either you think with my brainz or you don’t have brainz at all! It’s simply a disgusting attitude, said by a supposedly intelligent person. No one can – and no one should – call others names for exercising their democratic rights to vote. It’s disgusting … me and other 141,000 being called stupid for voting Labour. You definitely have a problem with people who don’t share your same opinion dear …Your inability to accept and respect the opinions of others does not make you in any way better than me.
[Daphne – Please stop calling me ‘dear’. We haven’t been introduced and I’m not your dear. A certain type of woman calls other people ‘dear’ to be sarcastic, raising doubts about your gender or proclivities. You clearly have a problem with precise language. I don’t have a problem with people who vote Labour. I have a problem with people who, faced with a choice between sanity and insanity, choose insanity and hope for the best. That’s all. You might have failed to notice, but even the current leader of the Labour Party has realised, with five years of hindsight, that Labour’s anti-EU policy was insane. You might also have noticed that George Abela was pro-EU and, being a sane person, almost certainly voted Yes in the referendum and for the Nationalist Party in 2003. That’s what clear-thinking people do: they think clearly. And that’s why I think quite highly of him and not highly at all of Muscat, who has the brain of a chicken where his own personal interests are not involved.]
Daph … of course you don’t consider Abela a nincompoop! Who, in a sane state of mind would? Not even stupid Labourites like me …
I stated back in the days of the election leader that if Abela was elected, no genuine PN follower would loathe losing the next election.
[Daphne – Don’t call me Daph, either. That’s for friends and family only. I’m Daphne to you, and Mrs Caruana Galizia if you push your luck further. Thank you.]
@M. Brincat, who wrote: “See, Daphne, you’re daphnetely thinking from your farthole rather than using your brainz. I’m no Joe Muscat supporter! I was – and still am – all out in favour of George Abela!”
So let me get this straight. It’s Daphne’s blog, she allows you to comment without censorship…during this time she’s not using her “brainz” but thinking from her “farthole”. Oh, and yes, she fills the TMI page with “demel”.
Daphne rightly calls this a free country and free it is, u ghalhekk ma flahtx inzommha fuq l-istonku. Ara veru ghandek wiccek imcappas bid-demel u ma tafx tisthi. M’int tghamillu l’ebda gieh lill-avukat.
For M Brincat
Special Delivery
http://www.gardenersupplies.co.uk/images/FIR%20011%20CS%20DIGGING%20SPADE.jpg
Since your spade seems to be inadequate, let me oblige…
If I may, I’d like to redirect some of this rather pointless chit chat with Mr. Brincat back toward an important point raised by Daphne in her article: namely that the MLP is not really a party of the Left. In my view the party has long been a mix and match of various political threads.
The Leftist leanings of the MLP in the early to mid-1970s were characterized by efforts to introduce reforms typical of a welfare state while at the same time moving towards the political Left: embracing the Non-Aligned Movement and establishing closer links with developing and newly-independent countries. I think that the MLP was at this time still influenced with post-colonial ideas floating around much of the non-Western world. Hence the visits to Malta by Ghaddafi and Makarios; Mintoff’s visits to China, Yugoslavia; visits by party and GWU people to Communist countries such as North Korea.
At the same time, I suggest that from the late 1970s into the 1980s, the MLP increasingly veered toward populism. For many party members (including those at the highest levels of power) ideological concepts such as “Socialism”, “Non-Alignment”, and “the Left” increasingly lost their meaning (some individuals such as Lorry Sant or Wistin Abela probably never lost much sleep over ideology anyway) as the party strategy came to be dominated by the need to remain in power at almost all costs. This is where conservatism with a dose of corruption and violence increasingly came into play as the party and the country itself became more and more inward-looking. Some elements of old MLP policies from the early 1970s and earlier remained but were now rehashed to fit the new direction that the MLP was taking. The party remained anti-Western in principle but also increasingly willing to accept financial support from any source (Italy, China, North Korea, Libya). “Socialist” programmes such as “Izra u rabbi” and “Dirghajn il-Maltin” (pardon the probably atrocious spelling) conformed to some vague ideological principles but also increased the people’s dependence on the the party and the increasingly invasive state (there’s conservatism again) through a vast patronage network that provided access to jobs, housing, infrastructural contracts, and household “luxuries” such as colour TVs. Notice however that there were no attempts to introduce divorce, encourage tertiary education, and any other reforms that one might associate with a progressivist outlook.
I could go on but I’m sure that I’ve already taken up enough space.
“In many ways, all this change is about going back to the future. Joseph Muscat has got a buzzing bee in his bonnet about being ‘progressive’.”
In 1939 Dom Mintoff wrote a letter to the Daily Malta Chronicle. This is an excerpt:”Mala is in need of members with fresh ideas to rally all the progressive elements to change our mediaeval social system into one which would be the envy of the world.” You can find it in Pirotta’s Fortress Colony.
That’s quite a good analysis, Marku. May I suggest, however, that anti-Western ideology was THE guiding principle for the MLP. The moderate, British Labour-style MLP faction was killed off by the Mintoff breed which placed itself firmly among the various “liberators from colonialism” which emerged after 1945.
Someone will surely reply with the usual comment about Mintoff wanting integration. But that’s the whole point. I mean, integration, for god’s sake. That would have meant the UK henceforth changing its name to the United Kingdom of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, …. and Malta. Sheer lunacy. If he really wanted us to be “British”, as he thundered in his famous speeches from the 1950s, he would have asked for Dependency status, no more, no less. Which would have suited us down to the ground.
If it quacks like Third World Marxism, to paraphrase the saying, then it is Third World Marxism. And that’s exactly what the MLP believed in. Liberation from colonialism, full employment, the welfare state, a self-reliant economy, minimum imports, antagonism towards NATO and the West, a dislike for European-style public criticism of the government, preference for social equality over economic prosperity, and so on and so forth. All wrapped up in Communist social engineering rhetoric.
This led, with very few real changes, to the culmination of it all: Labour’s opposition to EU membership. Which followed every preceding event as naturally as day follows night. It couldn’t have been any other way. And it wasn’t, as some still suggest, an idea hatched up in vacuo by Alfred Sant.
I remember stating, in the days following the elections in March, that the only way for the MLP to redeem itself would be to disband the party, and form another one. Joseph Muscat seems to have misread my comment. He left the party intact, and changed the name. He changed the wrapping but the old mistrust of anything “European” lingers on. Of course you can’t reverse fifty years of ideology overnight. And I don’t expect Muscat to even try. Political convictions aren’t dictated by the party hierarchy. They’re akin to religious beliefs. Something intimate, between you and your god. As the MLP flaps around looking for an identity, it may seek to reinvent itself as Malta’s liberal party. But in the desperate harlotry for votes, it is better to play it safe in Malta. Out go abortion, divorce, gay marriage, and all that Hollando-Scandinavian stuff which gives Tonio Borg nightmares. So we’re back where we started.
Of course the MLP, or LP, or Il-Partit Laburista, will survive and flourish. It only needs a handful of votes to win the election. That has always been the way in Maltese politics, and I expect to be writing very much the same stuff in 2013 or 2018, if I’m still around. I hope Marku will still be here though, on this blog. By then, we’ll have internet chips implanted in our brains.
“increased the people’s dependence on the the party and the increasingly invasive state (there’s conservatism again) through a vast patronage network that provided access to jobs, housing, infrastructural contracts, and household “luxuries” such as colour TVs.”
That’s Socialism in its purest form. Conservatism is today synonymous with individualism and self-reliance and not government intervention, at least when it comes to economic matters. Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan are just two examples of politicains that managed to popularise conservatism in recent years thanks to ideological reforms. It is thanks to these politicians that most Western countries today have accepted the concepts of privitization, liberalization, and non-interventionist economic policies. The Nationalist Party is slowly but surely following the same path.
I wouldn’t call this “progressivism”, at least not in the sense of the political definition of the term.
According to wikipedia:
“In some countries, the word refers to left-wing politics. For instance, in the United States, the term progressive emerged in the late 19th century in reference to a more general response to the vast changes wrought by industrialization”
“In some countries, the word refers to right-wing politics. In Ireland, progressivism refers to conservative liberal free market policies of Progressive Democrats.”
“American progressives tend to support interventionist economics: they advocate income redistribution, and they oppose the growing influence of corporations”
Seems to me like the word is being thrown around by various political factions simply because it’s very cool-sounding and attention-grabbing.
The MLP or whatever, is beginning to seem like some tired whore, way past her prime, desperately searching for another client. A bit of glitter here, a mound of makeup, a plunging neckline, are de rigueur. From afar, an attention grabber, but up close she does not stand up to expectations.
In other words, the MLP may be getting a make over, but underneath it is still the same. It may dress in new flashy clothes and find itself a new name, but the same people are still there.
Dear Daphne
In my opinion, you were not fair at all with regards to the changes that have been proposed by the Labour party’s general conference.
I am pretty sure that you have read all the proposed changes and many of these changes are in fact what Labour needed in order to become a serious alternative to the current government.
It is true that many of the “old faces” are still there, however, it is also true that the “new faces” are being involved quite more than they use to in the past.
Did you not notice the increased involvement of people such as:
Dr George Abela, Louis Grech, the prospective involvement of probably one of the best Economists Profs Scicluna?
Apart from the fact that lately the party is taking quite a positive approach and it has also supported the government in issues where the government was right. (as it should do)
Obviously, there is still more to do, however, if we are to be a bit objective, there has been a positive change in the Labour party.
At long last, it seems that Labour is listening & if they continue on this road they could become the party of the future.
By the way, I consider myself to be a very moderate left winger. I believe in the free market system & strongly believe that the best way to help the poor and those who due to many reasons fall behind is by encouraging initiative instead of promising protectionist policies. (Fully agreement with you Daphne)
[Daphne – What the Labour Party needs is not serious changes but serious people. Sadly, with Joseph Muscat, Anglu Farrugia and Toni Abela at the helm, that’s a bit of a non-starter.]
Let’s put it this way, if Labour is elected next time round and Joseph Muscat leads the country on the advices of people such as Louis Grech, Profs Scicluna, George Abela, Karmenu Vella, it would not be a bad deal at all since as you surely recognize these are all very valid people.
On the other hand, I think that Joseph Muscat was really clever in making his way to the leadership, when there was Alfred Sant he nearly always supported the positions taken by the party, however, now that he is leading the same party, he is ackowledging all the mistakes or bad judgements taken in the past.
With regards to serious politicians, unfortunately, most people think very highly about them here in Malta. In the developed world (US, EU & Canada) it is more likely that people take politicians with a very pinch of salt and that’s how it should be.
Even if it is hard for you to admit it but both political parties have a considerable number of politicians which cannot be described as serious.
We need to be critical of all politicians all the time if possible and make sure that they are accountable to us instead of glorifying them all along.
[Daphne – “On the other hand, I think that Joseph Muscat was really clever in making his way to the leadership, when there was Alfred Sant he nearly always supported the positions taken by the party, however, now that he is leading the same party, he is ackowledging all the mistakes or bad judgements taken in the past.” We have a different moral code. What you see as cleverness, I see as crass opportunism.]
What I mean is that in my view Joseph Muscat full aware of the fact that the majority of the delegates most of the times do not embrace the much needed change to their party, he managed to win their support. Now with the delegates’ support, he will push forward the much needed change and if he manages to this successfully that would be beneficial for all the people, if they offer a better vision. With regards to morality was it moral that the PN immediatley issued a journalist card for JPO when we all know that he was never a journalist? Anyway, happy weekend to you, I hope one day you will be a bit more objective, I think you would be more beneficial to society. (I am not being nasty or sarcastic here, I mean it!)
[Daphne – Anyone can get a press pass if they have a letter of accreditation from a media organisation. The Labour Party knows this, and so does AD (lots of their non-journalists have press passes) though it didn’t stop them making the most of whining. Morality has nothing to do with it. It’s not as though he stripped naked and danced a jig. I think it was an extremely smart move, one which exposed Sant as a coward incapable of handling unexpected and unforeseen situations. This is the point you miss: that a tactic of which you disapprove exposed undesirable weakness of character in somebody who was aiming to be the country’s leader. Not that we needed further proof of his weakness of character, given that his ill-fated government imploded as he exploded, but it’s always good to refresh people’s memory.]
I did not miss any points, in fact I think that Sant should have tackled JPO there and then. However, I disaprove of any dirty tricks and this applies to all political parties becuase I strongly believe that the people should vote on ideas, policies & vision. You insult non voters, labour voters, AD voters & any other voters simply because they do not vote PN because in your extreme & very biased opinion the PN has created so much wealth & prosperity. This means that if you had to have your way,the PN would get 100% of the votes. Obviously you would not admit it but that is the way you think. You simply do not get it, the majority of the people in Malta are not happy with the PN and have been so since 2003, however, unfortunately they had no other choice to date. You simply would not admit the fact that much of the economic progress that was obtained under the PN was created on the irresponsible & simplistic notion of living beyond our means. This is my rational & intelligent view and no insults no hateful comments will convince me otherwise!!!! I always speak my mind, my bias does not stop me from being objective. My main concern is not that my party wins election after election at all costs but that there is continued & sustainable social & economic progress.
[Daphne – “You insult non voters, labour voters, AD voters & any other voters simply because they do not vote PN because in your extreme & very biased opinion the PN has created so much wealth & prosperity.” It’s not an extreme and biased opinion but a matter of recorded fact. If you don’t believe your eyes and ears, check the Central Bank records and official statistics. Whose fault is it that there’s no choice? Mine? The Nationalist Party’s? The government’s? That’s right: it’s the Labour Party’s fault. So direct your insults there, please, which is exactly what I do.]
I did not insult you, I just wanted to point out that you are too biased in your political opinions. I would not dare to insult anyone simply becuase I do not agree with their views, that’s not my kind.
Regarding the wealth I did not say that under successive PN governments there was no wealth created, however, a good amount of that wealth was created on the notion of living beyond our means as a nation and too much money was wasted along the way.
The current Governor of the Central Bank has repeated this many times and all Economists did this before.
With regards to directing my insults on the Labour party, I would rather criticize constructively rather than insulting them and I must say that unlike the PN this time round they seem to want to listen to everyone and they are opening up their doors.Finally it seems that apart from a bit of lipstick they are also attracting very intelligent people to their ranks such as Profs Scicluna, Marlene Mizzi & many others. Now we have it confirmed on this blog that your style is directing insults and sometimes even very personal attacks on the Labour party members and their families!! This style is really admirable and very unifying in fact many confuse your style with that of Barack Obama!!!! It is simply impossible to discuss objectively with you that is my main point and many people know this. Your intollerance & hate for any opposition to the PN knows no limits, honestly how can you manage to keep all this hate inside you? (actually you express it in writing). By the way I know people like you even Labour supporters but that is not the point!!! Why all this anger & hate?
[Daphne – (1) I am not biased. I have political opinions and am not wishy-washy about them. (2) No, the accumulated wealth in this country is a state of fact, not opinion. (3) It is not wealth that is created by living beyond one’s means, but debt. (4) You do not criticise constructively but insult those you do not agree with. Read your comments in my regard. (5) Edward Scicluna and Marlene Mizzi have always supported the Labour Party. They have not had a Damascene conversion. (6) What you view as personal attacks is a statement of facts, par for the course in the free world, not par for the course in mealy-mouthed, fence-sitting Malta. (7) I do not find it difficult to discuss with those who don’t agree with me. I find it difficult to have any kind of discussion with illogical people. I prefer not to engage at all in those circumstances. (8) You confuse hilarity with hatred. The only people who are driven by hate are the key members of the Labour Party – Joseph Muscat excepted – and very many of those who vote Labour, because they are driven to do so by hdura and pika. (9) Tolerance and intolerance are spelt with one ‘l’ and in ‘because’, the ‘a’ always comes before the ‘u’. (10) It is entirely unnecessary to use more than one exclamation mark, unless your text features in the speech bubbles of a comic-book.]
I have gone through all my comments, however, I did not find any attacks or insults in your regard.
I just pointed out to you that the way you write many a times does not promote any unity at all, and this contradicts all the values that you say you believe in.
Sometimes it is hilarity but other times it is not really so and many people know this too well.
Thanks for pointing out the extra “L” that I used in the word intolerance and for explaining how text feature in comic books.
I rest my case & will not add anymore comments.