If René Descartes and Anselm of Canterbury met in a fictitious room in some other dimension we cannot be sure what the resulting conversation would be. Provided they overcome linguistic difficulties of sorts (but heck, if we create the fictitious room we can create a Douglas Adams Babel Fish – or they could just both revert to Latin, simples) there is a high probability that at some point they might bring up the two maxims with which they are closely associated. For every “Cogito, ergo sum” shot by René we would have a “credo ut intelligam” from Anselm. Then again they might end up talking about something else altogether – like for example whether the fact that they were together in a fictitious room was proof enough of the existence of a God.
Leaving René and Anselm to their conversation, we could take a quick look at the Maltese political scene from a philosophical and sociological point of view. This blog’s fate is irreversibly linked with the “PLPN paradigm and theory” that links the hegemonic performance and presence of the two monoliths of Maltese politics to a general degradation of quality and value in political thought. The latest step in the evolution of Maltese politics – the Taghna Lkoll/Joseph Muscat phenomenon – has opened a new chapter in this saga and I’d like to think that it is one that confirms the general trend of dilution in quality.
In a way we are witnessing a delayed confirmation of sorts of the Fukuyama “End of History” notion that however takes into account new circumstances such as the forced abdication of ideological trends in favour of populist scenarios. Not only was the political game rigged to confirm the careerist mechanisms of the few (witness the semi-failure of the M5S in Italy to usurp the throne from the old system) but it managed to adapt further by eliminating any qualms of rigorous policy and adopting il qualunquismo (populist ideas that please everyone and everything).
Revolutions whether Orange, Silk or Arab seem to have only served to change the actors but not the methodology. Potestas omnia corrumpit? Not only. Do not forget the concurrent revolution in systems of communication – the massive power of tweets, facebook and direct marketing. The irony is that the democratisation of the media has been accompanied by a post-9/11 adaptation of Orwellian Newspeak – witness the shift of the hegemony to the new methods of delivery – and the consequent blatant violation of data protection and rights in the local scenario.
The most shocking aspect of this all was not the adaptation of the hegemonic forces to the new ways of promotion, nor was their unabashed abandonment of principled policy in favour of pragmatic manoeuvring. What shocked was the unquestioning acceptance of their methods by the larger part of the population. “Jiena nemmen f’Joseph ghax iwettaq dak li jwieghed” (I believe in Joseph because he delivers what he promises”) went one of the pre-electoral ads. Even if we were to cast aside the blatant fallacy that was underlined by the fact that Joseph had hitherto never had any occasion to deliver anything we are still left with an important groundbreaking statement – one of belief. Faith.
“I believe in Joseph”. Sure the vocabulary was not new to the Maltese political scene that linguistically crosses the borders of emotions (pain, suffering, glory, guidance, shepherding) but this time there was an even deeper pronouncement of faith. The profession of faith was transformed into a mantra – the Taghna Lkoll – of words, words and more words. Meanwhile Joseph divested the party of its very essence – this was no longer a party, it was a movement. If you believed in Joseph then you were part of the movement and this would include apostates from the other big religion in the country.
The party had transformed itself into a sect of unquestioning believers attracted on the back of various emotional baits such as anger, promises of merit, undeliverable plans of solving the energy dilemma as well as individualised packages such as free for all for hunters or those crazy campaign moments when tablets were promised to all. If you needed proof of this you had to wait no longer than 50 days from the movement’s ascension to power. Gone was the meritocracy, the promises on energy were teetering and amended while the true cost of bandwagon promises began to be seen as in the case of the hunting farce (and Galdes’ infamous loophole jibe). Did the acolytes protest? Hell no. At least this government was not the previous one. It could commit the same indecencies, it could vote itself more expensive costs but so long as it was not the devil incarnate as announced by Joseph in his book then it was AOK.
It’s dangerous, this sect business is. It is far, far worse than a political party abusing of its relative majority to create a wider gap from the people. Meanwhile on the other side of the dichotomy there do not seem to be signs of an abating of the trend towards relative nullity. Sure, the pomp and circumstance of Nationalist camaraderie was respected through and through in the leadership election and the “look no backstabs” performance might have gone down well with the general public still finding it hard to digest the Franco Debono indigestion. Still though, was so much politeness and mutual deference really necessary? (L-aqwa li “well behaved”).
The eagerness of the nationalist milieu to anoint a leader with as little acrimony as possible does not bode well. “We are all behind Simon” is not necessarily a good thing given that in more ways than one Simon Busuttil remains a virgin to local politics barring his stuttering performances in the last general election. The early signs of a “solution” within the PN fold stinks very much of the sectarian option that Labour has so successfully adopted. Less critique and more monolothic acceptance seems to be the order of the day – allowing parties to spout nonsense wrapped and packaged in propagandistic bling.
If the PN really does go the PL way then we have the two parties finally crossing the threshold of faith. Less cogito and much more credo. The Maltese have a saying “iwiegħed l-ilma jiżfen“(literally “to promise dancing water” best translated as “to promise the moon”).
Our parties have long shifted to promises of moons and dancing waters. The danger is that instead of questioning them and their policies more and more of us are preferring to believe.
Amen.
