A progressive, liberal government for hunters and trappers
Times of Malta reports today:
The European Commission is closely following the Government’s relaxation of autumn hunting rules, but has not indicated any change in its position on finch trapping.
A Commission spokesman said it is following reports that the Government, supported by the hunters’ lobby is considering applying for a derogation for trapping.
The way ahead for the Nationalist Party should be clear: the truly progressive and liberal party as distinct from this bunch of pseuds, fakes, ultra-conservatives and inward-looking troglodytes.
People like Kenneth Zammit Tabona and Astrid Vella are attracted by the Labour Party not because it is liberal but precisely because it is conservative in the worst of all possible ways. If you were to analyse the arguments made by people such as they, you will understand that they are not so much about conservation as about conservatism and backward-looking, misplaced nostaglia. They are also attracted to Labour because it is among those they perceive to be their social inferiors (“maaa, she’s really sweet – a simple village type of woman”) that they feel able to assert what they think of as their God-given social authority, hence preserving the ‘natural order of things’.
This is the time for the Nationalist Party to get off the hunting and trapping bandwagon and take a clear stand AGAINST. Over the next year or so, it needs to think long and hard about how to distinguish itself on matters of policy and attitude, from the Labour Party, and this is a good place to start.
The Labour Party’s progressive liberalism has been revealed as fraudulent already: it is the party of builders and bird-shooters, of gay men but not of gay women (look at their campaign collateral and their appointments), overtly EU hostile, not particularly strong on which boundaries can be crossed, and not that crazy about having human rights provisions interfere with what it wants to do.
The way ahead for the Nationalist Party has not been so obvious in years. It should take it.
9 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Kenneth Zammit Tabona is so much detached from reality at this point that all his Facebook posts are about ancestry, the British Royal family, and so forth.
He recently wrote that OMG, he will never ride on an Arriva bus, given the risk! As if HRH will ever mix with the commoners and ride on a bus.
If he was a popular British personality he would be thrown in the media circus as an object of ridicule. But this is Malta and we need to demonstrate fake niceties.
Let’s just go for a referendum and settle this once and for all.
You are making a very good point here, and one that I thoroughly believe in.
There is a veritable army of intelligent, well-educated, level-headed, industrious, unpretentious middle-class voters out there, the ones without the political connections and with no claims to underhanded favours (because they are perfectly capable of making it under their own steam).
I am 100% with you, Daphne. Times are changing. Hunters will forever become a minority and a part of a minority. Let us not forget that hunters are persons armed with a gun and that is not a right, but a concession.
The Nationalist Party, is treading so cautiously that it is giving the impression that it is afraid. It seems that it is copying Muscat’s strategy, when in opposition he did not pronounce his party’s opinion and intentions, in order to accommodate everyone.
This was a strategy however solely for accumulating votes. Such strategy of not taking a position was criticised, rightly so, by the government of that time.
That a political party takes a position is a MUST.
Eddie Fenech Adami was great in this respect. Gonzi’s economic and international successes came because he led the way there. He was never afraid of taking a position, even in the case of Libya.
If he became unpopular, it was more due to back-stabbings rather than because of taking wrong turnings.
With all the farcical moves going on now by government appointees, gaffes by ministers, disgraceful comments by major Labour exponents, fanning racism, power abuse by the Police Commissioner and more, all have the consent of the Prime Minister.
In some cases he defended the gaffes and abuses, and in the rest he remained silent, signalling his consent or approval.
The PN has till now been silent in the face of moves, even those that relate to a situation indicating more abuse of power. What is the reason behind this silence? Is it part of a strategy? I hope so.
Is it because of being afraid of being unpopular in certain issues? If this is the case, it would mean the ruin of the party.
I would be happier to support a party portraying strong principles and able to leadthe way in support of those principles, and lose the election, rather than go to a party, which accommodates and promises everything to everyone, even opposing views, without any idea where best to go, which has double meanings to every word and promise uttered and which its sole aim is to be in power.
If the PN were to follow Labour in this respect, then we, citizens, would have nothing to choose between.
If it is true that SILENCE MEANS CONSENT, is it the case with the PN as well?
I definitely concur with your opinion.
We have Birdlife Malta.
How about referring to the Hunters’ Federation as Birddeath Malta?
The majority of hunters will vote PL anyway, so there’s nothing to lose and much to gain in this.
And let’s add illegal boathouses to the list of issues to take a stand on.