Loved your analysis.

Here in Malta, the only place where we can explore new ideas is Daphne’s website.

Here the group is allowed to express itself freely, and the different views seem to evolve into a better understanding of the issue in hand. The same subject is explored from various angles, some more serious than others.

For starters, it’s impossible for a tiny community intellectually cut off from the world to develop anything original.

Add to that the Maltese sense of self-importance* and you get a gelified terrine of rehashed everything.

Independence just made it worse. But let’s not get started.

*It goes something like this: L-eqdem tempji fid-dinja – San Pawl – Malta ssalva d-dinja fl-Assedju – Ic-Centru tal-Bahar Nofsani – Malta terga’ ssalva d-dinja fit-Tieni Gwerra (anke jekk tort tal-Barrani) – Malta tikseb il-Helsien – Malta l-aqwa fl-Ewropa – Malta globali.

Gahwra fil-Mediterran, gotbless. Abitata minn nies hawtiela, l-irgiel qalbiena, mibrubin u mibnija saffejn, in-nisa l-ghaxqa ta’ zewghom, ghajnejhom zoroq u hugbejhom folti. Fuq kollox, titbissem xemx hanina li ssajjar il-frott bnin. Gotbless ghal darbtejn.

In Malta, idea creation, definition and approval certainly needs to happen in a group. By reference to the majority that made up the Malta Taghna movement, this prevalent thinking is why ground-breaking new ideas in Malta go nowhere, unless it fits the group values. The one with a “crafty” idea will not discuss it. Therefore the expression: “mutu, mutu qrunu f’butu.” Was the IIP discussed before Malta Taghna? No. It would never have obtained group approval and they knew it.

This is very Italian in nature: the members of a group, all needing to fit in to have an identity, each one with a role that can be referred to, play a containment role in making each one feel important in his sphere of interest/fun-jibe potential. There is the funny guy, the clever one, the elegant one etc. New and different ideas find little genuinely fertile ground.
Everyone is open about everything, the topics are rendered superficial, sports like football are glorified for the euphoric highs and lows created, and one is groomed to stay within the accepted parametres. This is ideal for control of the masses.

In the UK will the group really say what it really thinks? The eccentric is a British invention and essential for new idea development and generation. One doesn’t reveal the full extent of the new idea but goes on to develop it independently. Having an informed different opinion has a value. It adds interest. As long as it is class specific. Over stepping a class is what led to the expression: too clever “by half:” that’s half a class they’re talking about. One enquires around for the different input before final autonomous definition and development of one’s idea. One talks about it if one must once it’s a success. The eccentric operates freely outside the class system.

The US has a history of a plethora of ideas patented. Lots of open talk and free discussion in the development of these. One develops ideas off the back of others. Not all of them are successful, but the creation energy is there. The failure culture is different.

In Japan, they will carefully study new ideas but only develop the one or two out of ten that they are sure will be successful. This is reflective of the social structure too.

In Germany flippant ideas aren’t what take the system forward. The mentality is that the professional are best suited to produce quality ideas and therefore the stress is on the quality of ideas and the quality of the workforce at all levels: The quality of decisions and thinking. The socio-cultural and economic hive of activity is entirely supportive of this fundamental premise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhUFxaauNTE

How can the switchers not have realized that they were releasing a monster with their votes. You are spot on when saying that is why Girgenti was chosen. The fact that he did so says so much of his underhanded way of manipulating those around him.

I agree. Who was the reporter asking that question?

This is part of an interview held with Joseph Muscat on Bondiplus and aired six years ago on the 31st March 2008.

Listen to Muscat’s parting shot.

Look at Lou Bondi’s body language. His discomfort.

At the time I felt that there was a done deal somewhere and time proved that I had probably read the situation correctly.

Moreover, Joseph’s cynical remark is so typical of the man particularly when he knows something that you don’t.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5ktH17A5d0

Not only they wagged their tails, some of the questions put to Godfrey Farrugia seemed planted and were intended to humiliate him.

And like dogs, they lapped up the cookies and wagged their tails.

Shameful!

Let’s face it, there is no one of the calibre of Lou Bondi out there.

The fact that he lacks principles and is so easily bought does nothing to diminish his journalistic capabilities.

This is something Joe Muscat realised very early in the day and in truth it has cost him next to nothing.