Author: Jacques René Zammit

It began with a bang. As the contestants unveiled their mutual electoral colours we could tell from the get go that this would be a campaign heavily dependent on the marketing. Malta Taghna Lkoll and Futur fis-Sod relied heavily on not being one colour, on not being monotone. Here was the visual realisation of what the parties had already attempted 5 years back – being something for everybody. The PN’s MSN clone segued from Blue to Green to Yellow to Red with ease while Labour’s naïf collage spoke of “everybody” – or rather “us” a distinction that would later bear on the message.

The fanfare and explosion of colours was blinding and the inspiration from across the Atlantic could be seen from the start. Our political leaders will continue to be Obamafied until a new source of inspiration comes along. The mychoice.pn site was stuck in a mental masturbation for anything Obama-ish with the banners and the ribbons and retro fonts unabashedly cloned from the Democrat intitiatives. Labour was not to be outdone in that department. More heavily funded this time round, Muscat’s party did it’s utmost to get the feel of the “Change” wave that Obama had created the first time round. The videos and the “Taghna Lkoll” mantra seemed to do the trick as well as those very impersonal and trumped up photos with people holding little placards as though we all go through life holding pieces of cardboard in our hand.

The main parties steamrollered over personal data protection rights. Nothing is new there. The PL and PN operate under the assumption that the world needs them to exist and that the rules are only there in case things go out of hand but otherwise they are swept under the carpet during a campaign. Incidentally yes it is PLPN – the Labour party might have spent the larger part of the last 25 years in power but it never ever challenges the status quo with regards to the rules of the game. Labour does not seek change from the PLPN system, it simply seeks more frequent alternation within the PLPN system. It’s not an obsession of mine, it’s the sad truth.

The campaigns are best characterised as a bombardment of half formed lies (it’s like a half-truth but with less substance) that land sporadically and indiscriminately on the acolytes and the unconvinced alike. They’ll tell you that their party organised your flight home to vote – giving you the impression that you owe the PN or PL your life. They won’t tell you that this is taxpayers’ money being used to satisfy their control freak mechanisms and that all the while the data of the couple of thousand using the flight is controlled by both parties in full and blatant violation of data protection laws.

You will receive an Amazon-forestful of propaganda in your letterbox from the two parties who claim to have put the environment at the heart of their policies. As Caroline Muscat documented well enough in “A threat to electoral integrity” it is blatantly obvious that both parties operate with a much higher budget than would be allowed by law. I have to highlight that because the extent of the importance of this statement rarely hits home. The PL and the PN operate ILLEGALLY every election. They overspend in blatant disregard to the rules of the game. They will tell you that it is because the rules are outdated – and that somehow gives them a god-given right to ride roughshod over the rules of the land. Would AD be able to state that the rules of representation are outdated? Tough chance.

The hype about manifestos (or electoral programmes if you’re into this latest technical distinction) came and went as stealthily as ever. From the early rumblings when Konrad Mizzi was still a real person and not a figment of our imagination we thought that the main highlights of the manifestos would be discussed in depth and torn apart or elevated to Nobel prize material depending on the party proposing. This soon evaporated into uselessness after the “tablets for all” farce that risked showing the true colours of the PLPN manifestos – an auction in a supermarket, buying votes with promises tailor made on the spot. After the tablets we heard little or nothing of the content of the party’s promises as stage two of the marketing campaign required a concentration on scandals.

The dark side of the PLPN system came out in full force here. The inevitable weak points of corruption and connivance with the darker side of society would be painted into the tableau in accordance to a party’s needs. Thus the PL would do its damnedest to link a real ring of corruption in oil procurement to a tenuous connection with the minister concerned. Reality – the existence of corruption in various sectors of our PLPN patronised system (from Maritime permits, to driving permits, to VAT inspections, to oil procurement, to environment decision) – was being hyped for electoral purposes. The PN fought back with undercover tapes and recordings that would only end up exposing another side of the PLPN – their network of kazini  as a useless relic of politics past now in the hands of little entrepreneurs who would turn a blind eye to illicit methods of making a quick buck.

The warts and all phase would simmer down when the yelling was over with no real victor and a deeper entrenchment by the two sides was confirmed. At this stage the parties would morph into some sort of religious Messianic cult sect.

Muscat’s Taghna Lkoll would pull the non-divisive rabbit out of the hat and this would turn out to be a surprisingly catchy concept. The hordes of flag-waving tribal acolytes would suddenly adopt a questionable neutered approach of “Love thy neighbour” complete with a full revisionist approach towards history. History need not be made when it is being re-written and Labour is banking heavily on being the proverbial victor that rewrites history (at least for a while). It is a re-legitimation of the stigmatised “Labourite” that is so appealing for the hardcore while at the same time sterile enough for the doubting thomas to actually contemplate the vote. At this point actual tangible plans become useless – replaced conveniently with buzzwords such as “costings, roadmap and injections” that make the speaker sound deceivingly competent.

Gonzi’s reaction to all this has been the calling of the troops. His Gozo mass meeting speech also drew upon history. Not history with a big “H” but rather the historical personalities of the nationalist party. His was not to deal with the recycling of Eddie’s “reconciliation” as Muscat seemed to be doing. No. Gonzi, preceded by a catch-phrase generating Simon (Gas daaaawn gooool-haaaajt! – seriously?) would call upon the spirits (dead or alive) of the giants of Nationalist history and then would rightfully move on to list tangible achievements. No need for rewriting there but a legitimate claim of the success – a give credit where credit is due of sorts. Which is the closest we got to talking about actual stuff and not the pie in the sky sweeping statements of the Muscat kind. It would be a mixture of nationalist (as in the party) pride peppered with little hints of remorse for the arrogance that seems to have miffed so many. Then like the Moonies and the Jehovah Witnesses Gonzi would send his masses out to proselytise – convince two other people to vote PN. Still it’s always better than Simon’s grocer idea.

In the end the campaigns ended up doing just what was expected of them. To raise the ante on noise, colour and special effects in order to hide the unshamefaced prostitution of values for the sake of votes. In this latter category I believe that Muscat’s bandwagon of opportunism wins the game hands down. His last minute deal with the hunting community (where he promised nothing more than what the nationalist government already provides – observation of EU rules) was the final cherry of the cake after much flirting with his ghettoised concept of society – from women to LGBT to businessmen to workers to students. To each a promise without actually showing how the money will be brought home.

Gonzi’s team seemed to be a mix of desperation and anger. You cannot blame them – whatever is said they have been the “bahrin tal-maltemp” that Gonzi describes. Their fault mainly lies in  obstinately persisting in playing the same game within the rules of the PLPN system and this will undo their government in the end. They can blame the voter they can blame those who will move on to the hope being given by a third party but the truth is that Gonzi’s PN’s greatest mistake is that of playing along with PL when it comes to the wider rules that mold our institutional and societal structures. The greasy poles, the career ladders, the inevitable cronyism, the tribal approach, the winner takes all mentality, the divine right to govern with a majority without listening to anyone else – that is what will undo this government. No amount of marketing could avoid that.

Sadly another party is rearing to take its place under the great rules of PLPN alternation and the campaign has only proven to us that it will be more of the same. If not worse. Once the mask of unity and taghna lkoll falls the impact will be terrible.

We’d like to say we told you. But it would be as useful as our vote.