“The Maltese don’t accept that anyone can be better than them – if they are (better than them), then they must have cheated.” – anthropologist David Zammit
There’s an interesting articled in Times of Malta today about the intense competitiveness between people in Malta. I’ve pulled out what I believe to be the most important bit, and used it as the title of this blog-post, because it is a succinct explanation of voter/social behaviour.
The Labour Party under Joseph Muscat has understood that, in general, there is a tension in Maltese people between the desire to see themselves raised up to the level of others and to see those others dragged down to theirs, or preferably below theirs.
In its previous incarnation, the Labour Party understood only the desire to drag others down but not the concomitant desire to have what those others have (as distinct from being what those others are).
The Nationalist Party, from Eddie Fenech Adami onwards, understood and promoted only the need of people to raise themselves up. It did this successfully, and created a society of complete social mobility in a single generation, with the sons and daughters of illiterate labourers graduating from university and working in professions – some of them in other EU member states – with lives their parents would not have imagined possible.
This worked well for a long time, but what the Nationalist Party failed to understand (well, I suspect it does, but won’t deal with the situation in the amoral manner that Labour deals with it) is that once people have ceased to be distracted by dedication to ploughing their own furrow so as to improve their own circumstances, they will raise their head, look about them, and start making comparisons while getting angry and jealous.
This is when they start wanting to drag others down. And that begins to take priority over maintaining or improving their own situation. Perversely, dragging others down is sometimes confused in the mind with improving one’s own situation: i.e. “If what I perceive to be X’s privileges are taken away from him/her, my own life will be better.”
David Zammit’s observation is the governing principle of voter behaviour in Malta, and should not be ignored. I don’t think either of the main parties ignores it – Labour certainly does not, as it built an entire electoral campaign on this basis and won massively – but the Nationalist Party has trouble dealing with it, though it is learning.
29 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140506/local/Why-do-we-love-to-taunt-adversaries-.517820
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140506/opinion/Soldiers-of-fortune.517846
Sums everything up nicely.
“According to anthropologist David Zammit, the rivalry that pervades Maltese society is prompted by the fact that our society is a relatively homogeneous one where differences between us are few.”
I strongly disagree with this statement. There is a massive rift between those with a European culture (the minority) and those with a Middle Eastern/Arabic way of thinking (the vast majority).
The analysis portrayed by Zammit only refers to the latter group.
The problem of the Nationalist Party is that its voter base includes members of both groups, while the Labour Party’s voter base is almost entirely composed of the Middle Eastern mindset.
“… the Nationalist Party has trouble dealing with it, though it is learning.”
It has to learn quickly.
There was one notable importer who understood that notion to perfection under Mintoff: in cahoots with Patrick Holland, “Khomeni of the trade department.”
To the extent that -as witnessed by a former employee who felt the weight of guilt – he was given a trade stamp to stamp licences at will, within the comfort of his own offices.
He ensured that nothing got in his way, and bounced on from project to project no matter the subsequent government.
Another short, stout, envious and amoral “successful Maltese businessman.”
Ivan Fenech was wondering what importers had to do to get a licence:
Importers were cajoled to pay 5 to 10% of the value of each and every container that they were granted a licence for to Patrick Holland and Khomeni. Many did this. Some didn’t.
If the notable businessman mentioned above set his sights on x importer’s business, that importer was denied a licence for any RANGE of product that it could possibly near description to.
If the importer x decided that that was not a moral and ethical manner of doing business and did not play ball, like a fool he dispatched his men on a daily basis (over the many years) to the trade department in the hope that a licence would be granted.
If for some odd reason, a licence slipped through (a miracle) for say 10 containers of produce, then there would be a notice on radio and television that x importer had smuggled them in and the Armed Forces were sent to collect each and every item that made up those 10 containers from the retail shops they would have immediately been dispatched to (such was the demand and lack for the product).
Sometimes products with a short expiry date would also experience a miracle licence situation, only to be impounded indefinitely by the government upon arrival, leaving importer x to face the costs involved.
Throughout all this time, with close to zero income from import trade, but with some participation “granted” in the distribution of bulk-buying items and other local produce imposed upon them, importers kept on all their staff because it would have been impossible in that destructive political environment for the staff and their families to find decent jobs elsewhere, and also because they were not permitted to make them redundant unless permission was granted by the General Workers Union, which obviously never came. This had a cost impact: financial and social.
The importers had to be innovative on a daily basis and resilient, because no one knew what Mintoff, the GWU and his malicious crowd would dream of next, or where the next attack was going to come from or what form it was going to take.
Muscat, by his own admission, was taught by Mintoff.
Since 2002 (that I can vouch for), Muscat went after employees of such people for further insight.
“Khomeni of the trade department.”
Was his name Michael Camilleri by any chance? Just curious.
No.
Just look at our Prime Minister and try to convince me that cheaters never prosper.
I’ve already told my daughter to apply for a job as a One TV reporter.
How do you deduce that the Nationalist Party is learning?
[Daphne – The way some of its people are now speaking with a view to getting a message across. ]
Well said. My father would always tell us “taghmluiex ma minhu aghar minnek,, imma ma minnhu ahjar minnek, ghax minghandu titghallem.
An anthropologist has finally spoken! Now where are the social workers, philosophers, sociologists…..?
My feelings exactly.
Thank you and God bless you, Mr Zammit.
This is a brilliant piece.
It completely denudes the ‘Malta taghna ilkoll’ myth as it was perceived to be.
Thirty years ago we were screwed by a bunch of illiterate troglodytes and this time round we are being screwed by troglodytes with a university degree who have separated themselves from their lineage but who have dismally failed to take that leap of civilisation.
This comment was posted beneath an article on Times of Malta titled ‘PM orders enquiry into tankers escape’. It seems to prove the point. The tendency to drift to the bottom remains strong among some.
This was not a matter of security but of good riddance. Leave it to go, it is probably not our problem, and none of the parties probably are Maltese. And it was going to cost us lots of money tying limited resources to a case which will probably take long. I don’t think that such things happen by coincidence. PN must try to learn be a little practical rather than legalistic. Sometimes it helps.
He’s one to talk. David Zammit is not an anthropologist, but an expert in legal anthropology. In other words, he was a lawyer to start with. A member of the inner circle.
[Daphne – I’m not sure about that. Yes, he first graduated as a lawyer, but I clearly recall him taking anthropology classes with me around 93/94-94/95.]
I took Horatio Vella’s classes. It doesn’t make me a classicist.
My point is that nine times out of ten, those Maltese who are better off than you are likely to have cheated.
Malta is one of the least meritocratic places on earth, social mobility is miles behind other European countries, and cronyism is rife. That counts for academia too. Especially academia.
[Daphne – I think something has been lost in translation. Did David Zammit say ‘better off than’ or ‘better than’? He’s quoted as saying ‘better than’, which is how I read it, but then ‘ahjar minnek’ means both ‘better off than’ and ‘better than’ – the usual problems with one-size-fits-all Maltese vocabulary. The thing is that this is not only about money, and that’s what I was talking about here because I assumed it’s what Zammit meant. The average Maltese person doesn’t even acknowledge that there are such things as superior intelligence, gifts, talents or even physical appearance (hence the number of squat and homely ladies of 5′ brazenly saying they are models). Acquiring university degrees = intelligence, therefore anybody can be intelligent if they study hard enough. Those who are able to paint well cheated to get a scholarship to a school which taught them how, or had a patron saint who helped them get it, or had parents who cheated and got them the money to pay for it, and those who can’t paint are just unlucky because they didn’t get to cheat or have a helping hand – natural ability doesn’t come into it. And so on.]
I meant “better off” as in currently in a better position. More successful, if you like.
from https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/davidzammit
David E. Zammit graduated with the degree of LL.D. from the University of Malta in 1993 and proceeded to read for the degree of Ph.D. in Legal Anthropology at the University of Durham (UK), graduating in 1998. He then completed a diploma course in tort law at the University of Rome “La Sapienza”. He is a full-time Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Laws and Executive Editor of the Mediterranean Journal of Human Rights. He has conducted anthropological field research in Maltese courts and legal offices and contributed various papers to scholarly conferences dealing with the interface between law and culture. His research interests span legal anthropology, tort law and the law of evidence.
I could not agree more. It also gives people self-justification for lying and cheating (for example having someone else write your doctorate or, as in the case of Bianco the “professor”, using a title to which he is not entitled).
PL repeatedly defends the indefensible by (falsely) claiming that the PN did the same. This is how they defend themselves when they are criticised about the countless obscene appointments.
For the PL the issue is not what is right or wrong; the issue is what the chosen ones (dawk tal-qalba ) can gain. Their logic is, if the PN did it (as they so believe), then the PL should do it too.
And make no mistake, it will get worse after this month’s elections.
I don’t think it is at all about competitiveness, you should try to let the British psyche to sink in to understand competitiveness, it’s the be all and end all for far too many people. The Maltese don’t even register on the same scale.
The Maltese issue is one of envy.
Taken to an extreme, some people will deliberately destroy an object they have no use for (as long as it is not worth being sold on) before disposing of it, to ensure that no one else can make good use of it. It’s surprisingly common amongst the cabbage class.
It is called ‘lanzit’. For once there is a Maltese word that fits much better than any English word to describe this situation.
So true, I have observed this in my work place and it is the environment in which they thrive.
They have no knowledge about how to be happy with what they have and to live their own lives.
They are more interested in having what others have and if they feel that in some way they haven’t managed or still feel inferior, they then work to bring down those they envy. The result is that they are still sad and unhappy people as they are never satisfied.
They first look for the obvious targets usually joining forces with others to achieve their goals. When they get tired or think they are ready, they then turn on each other.
The thing that one must consider is that at the moment the targets are the Nationalists, but very soon (I believe it has already started) they turn on their own.
This is where the Labour Party will fail with its current attitude. In fact I truly believe the fault line is already there, and the fissures are showing everywhere. They are already getting envious of each other, so it is not too far off when they will turn their hatred onto each other.
A long time ago a friend of mine told me that the Maltese are like crabs.I took great offence with his remark and asked him to explain.He told me to look at crab cages and notice that they are open at the top.So? I answered.Well when one tries to go to the top the others pull him down so hardly any ever escape.SO TRUE with us Maltese too.
Good to see the future king of England flying economy.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2621361/Prince-William-flies-economy-class-journey-home-American-wedding.html
As Guido DeMarco once said, “Dan hu pajjiz mibni fuq l-ghira”
I don’t think it is an observation only valid for the Maltese.
Maybe it is more valid for small, confined communities but I am sure it is applicable to all human beings. After all it is a reflection of a biblical episode of the murder of Abel by Cain.
In my opinion, this post should be flagged up again.