Categories
Citizenship Constitutional Development Mediawatch

Expression is free

expression_akkuzaOn his way to the Philippines Pope Francis conceded yet another few comments with regards to the Charlie Hebdo massacre in France. It’s the Pope speaking – don’t forget he was considered for a long time to be infallible. Bergoglio is a great communicator and has won back many sheep to the fold of Catholicism thanks to his attitude and humility. I don’t know if it is the euphoria of the moment or the relaxed atmosphere of a casual interview during a flight but Bergoglio’s qualification of the freedom of expression made me cringe.

“Imagine my assistant insulted my mother”, he said, “then he would be risking a punch.” Really Francis? Since when is that the standard Catholic answer? Whatever happened to turn the other cheek to begin with? But I am not here to tell Francis what his religion teaches as to how to react to violence or insult. What worries me is that there is little different between Bergoglio justifying a punch for an offence and an Imam in London claiming that the Charlie Hebdo journalists asked for it. It’s no different from the reaction in some quarters that called for a limit to the freedom of expression to be set at the prohibition of causing offence.

Right now it is tough for citizens of the nations that are run by the western democratic paradigm to reconcile their ideas of liberty with that of Charlie Hebdo’s freedom to insult and offend a cult. Can an opinion be damaging? Can it be allowed to be damaging? If I believe that stories like the immaculate conception and resurrection are absolute hogwash am I allowed to lampoon them in cartoon fashion? What does the freedom of expression say about that?

Well, in France the courts have already had to deal with this kind of question. There is a difference between the use of the freedom of expression to parody, mock and, yes, even offend on the one hand (which is allowed) and the use of the freedom of expression to incite hatred or call to violence. The reasoning is that nothing is sacred when it comes to the boundaries of freedom of expression. There are of course mechanisms to protect persons who feel damaged by another’s expression. You can see the right to protect against libel and calumny of course. But when it comes to mocking religious figures – there is no limit. Mock and be damned.

Why then are people arrested if they tweet or post on the internet in support of the attackers of Hebdo’s offices? Are they not expressing their opinion too? Well yes they are but they are also justifying the crimes by their acts. In France it is called “apology of terrorism”. It is seen as a step towards incitement to violence and hatred and that is why it is not allowed.

The difference is sophisticated. It requires a level of intellectual engagement that is not available to all. Living in a liberal democratic society requires that kind of sophistication. It takes a level of intellectual engagement to control the savage instinct of resorting to violence when one feels offended and instead to dismiss the efforts at lampooning as puerile schoolyard humour. Life in a western liberal democracy is not for everyone. Many would prefer to be shielded from offence by governments that censor and prevent caricature. Theirs is not the promised land of the west. They would prefer to be able to punch, flog, whip, punish a lampooner than simply look away and not take notice of anything that so deeply offends their sentiments.

They would resort to laws and bullying to silence where possible. If the law does not help them in that sense, if it is too liberal then they will exploit the weakness of the politically correct age and claim that this is about islamophobia, antisemitism, irreverent anticatholicism. “Je ne suis pas Charlie” they will tell you but they miss the point.

Because being Charlie does not mean having a predilection for infantile, sexually oriented humour and for easy (too easy) quips about prophets popes and saints. Being Charlie means having a sophisticated understanding of living in a society where others are free to express themselves in accordance to our charters and where the right kind of reaction is one of intellectual engagement not judicial or physical bullying and savagery.

Being Charlie means hearing yet another Yo Mama joke and not having the instinct to punch the joker in the face. Because being Charlie means understanding that the joke is always on you. And that’s as subjective as it can get.

Categories
Citizenship Politics Values

The Maltese Race

malteser race _akkuzaIt’s almost eleven o’clock on Sunday morning. In my church going days this was the time for the infamous Sunday mass ritual complete with sermon, parade and chit chat on the church parvis just before heading off to Sunday lunch. For a long time through my childhood and adolescence we counted the mores and values of the Catholic Church as our own. Those days are long gone and it is no longer a question of pointing your finger at the Bishops and their flock whenever you feel that the moral compass has gone haywire. To be honest it has become harder and harder to identify the source of our common values in a nation that has discovered a plurality of divisions that go beyond the traditional good and evil fault lines that have always aided us to paint a chiaroscuro picture.

I remember Marsalforn’s priest (known to the flock as il-Kappillan) promoting numerous missionary efforts during the months of summer when his church would be full to the brim with the sudden influx of ‘Maltin’ who had come over to Gozo to spend their summer vacation. To the kids the idea of a mission was a remote place where the poor underprivileged, unlucky and pagan souls would be nourished with food for the spirit and for the flesh thanks to the intervention of intrepid missionaries. They might have been a reality but it was a reality that was far away. The sense of remoteness would only be breached when the first shipload of Albanians would reach our shores in the early nineties.

We grew up with a cushioned mentality of what brotherly love and concern is about. At school I heard first of the La Sallian Freres around the world spreading the word through education. Then I learnt about the not too lightweight methods of Jesuits like Francis Xavier and their trips to preach to foreigners all the way to the Orient. I came across the Freres again recently when watching a documentary about the history of what was once the Belgian Congo. Their schools have survived the upheavals since independence and they now include history teachers teaching young Congo residents the path that the Congo had to take towards eventual freedom and self-determination. Congo’s first short-lived president Patrice Lumumba had for long preached a Congo where “the blacks would be white and the whites would be black”.

But I digress. Our concept of “foreigner” were forged in colonial times and then continued to be moulded in post-independence Malta that probably had not shed its colonial mentality. For long the foreigner was a tourist with all the idiosyncrasies he could bring. He was a tourist to be charged according to the hidden prices on the menu (still is) and someone who could leave a penny or two on this young republic’s soil. Politically with the arrival of Mintoffian principles combining fabricated nationalism and aggressive participation on international fronts, the foreigner became a “barrani” – an outsider – a concept that is encapsulated in very similar terms to “not local”. We had to choose with whom to deal with and who would be our friend in times of need.

There is no doubt that the politically expedient mechanism was absorbed into our way of thinking. The irony is not lost when you see that this kind of political tool culminated in a legislation on “foreign (outsider) interference”. Setting aside the political undertones, it says much about the lilliputian element in the mentality. “We are Maltese and no outsider will tell us what to do”. Inevitably such a narrative required a fleshing out of the myth of the ‘Maltese Race’ – for which we came up with a word that is only used in one other circumstance  ie. the United Nations or Gnus Maghquda. By 1979 we had Gensna (technically “Our Nation” but giving off serious whiffs of “Our Race”). The language of “us and them” had been packaged roughly and served its purpose well. It probably was here to stay.

Fast forward to the nineties where we began an uncomfortable rapprochement to the continent to our north. We may have made giant strides towards the “Europeanisation” of our nation structurally but come the referendum on EU membership the “us and them” mentality showed that it was going nowhere. “Them” in this case was the Europeans. We had the derisory, ridiculous, statements of parts of the opposition to membership regarding AIDS, Sicilian workers et al but they were there and I am not too sure that they were easily dismissed. Without making a value judgement on EU membership itself, I believe that it is safe to say that Malta might have politically and economically joined a wider club of peers but a substantial part of its population was still torn about the need to have anything to do (or depend on) the outsiders.

An uneasy membership had begun and it would not be long before we would have a government pouncing upon the uneasiness of a  large swathe of our population with the concept of “the others”. It could have been any party mind you – so long as it is one that relies on substantial doses of populism there would always be a vein to be tapped – a vein that dislikes the outsider, snobs the foreigner and demonstrates all the makings of an intolerant mentality.

The Albanian ships had just been a forewarning. Soon we would have an ever increasing wave of refugee seekers escaping the turmoils of the Dark Continent. We would also absorb a large amount of people escaping the ugly reality of the Balkan break up. Later on (more like recently) we would add to those the East European (non-EU) diaspora looking for a better life. The Gens Malti suddenly found itself knee deep in barranin. Would it cope? Could it cope?

In this year’s address to the Luxembourg population on Duke’s Day, Prime Minister Xavier Bettel surprised the non-Luxembourgish community in Luxembourg (the country, not the city, has 48% of non-Luxembourgers in its population in 2014) by addressing them specifically. He switched to French from Luxembourgish to do so (already an immense concession) and proceeded to tell the “foreign” community of how they are welcome in Luxembourg. “You may seem to be a problem at the start but I see you as a challenge, a positive challenge and an opportunity”. I paraphrase the sense of his speech but that was Bettel’s attitude in a nutshell. Luxembourg would make the most of the presence of non-natives – not complain about them. (see Luxembourg’s score on the Migration Policy Index here).

It’s not all about Migration though. It’s about a general attitude to anything conceived as non-Maltese i.e. foreign. Trying to understand this obsession with the Maltese Race is not simply restricted to the dangerous gibberish spouted by Imperium Europa followers. It means trying to understand how it is that we form our ideas about who and what is non-Maltese. It is also about trying to understand why we have selective bursts of what cannot but be termed racist/intolerant conceptions when talking about events unfolding in Malta and close to it. The overwhelming majority surely has no wish to think in terms of the brotherhood of man.

That is why it is worrying but not surprising that an idiot on Facebook expresses his wish that MEP Roberta Metsola gets gang raped by a group of immigrants when he sees her efforts being made towards integration and assistance. That is why it is worrying but not surprising that our government’s envoy to the World Tourism Authority deems it fit to use the word “rapist” when talking about ADITUS chairman’s efforts in assisting refugees and immigrants in integration. That is why it is worrying but not surprising that our nurses complain about (specifically) Libyan patients being brought to hospital as though hospitals are only equipped to combat Maltese illnesses and bacteria (and to think that part of our great historical narrative includes a period when Malta was the hospital of the Mediterranean receiving wounded from the First Crimean War for example).

Sliema and Saint Julian’s are under threat. There is hooded gang doing the rounds with some kind of master key and burgling homes. It seems to make a difference that these criminals are Eastern European, probably Serb apparently. We have got used to situations where the defining factor is not a crime but the nationality of the person committing it – as though this in itself is an aggravation or proves some statistical point.

All this points to a continued uneasiness with the concept of non-Maltese in 2014. This is not a pretentious rant but an attempt to identify the source of the mentality and the problem. Nations like Luxembourg have taken up the challenge and are seeing the potential in seconding this new wave into the very struggles of their own nation. Malta on the other hand seems to have gone down the path of refusal and denial. Efforts at integration and commonality are either not evident or non-existent. What is clear is that we are very weak policy-wise when it comes to thinking about how to work on this reality. So long as those entrusted to govern prefer to pick and mix with a populistic enthusiasm we can expect little or no positive input from their part.

Meanwhile the Maltese Race continues…. to the bottom.

 

 

Categories
Citizenship Drugs

Playing that Criminal Record

criminal_akkuzaThere’s an item in the news about the Earth Garden concert. The article title is “DJs ‘humiliated’ by police at Earth Garden Festival“. This is one of those instances where you have to wonder what the quote marks around the word humiliated are intended to convey. Is it sarcasm? Irony? Is the journalist taking the piss out of the DJs and saying that they are making a mountain out of a molehill?

I’ll leave you to guess about the employment of quote marks by the Times journalist on this occasion. What is more interesting, and worrying, is the existence of a policy that is being applied by the police in these circumstances with regard to the line up of DJs. So, from what I gather, when you apply for a permit to have a concert such as Earth Garden (in this day and age when people are paid commissions by government to look for garages for performing artists to practice in – coz we iz cool and with it) your line up of DJs gets vetted for any “priors”. If what the organisers said is true then apparently even a minor crime (I’m assuming possession) that dates over 20 years is sufficient for the long arm of the law to strike you off the list. I am also assuming that no such vetting occurs for the other people emplpyed for this concert – the barmen might have just finished their latest stint in Kordin, the cleaners might be on parole and there is (I am still assuming) no quick check up at the door to ensure that all concert goers have a clean bill on their social conscience.

If at face value (yeah Prima Facie) this is not already a ridiculous state of affairs in your mind then just put it all in context. This kind of attitude is a clear demonstration of our society’s lax and arbitrary attitude towards any sense of justice and equity. Policies such as this might (and I stress the might) have a place within a comprehensive program of – let me see – drug dissuasion. But is there one? What is the national policy on Dj’s and their role in concerts? Is there one? Has a spin doctor within the Taghna Lkoll government noticed the potential niche market and come up with some new groundbreaking “social legislation” to add to The One We Allowed the Puffs to Marry, The One We Made Being Gay Legal and The One We Introduced Social Security. (Warning, Irony and sarcasm might damage your brain)?

Not yet it seems. So the branch of the law that most randomly interprets policy and the rule of law decides to suddenly make even the most minor of infractions hidden back in time a huge handicap for DJs. yep. Just DJs. All this while the Prime Minister of the Republic openly embraced a convicted criminal and proudly declared him a soldier of steel. Mixed messages? Who cares? We work in niches and pigeon holes. Even far from the political rhetoric there is something very worrying about the haphazard way that we go about creating, applying and interpreting our laws and policies. The man in the street cannot be blamed for having a skewered view of the law and all that pertains to it.

Cause the police always got somethin stupid to say
They put out my picture with silence
Cause my identity by itself causes violence – N.W.A. (includes O’Shea Jackson a.k.a Ice Cube, Andre Romelle Young a.k.a Dr Dre)

This is the country that hosts the Isle of MTV and will (rightly) close an eye for performers such as Snoop Dogg yet small-time DJs will be struck off the list. A video about FIFA and its corruption is making the rounds – it mentions how in Brasil alcohol consumption was illegal in stadia until FIFA obliged Brasil to make it legal to accomodate main sponsor Budweiser. It is this kind of inconsistency that makes a mockery of any social and legal system. Policies are meant to be created and used with real social purposes. The law should not simply be a toy for bullying selectively and making a mockery out of citizen rights.

The law – the rule of law – is essential to the fabric of society. It can erode slowly and gradually but the ultimate implosion will not benefit anybody. Justice and equity deserve more careful and less partisan application. I will never tire of repeating the old latin adage. We are servants of the law so that we may be free.

“Police on the scene, you know what I mean, they passed me up, confronted all the dope fiends”- Robert Matthew (a.k.a Vanilla Ice, criminal record includes possession of firearms, domestic violence, expired pet tags, driving with expired licence)

Categories
Citizenship Politics

In search of the discerning voter

10390007_10154146760665368_1785490145830756640_n The Luxembourg contingent landed this morning. I drove straight to Evans Building to pick up my voting document which, as it turns out, had already been collected by a conscientious neighbour (thanks John!). Still, it gave me time to go walkabout in a resplendent and vibrant Valletta. It was a welcome assault on the senses. The streets thronged with people – at work or for leisure – with a wonderful background from the numerous musicians at every corner.

The (I almost said cruel) sunshine beamed off the golden buildings and were it not for the incredible amount of dog droppings that peppered the Saint Elmo end of Valletta it would have been a party for all the senses.

I bumped into the (almost complete) set of nationalist MEP candidates close to the law courts. They were on a walkabout of their own drumming up last minute support. Speaking to Simon Busuttil, Jonathan Shaw, Therese Comodini Cachia and (international secretary) Trevor DeGiorgio I got the feeling of a genuine effort of reaching out. I am no fool and this is an election campaign but there is no doubting that the effort remains and the PN does have a negative perception reputation that it needs to overcome.

Further up Republic Street I came across AD’s Cassola getting a quick lunch in a main street cafe. I asked Arnold what his feeling is and his reply was one of guarded confidence. The polls are not clear he said but AD have a sense that this is 2004 all over again. By AD standards this is supposed to be good – particularly since they seem to be convinced that a chunk of Labour voters might be tempted to go green. I did not meet any Labour candidates – nor did I meet any from the unfortunate Panini Sticker Album (though I did get a wave from former course colleague Franco Debono when turning into South Street).

I am quite sure that Labour are confident in their own way – especially given that they can still count on their well oiled propaganda machine that has become their trademark. It’s a machine that has the pulse of the luoghi comuni, running mainly on half-truths and brushing aside the weak nationalist stunts that seem to backfire so unpleasantly for the time being.

***

I have deliberately taken a sabbatical from this campaign. It has been tough for the past few months trying not to keep up pace with the goings on – especially since this was supposed to be a European Campaign with a European dimension. We did get Juncker and Schultz visiting this micro nation (thanks Malta Design Week – go there, it’s definitely worth a visit) but on the whole there has been little or nothing European about these elections.

Muscat seems to believe that his best bet is forcing a personality battle between himself and Simon Busuttil. The targeted campaign highlighting the supposed benefits of one year of Taghna Lkoll glossed over the glaring failures of such concepts as meritocracy and highlighted such incredible achievements as the pittance of an increase in stipends. Thank God for hurriedly assembled “social right” laws that threw a heavy dose of mascara on Labour’s mask – making them seem that they really cared (when it was immediately evident that such moves were strongly rooted in populist measures). Labour seems to have managed to hide its very un-European approach to everything under the sun – including the European Union itself. Quite frankly the Labour party is the last party that could genuinely claim to understand what representing citizens in Europe is about – mainly, and most importantly because the Labour party either does not understand or does not care about what Europe really means. Forget the rhetoric of “best in Europe” – it is clear that for most of the time (all of the time) Labour still reasons clearly in us and them terms.

The PN is struggling resource wise and the temptation to play along to Labour’s game is still strong – which explains such monumental, off-putting gaffes such as the Panini Sticker Album. Ironically Europe is where the PN should be stronger in battling it out – at least on an MEP level – it being the party with a stronger pedigree on the matter. I have already had occasion to point this out before – the PN needs to work strongly on the principled building blocks and begin to believe more in such principles and their power of attracting the voters who are more careful when selecting leaders and not bluffers.

As for AD. This could be their golden chance. The unconvinced Labour voters who are rattled by certain Labour positions such as the unconditional backing of Cyrus Engerer might add to their base. They also have consistency on their side – they have a clear European dimension that could be attractive to the discerning voter.

The discerning voter. These elections will be a severe test for the voting population. Are they still biting at the marketing hooks that are thrown at them? Does a bus parked outside a secondary school do the trick? Will the little cheques (car registration, slight dip in petrol prices, maternity cheques) being thrown at them as bait win the day? Also, hopefully a marginal point, how many will go for the rabid loonies that form the tail end of the electoral list? Will we get our own dose of intolerant Eurosceptic vote?

***

To sum up these MEP elections will unfortunately be far from a definite sample of representation at a European level. In all probability there will be a set of mixed results that every party will interpret as a victory in their own right. It would be good for the electorate if it had an interpretation of its own. One that measure the success or failure of the vote on the basis of true representation within a European Union that is currently in dire need of getting in touch with its demos.

Or to misquote an apocryphal Plato: those who can’t be bothered to choose wisely who will represent them are punished by being represented by those who couldn’t really give a damn.

Categories
Citizenship Constitutional Development Politics

Ugly Heads

ugly_akkuzaRacism. It’s a dirty word. In the past seven days there seems to have been some form of virus in the air spreading dirty thoughts across the globe. The latest manifestation came in sporting events. First there was the Diego Alves incident. Barcelona’s colourful (an unfortunate word in these circumstances but I mean spirited) winger was getting ready to hit a corner in their match against Villareal when a banana was thrown from the stands. It is a not too intelligent and unironic insult that is common among the less evolved quarters of football “supporters”. Along with the monkey calls, the banana is the unfunny provocation (are you provocating me?) that yells “You are black therefore you are monkey”.

To Alves’ credit he did not only brush the manifestation of crass stupidity aside, he proceeded to pick up the banana and eat it before contributing to Barcelona’s turnaround victory against a banana coloured Villareal team. Unfortunately the beautiful game is often tainted with this kind of racist inspired taunts (remember Boateng last summer?). Surprisingly this week we also had news of similar dirty thoughts coming from – of all places – the black dominated NBA. The sport of LeBron and Jordan  hit the headlines for the wrong reasons when a phone call by the owner of the LA Clippers was leaked by his girlfriend to the press. It turns out that he did not want her to come to games in the company of African-Americans.

Donald Sterling (for such is the intelligent beings’ name) provoked a huge backlash to the point of getting a comment straight from President Obama that is destined to become a classic: “When ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, you don’t really have to do anything, you just let them talk. That’s what happened here.”  Barack, you’re so right.

It is ignorance that is at the root of intolerance. It is intolerance that is at the root of racism. In these times when democracy and democratic rights are being savagely banalised by the onslaught of relativism and populism the ugly heads of racism and intolerance are easily raised. We read in Malta about immigrants having to ask Maltese to “hail buses” because otherwise the driver would not stop for them. Ignorance. At its ugliest and worst. Rosa Parks would have a hard time in Malta, trust me. She’d probably still be stuck in some village police station on her 200th hour of “police questioning”. “What do you mean you refused to sit in the black section? There is a law you know.”

There are warning signs everywhere. Intolerance does not stop at racism on the basis of colour. In the Russian-majority areas of the Ukraine we had calls for a register of Jews. Even if we ignored the maladroit comments by Berlusconi about the Germans and concentration camp we would still have to admit that the current European Parliament campaign is unfortunately infused with not so subtle reasoning based on mistrust of the foreigner – a revived intolerance that the Europe of the universal declaration of rights was supposed to have buried long ago. (see also the recent outrage in the UK following a UKIP candidate’s comments).

Recently I learnt that the story that Adolf Hitler snubbed Jesse Owens during the Berlin Olympics was a myth. Owens himself explained that Hitler had actually taken an “official” decision not to congratulate any of the medal winners after he was told on the first day that he could not simply congratulate German medal winners. Hitler did not snub Owens. It turns out that he actually shook hands with Owens on the day before leaving the stadium.

Owens said he was treated better in Germany than in America where blacks faced segregation. Sometimes, the sources of intolerance and racism are to be found where we least expect it.

Categories
Citizenship

Freedom

The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government. – Franklin D. Roosevelt

solidarity_akkuza