I’ve long thought of writing a book on Maltese historical terrorism, or how the Mintoffians and Fascists stole our real history. But I don’t see Agenda Bookshops putting it on their Melitensia front shelf.

OK, Baxxter. Thanks for your extensive clarification. We were actually referring to the same geo-political philosophy. France/Italy/Spain all have part of their borders along the Mediterranean shores.

By Continental I mean Italian/French/Spanish. Their politics is a constant argument between different historical viewpoints. That is why they have the concept of Left and Right so deeply ingrained, when it does not exist elsewhere in Europe (including Germany). In each of the first two cases, the Republic was a creation of the Left, so the Left alone holds the moral high ground. The Left also claims to have saved the country from Nazi-Fascism. In Spain, the ideological divide of the Civil War was merely papered over when Franco died, but it’s still there.

In each of these countries, you will see a constant reference to history in political discourse. Because politics there is very ideological. None of the Nordic simple good management. Or the British tit-for-tat of parties who know they’re really on the same side.

If the PN is to fight back, it must start by writing the history books. But it won’t do it, because its people are mere village politicians with no grand vision and no awareness of the weight of history. Besides they tapped onto the “imjassrin” narrative to justify Independence, so they’re really on the same side as the Mintoffians on this one.

I am a monarchist, out and proud. Republicanism is the greatest scourge in European history, and the biggest lie of the last two hundred years. It took me a lifetime to reach that conclusion. But when I realised that we’d all be much happier if we realised we are NOT equal, I knew that the real enemy of mankind is the Left.

(Another) nice one Baxxter. I like the short, sharp analysis/comparison. It is certainly a cultural battle and the one you suggest is (unfortunately) the easiest to follow (and swallow).

There is of course the other, ‘more scholarly and erudite version, with its own publications and narrative’ but (again unfortunately) this is not a country renowned for its reading and cultural habits.

One question: why do say Maltese politics is very Continental. More Mediterranean perhaps?

The tribalism is certainly there. There’s one crucial difference though. Both sides have their own version of history in Ulster, with their own scholarship, erudition, publications and narrative. In Malta, there’s just one version of history – Labour’s, which goes something like this:

1. Malta The Colony: For millennia, Malta suffers under the yoke of the “barrani” (that’s “foreigner”, with a capital F, and with a pejorative slant to it. It’s an Arabic thing. You wouldn’t understand.)

2. Mintoff: The hero who fights to free his people.

3. Freedom: Malta prospers.

It’s a cultural battle, not a political contest. In this sense, Maltese politics is very Continental.

The tribalism is certainly there. There’s one crucial difference though. Both sides have their own version of history in Ulster, with their own scholarship, erudition, publications and narrative. In Malta, there’s just one version of history – Labour’s, which goes something like this:

1. Malta The Colony: For millennia, Malta suffers under the yoke of the “barrani” (that’s “foreigner”, with a capital F, and with a pejorative slant to it. It’s an Arabic thing. You wouldn’t understand.)

2. Mintoff: The hero who fights to free his people.

3. Freedom: Malta prospers.

It’s a cultural battle, not a political contest. In this sense, Maltese politics is very Continental.