Borg in-Nadur has Angelik; Labour has Joseph Muscat
Ahna se nissiehbu mas-setta ta' Joseph Muscat.
This Joseph Muscat business is dividing the country, but not in the way that he and his followers imagine. It’s splitting us up between those who are credulous and those who are not. While some fall over themselves to find fresh adjectives to describe his many breathtaking qualities and his potential for delivering us out of Egypt, others sit back and privately think how there’s one born every minute.
Of course, the cynical people who wonder about this medieval susceptibility to snake-oil merchants are not all sitting around throwing bottles from the back, like me. Some of them are sniffing around Muscat as we speak, donating large sums of money to his political machine, inviting him to dinner, and doing the Maltese version of kowtowing.
Having seen the writing on the wall – that he will be prime minister in four years’ time – they are laying the way for a slew of contracts, commissions and networks. That’s the way it goes, everywhere in the world and at every point throughout history. But it does mean that Muscat now has the wherewithal to pay his expensive new advisers and the man he has kicked downstairs to Super One.
Muscat was on the radio the other day, doing some more of that emoting he likes, trying to reassure traditional Labour voters that the party is not about to be taken over by defunct newspaper columnists who have spent the past 13 years or so running Labour down while chairing a government authority.
It appears that these traditional Labour voters are somewhat dismayed to find that the newspaper columnist in question has not switched from attacking the opposition to attacking the government because of any great moral or ideological principle, but for the age-old bag of silver and more than a little resentment at not having been given the top-level posts she demanded from the government and its agencies.
Those demands for various jobs were made only a few short months ago, and not two years ago. Had Muscat’s new adviser got what she asked for just before the summer, she would now be working for the government in a position of trust, rather than being paid by the opposition to undermine the government.
But let’s return to Muscat and his heartrending cries on radio. “I cried with you when we lost the elections. My job now is to make sure we cry no more,” he told his audience.
The very same chatterers who bored me silly in 1996 with their hailing of Alfred Sant as the new superhero in a baggy suit are now trying my patience by falling over at the feet of their newest idol, so they will no doubt have listened to that interview with an uncritical ear. They are too taken up with their oohs and aahs about the man’s ability to walk on water and to persuade ‘il-puliti’ to vote Labour. In the excitement of the moment, all good sense has fled. It’s a bit like the Harrods sale, when you find yourself buying a pair of green snakeskin boots with yellow heels that are a size too small, caught up as you are in the spirit of the occasion.
The funny thing is these chatterers pretend to have forgotten they said the very same things in 1996 that they are saying now, perhaps because it’s too damned embarrassing to remember the praise they heaped on Sant’s head (such very poor judgement).
This means that Muscat and his advisers are able to cultivate the myth that he has done the impossible in attracting hordes of ‘puliti’ who never voted Labour before. They conveniently ignore the fact that Alfred Sant has done it already: he was elected in 1996 with the votes of thousands of ‘puliti’ and ‘tal-pepe’ who haemorrhaged away from the Nationalist Party because of the same mixture of boredom, frustration, resentment, bitterness and infatuation with a new Labour leader that we are seeing now.
What do Muscat and the headless chickens clucking around him think – that Sant’s resounding victory in 1996 was the result of a temporary surge in votes in Bormla?
Well, Muscat had better listen to what I have to say next. I remember ‘il-puliti’ saying in 1996 (my former neighbours in Sliema, my acquaintances, my colleagues, my associates, people at cocktail parties) exactly the same things they are saying now, against the government of the day and in praise of the new Labour leader Alfred Sant.
Joseph Muscat might wish to know from me that many of them were the very same individuals he is so proud to have ‘converted’ today. I’m sorry to have to disappoint you, sir, but significant numbers of your so-called conquests voted Labour in 1996, for much the same reason they tell you they will vote Labour now.
When you’re a ‘puliti’ insider, like me, you tend to know people’s back-story. But when you’re a ‘puliti’ outsider, like Joseph Muscat, you have to take their word for it.
Because I am far from smitten, and at this stage in the game am unlikely to be smitten ever, no matter how many cheques for €40,000 Muscat waves at me that come from donations by corporation bosses who hope for favours after 2013, my ear tends to be more critical when listening to him being ‘interviewed’ by his own radio station employees. And so I wish to know exactly which electoral loss he cried over – was it only last year’s? Or did he also cry at the electoral defeat of 2003? This is an important question, regardless of what the nattering chatterers think, keen as they are to believe in the new messiah, standing about him with their mouths hanging open like that key figure in the Christmas crib.
Despite efforts to make Muscat appear as though he has been born again, it hasn’t escaped my notice that 2003 was only six years ago. I can still remember in great detail the events of that year, what I wore and what I did. It seems like yesterday, as it would to anyone over 30, the age at which time begins to telescope. I view Muscat as an arch-opportunist, who is capable of recognising the very same character trait in other individuals and using it, and them, to his advantage.
His opportunism was clear in that radio interview. “My job now is to make sure we cry no more,” he said. He needs to be told that his job is not to make sure that Labour is elected so that Labour supporters can have a go at the wheel and keep their tissues in the box. He tells us repeatedly how progressive he is and how he wants a new way of doing politics, and now here he is, saying that his job is purely the partisan one of ensuring that his tribe seizes hold of the controls.
No. His job is to devise a programme of concrete proposals as to how he will run Malta better than the Nationalist government is doing now. You don’t get elected to have power for its own sake and for the pleasure of lording it over others. You get elected to have the power to change the country for the better. There’s a difference.
It’s the main difference between the character and motivation of Fenech Adami and Gonzi on the one hand, and of Joseph Muscat on the other. Muscat’s naked personal ambition is actually what I find most repulsive about him – that, and the way he changes his mind about major, life-changing issues depending on what is more politically expedient, which is part and parcel of the same thing.
The more I listen to Joseph Muscat and read what is written about him by his gushing admirers, the less I wonder at the credulousness of those who congregate at Borg in-Nadur to watch a fat and lazy man with a low IQ and a bossy, controlling wife with a lot of spare salt spit thorns and do battle with demons.
When we need to believe, then we’ll believe anything. What is curious, of course, is the absolute lack of logic with which Muscat’s Damascene converts segue from ‘I am disillusioned with this government’ to ‘therefore I am infatuated with the opposition.’ It doesn’t follow logically, but try telling them that.
No matter how disillusioned I may become with this government – and believe me, there are long moments – it doesn’t follow that I will segue into admiration for the opposition. That is because my mind only functions logically, and not for want of trying to be otherwise because I have noticed that life is easier when, to deploy Peter Mandelson’s description of David Cameron, you think like a flibbertigibbet. “I hate the government therefore I love the opposition” – what a non sequitur.
But then I suppose it is too much to expect clear thinking from individuals who pick up no warning signals from a new party leader who, in the course of a single radio interview, repeatedly resorts to using Dom Mintoff’s expression ‘soldiers of steel’ and also Eddie Fenech Adami’s ‘right will prevail.’ Has he no maxims of his own? Is he trying to bat for both teams and be all things to all men?
To those of us who can think and who can remember the context of absolute crisis in which Fenech Adami used that rallying-cry, Muscat is truly laughable – the Angelik ta’ Borg in-Nadur of current political life. He spits nails into handkerchiefs and the weak of spirit applaud. Taking the long view, it is truly amusing.
This article is published in The Malta Independent today.
17 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
As usual, you describe the situation in your inimitable way. But we shouldn’t be surprised at how Joseph Muscat is acting. Politically, isn’t he the son and heir of Dr Alfred Sant? He spent the first few months after his election as Leader of the Opposition fighting the impression that he wasn’t his own man. Journalists kept asking him if he was going to follow in the footsteps of Sant and if the latter was going to be his mentor. Maybe he has succeeded in cancelling this perception or maybe we tend to forget as time passes.
Qualities of leadership and intelligence are not acquired. Either you have them or you don’t. If you have them, you can certainly improve on them through maturity and by experience, but if you don’t have them, there is nothing you can do except perhaps build an image.
Irid jinhabb m’Alla u max-xitan; u nahseb li jahseb li hu ta’ l-ewwel imma fil-verita hu tat-tieni.
This blog reveals the IQ of some Nationalists. i am sure a dog can score better IQ than you Daphne…
[Daphne – No doubt.]
Karl, your comment on IQ is interesting, however it requires some enlightenment. If all the population of Malta were to take an IQ test, and this was then averaged, it is a statistical fact that one half of all the population would be ‘below average’ and one half would be ‘above average’.
After observing the voting characteristics here in Malta for the last 20 years, I have concluded that the vast majority of the ‘below average’ group vote red while the vast majority of the ‘above average’ group vote blue. From time to time a cunning minority of the ‘above average’ group will sniff a wind-change and jump ship. Witness 1996 and the ensuing disaster.
I fear that a similar situation could occur, with the same result. As Yogi Berra once said “This is deja vu all over again”. Your inane comment certainly indicates where you stand on the IQ scale and is further proof of my theory.
You are probably right about Joseph Muscat, particularly as his credibility is dented by his anti-EU past. However politics is relative, whether you view it as choosing the best party or whether you choose between the least of two evils. The Nationalist Party is looking tired and needs a good shake.
I think that all it needs to do is to look back at what it did post 1987 and come up with fresh ideas. At that time it was able to create wealth and reduce taxes. Out of a dilapidated ex-torpedo depot it created a yacht marina and an opportunity for users, embellishing the area for the rest of us, and generating recurring income in the process. The commercial ship register was created again generating income out of practically nothing.
There can be no doubt that the state owns a lot of under-performing resources which can be tapped to create fresh economic activity, generate revenue and reduce taxes. Similarly the stock exchange was created. The only similar initiative in the last few years was Smart City which is still in the making and which is now looking like it may slow down. I’m sure the PN can do better.
You have described the situation to a “T”. Unfortunately, this is Malta, where political patronage still holds sway. No matter how disillusioned we may be with the present state of the nation, this is where we separate the men from the boys. The boys change horses at the slightest whim. The men do not. But there is something to be said about loyalty. The Nationalists have a damning habit of not trusting their own, but of being infatuated and enamoured by Johnny-come-latelys with fancy titles who magically come out of the woodwork in the aftermath of a PN victory and who have enough networking ability to worm themselves into positions of trust. Their allegiance is public but often found to be shallow. Many of these will quietly be doing their deals with the other side if the winds blow that way.
People confuse party affinities and political convictions with political paybacks. This is certainly not so for the foot soldiers in the PN, who, despite being sometimes personally disappointed, and yet, victimised by their own people simply because they are foot soldiers, still doggedly soldier on. You will find these people working hard to promote the party and the government that they believe in. And yet they are kicked in the teeth all the time, mostly by the aforesaid johnnies who have no sense of history or who do not bother with it.
As an aside, these johnnies are busy lining their pockets and making sure that they will not go hungry come Josephtime. I saw the beginnings of a rebellion by the same foot soldiers during the MEP elections, when a considerable number kept away from their usual positions. I know most of these people. They would more likely ask for a politically motivated favour than kill their own children, but they are fed up being treated as “dubbien”. The wouldbe MPs and ministers suck up to them before elections, then make it a point to not even give them the time of day for five years.
If the PN loses its soldiers, it will have lost its soul, and therefore its raison d’etre. Which is a pity. Maybe the PN really needs to lose the election and see the country suffer under one who is shallower than most but who will be PM by default. This time there is no emotional issue to bind people, as there was in 1987. It’s going to be very hard to appeal to people’s loyalty as a party. Truly, we have reached a nadir.
I will find it very hard to forgive the PN if it gives the country to the MLP on a plate. It’s time the rank and file claimed back the party. But who will lead them?
Vince Farrugia, maybe?
I don’t care if it’s the devil himself. But you saw, as well as I did, that the PN lacks leaders. Gonzi alone can’t do it again.
Joe Muscat is a non-starter. His political career so far has been characterised by shining, emotionally pitched opportunism and the undeniable self-rewarding ability to jump on the right booty-laden bandwagon.
The real problem is that when, by default, in four years time he is Malta’s prime minister, his “political” activity so far (and probably in the coming four years) will mean that over and above his intrinsic inadequacy, we will have a paralysed prime minster and consequently a paralysed nation.
Maltese politics and the Labour Party especially seems to be cursed with the bizarre unwritten rule that a departing leader gets to choose his successor. Alfred Sant is to blame for pushing Joseph Muscat to the forefront. Not for the first time, though fortunately for the last time, his political acumen was found wanting.
In no other European country would a buffoonish 30-something MEP without any experience at all in his own parliament be parachuted in as leader of the opposition. The fact that there is a smaller pool of political manpower in Malta should work against such an outcome. What on earth was this genius doing in Brussels in the first place if national politics needed him so desperately?
When the time comes for Dr. Simon Busuttil to dedicate himself more to the running of the floundering PN, would you still be writing about the “buffoonish 30-something MEP without any experience at all in his own parliament be parachuted in as leader …”?
[Daphne – You can’t compare the two. The only thing they have in common is their age and MEP background. Busuttil is extremely astute, which is not the same as cunning and manipulative, and he sticks to his political principles. I can’t for a moment imagine him swinging between stances on EU membership, for example.]
Well Simon Busuttil doesn’t strike me as buffoonish at all. I am not that keen on his politics but he seems pretty clued up to me. But yes, I would find it equally bizarre if he was parachuted in as leader of the Nationalist Party. It is normal practice in most liberal democracies that I know of for the leader of the opposition to be elected to parliament by a popular vote.
At least Simon Busuttil is in Brussels out of a genuine passion for the European Union. The rest of them appear to be there just because it pays better than being an MP in Malta and it affords them “certu lifestyle”. Joseph Muscat can hardly have been that passionate about the EU because he voted against joining it. Clearly becoming an MEP was a “certu lifestyle” choice for him.
Daphne, I read in your blog that you are predicting that this little grinning garden gnome will be the next PM of Malta. The logic behind your reasoning is difficult to refute. However, I shudder to think that an obviously opportunistic little twerp could be representing this fair land on the world stage. Malta has enough difficulty punching above its weight in the international arena. A lightweight is the last thing we need. He would be a national embarrassment and an international disaster, as were his Labour predecessors. If you will allow me a prediction–this little man will trip himself up far before the next general election, a fervent hope for the sake of my Maltese grandchildren.
“Muscat is truly laughable – the Angelik ta’ Borg in-Nadur of current political life.”
You hit the nail on the head with that one.
Boredom can be one reason why the majority will vote PL in three years time (or less? – Sliema’s MP may surprise us).
The environment/MEPA is another reason – scores of children suffer from asthma and allergies nowadays, and many are missing school; and in most cases the not so clean urban environment (building sites everywhere, cars, etc) is causing all this. The PN government has dragged its feet on this one.
Now that 99% are sure that PL will be in government come next elections, I hope that the PM will take the bull by the horns where it’s needed: public transport, hunting, abuse of welfare system etc … and make the much needed changes.
I’d rather have (my) PN lose the next election with a landslide because it did the right thing (and so many were ‘hurt’) than lose by a few votes because it tried not to ‘hurt’ voters.
“Now that 99% are sure that PL [surely ‘MLP’, Baxxter] will be in government come next elections, I hope that the PM will take the bull by the horns where it’s needed: public transport, hunting, abuse of welfare system etc … and make the much needed changes.”
But he won’t. That’s the problem. Most of the problems you attribute to the PN, or to bad governance, are the result of our 1300 inhabitants per square kilometre. We have the highest population density in the whole stinking world, and short of running a eugenics (oh balls, I’ve done it now) programme, there’s nothing that any government can do about it. Period. Full stop. Point barre. Finis. Ze End.
@ Harry Purdie
You wrote: “Malta has enough difficulty punching above its weight in the international arena. A lightweight is the last thing we need”.
Did you see Lawrence Gonzi’s picture standing between Michelle and Barak Obama by any chance?
[Daphne – I’ve heard about men thinking with their genitals (and here’s one example, clearly), but doing politics with their height? I don’t think so. Where would that have got Napoleon?]