Tag: the Malta Independent on Sunday

Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Revolting

“What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalisation of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” The Jasmine Revolution seems to continue to vindicate Fukuyama’s famous words in his 1989 essay “The End of History”.

In the long timeline of human history 20 years is just a blip. In 1812 Napoleon faced the full and final settlement of the Napoleonic Wars that had their genesis in the 14 July popular uprising in 1789. Approximately the same amount of time passed between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the first rumblings of the Jasmine Revolutions. All clues point to a longer stretch of time for the viral revolutions to spread to other countries − as they have already done − such as Bahrain and Iraq: Fukuyama’s end of the Cold War is not so much an immediate happening but a gradual shutting of the door over a period of time.

Fukuyama’s theory centred around the fact that the only ideological alternatives that would be left after the end of the Cold War would be human rights, liberal democracy and capitalist free market economy. From Manama to Tunis, from Cairo to Tripoli, the loud voice of the peoples of what another theorist would call the Greater Middle East is being heard in order to determine their access to human rights, liberal democracy and a free market economy. On Friday, even the recently liberated Iraqis hit the streets denouncing a corrupt government and calling for reforms.

What civilisation?

The theorist who defined the civilisation of the Greater Middle East is Samuel Huntington. Like Fukuyama, Huntington also came up with an interesting analysis and theory of international relations. Unlike Fukuyama, Huntington saw a future of conflict along the fault-lines of civilisations. If he were alive, Huntington might want to rethink his theory or at least realise that his was a supposition that underestimated the power of the yearning for liberal democracy among Muslim peoples. Huntington’s Islamic civilisation has proved to have much more than “bloody borders” − it has uncovered a yearning for the liberal freedoms among a hitherto misunderstood mass of peoples.

Huntington may be forgiven for having theorised on what is fast turning out to be a stereotype but he was not alone. Even in the nineties, when the domino effect of the cold war liberation was at its highest, few would have theorised that the liberal streak would spread to the Middle East. Sure we speculated (and to a certain extent worried) about the Chinese peoples following suit but Tiananmen put an end to that quite quickly. And Gaddafi knew that didn’t he? The crackpot dictator could have lost his sanity long ago but his references to the June 1989 events in China were not haphazard.

We were all duped. All of us. In our uncomfortable entente with the pluri-decorated dictator from a North African tribe, we swallowed the lies that were fed to us. The lies that told us that tinpot dictators are the right sort of valve to hold down the hordes of uncivilised and radical peoples that threatened to be unleashed on us should the dictators ever let go. The lie was lubricated with oil and sweetened with smiles and promises. Politicians kowtowed, businessmen sucked up and we were happy to not be concerned.

 

 

The Inhuman Rights

Gaddafi was the West’s not so hidden secret. Lord Blair famously shook hands with the genocidal maniac in 2003 and Italy famously signed a Friendship Treaty with Gaddafi’s Jamahiriya. No sooner had the smiles and handshakes confirmed the Crazy Colonel’s rehabilitation in the international jet set did the businessmen land for a piece of the Libyan cake. Maltese businessmen included.

Look back at our dealings with Libya and not once will you see a reference to the people − to the subjects of the dictator. I hesitate to reproduce the image of what we thought of Gaddafi’s subjects but you do not need to go far for a reminder. Just open the comments at the foot of the first articles reporting the Libyan uprising. As Libya revolted Malta showed its revolting side. Speaking on Ghandi Xi Nghid, journalist Karl Schembri compared the vegetable vendor in Tunisia to the Czechoslovak Jan Palach. Few Maltese were making these comparisons at the start.

We were worried about the Libyan invasion (our wives, our children, our jobs in that oh so revolting singsong straight from the collective imagination inspired by Dragut’s corsairs), the GWU called on the Libyan people to calm down (lest Maltese workers lose their jobs), the politicians dragged their feet and the biggest noise the EU could make regarded the fears of an immigrant exodus.

Opportunity and hypocrisy

At the Saturday march organised in solidarity with Libya last week, the political group Graffitti caused a ruckus by carrying placards shaming Gonzi and Muscat for sucking up to Gaddafi. The pride of Maltese journalism threatened to quit the march and asked for the posters to be removed. Of course it’s one thing blogging about Mintoff’s parading with il-Kurunell and another looking such a poster in the face. The posters were not saying the whole truth though: Gonzi and Muscat were just part of a whole western lie that underestimated and disrespected the determination of a whole block of humanity in the Greater Middle East.

True, the insurgents have learnt the hard way that there will be no fighter jets coming to their rescue (who knows what accusations Obama’s government would have faced if it intervened… remember Libya has oil). They have learnt that the “self” in self-determination is a harsh reality that includes the risk of dismembered torsos and blood on the streets where you live. The are learning fast and by doing so they are earning the respect and admiration of a lazy West that had wrongly assumed that the wind of change that blew in Gorky Park would be limited to some of Huntington’s civilisations and not others. They may not know who Jan Palach is but they have shown the world that they can think just like him.

The tears of joy that burnt my face when I saw the jubilant scenes in Benghazi were mingled with a sense of anger at how long we have allowed ourselves to live the lie. True the revolution is fuelled by the new means of mass information (see the J’accuse post urging a philo-revolutionary revival of the defunct Voice of the Mediterranean) but it has also become one huge learning curve for the civilisations on all sides of the fault lines.

Viva la Vida indeed

Beyond the barricades there is a hidden link of humanity linking the Serb to the Burmese to the Egyptian to the Berber to the Maltese. Beyond the parochial perspective of journalists vying to become a one man CNN, of egocentric business communities and short-term politicians, there is a new movement and ideal that has rekindled the flame that started burning with the fall of the Berlin Wall. From Havana to Caracas to Moscow to Beijing all the way to earthquake riddled Christchurch, the world is still watching.

And if like Nero, Gaddafi is guilty of Queening while Tripoli burns, we would do well to learn at least one lesson from this latest instalment of the liberal democrat dream… that human rights are universal − really universal. They do not see the barriers of race, colour or creed − and that the DNA to fight for the rights of liberty, freedom and democracy is to be found in every last human being. Yes, even in those brothers of ours across the sea who we have looked down upon or ignored for so long.

Allahu akbar!

This article and corresponding Bertoon was published in The Malta Independent on Sunday (27.02.2011)

www.akkuza.com is fully compatible with the 2011 Jasmine Revolution.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Fight for Your Right (to Party)

So the Rais is definitely out and has rushed off to a caravanserai off Sharm el-Sheikh. Thirty years have passed since Sadat’s assassination (and Mubarak’s rise to power), 59 since Nasser’s 1952 revolution and 92 since the first Egyptian revolution (of the modern era) of 1919. Symbolically, each revolution had centred around Tahrir Square (Liberation Square). Back in 1919, the first of two revolutions was triggered by the decision of the British to exile Wafd leaders. The Wafd party had managed to gather a movement of support in favour of independence and in March 1919 Saad Zaghlul and two other leaders were arrested by the British and exiled to Malta.

From Tahrir Square to Misrah San Gorg

Thus the paths of two nations-to-be crossed that year. In June 1919, three months after the deportation, the Maltese would have their own riots and also suffer loss of lives while in Egypt the uprisings would result in 800 dead. Zaghlul would return (via France) to be Prime Minister of Egypt for nine months in 1924 and was considered as the za’im al-umma − the national hero − by the people. Independent Egypt would coexist with what it considered to be British interference until the 1952 revolution and Nasser’s military takeover.

Fast forward to 11 February 2011 and the crowds are jubilant in Tahrir Square, glad to have freed themselves of a corrupt government. One hesitates to add “once again” since if you were to read the original messages of liberation back in 1952 you’d be forgiven to believe that the beast of corruption had been soundly beaten by the liberation forces back then. If ever there was proof needed that you can never be 100 per cent sure that this is the last change that was needed then that is Tahrir Square − the square of three revolutionary moments for a people aspiring for change. “Welcome to the New Egypt” said one poster on the streets last night. How long till the next gathering?

You wake up late for school

While historic events were rapidly unfolding along the Nile, the political parties in Malta were still unfolding the latest scene in the Divorce Legislation Drama. The PN executive gave us much to think about by proposing the agenda for the next few months. It reads (a) parliamentary discussion, (b) parliamentary vote, (c) referendum if (b) is in favour of divorce legislation. Strategists, amateur and professional alike, were out analysing what this meant and where it would take us. (Caveat lector: I type before the final PN vote on Saturday)

Politics being what it is, there is a fair amount of truth in the fact that the strategy for introducing legislation is as important as the discussion itself. It is ironic, in a way, that two different strategies could result in two different outcomes – both of which could be reasonably and legally justified as being representative of the people’s will. So in a way expect much punditry regarding the pros and cons of a “referendum before” or “referendum after” approach. Each scenario has its own winners and losers with one big loser being the divorce debate itself. The reason I say that is that the divorce debate is about politicians shouldering their responsibility and recognising that there is a moment when society (or parts thereof) is being deprived of a right − the right to remarry − and that something must be done about it.

The Nationalist Party has met this imperative half way. Its motion does entail the taking of a position on the matter: a clear no to divorce. What it also does though is succumb to the need to compensate the logic of values with the spinelessness of strategy. Hence we have the somersault logic of “desperately seeking the people’s mandate/consensus” on the one hand and “relegating popular vote to a post-parliamentary postilla” on the other. While recognising that there is an important value (to the party) at stake, the Christian-democrat party fails to put its money where its mouth is and resorts to the usual shenanigans.

You miss two classes and no homework

Meanwhile, back at Transparency Headquarters, as the work on the Victory Balcony presumably proceeds with haste, Inhobbkom’s soldiers couldn’t resemble a band of headless chickens any more if they covered themselves in tar and feathers and pulled their tops over their heads. You’ve got to pity the New Old Labour. They wait on tenterhooks for the latest fart downhill to inform them whether the “referendum after” strategy will hold true. Then you get those alarmed by the fact that Parliament will actually pronounce its position first: and they rebel − for they’d rather see which way the wind is blowing innit?

Will Karmenu Vella explain why the progressive Mintoffian government of the 70s missed out on introducing divorce legislation at the time? After all the song and dance about the 70s we witnessed during the Labour conference you’d really think he had an answer. Seriously, what is the undecided voter expected to do when he sees that charade? Take Labour with a pinch of salt? Honestly, what were they serving at the conference? From Anglu Farrugia’s tear-jerking story about the Sun King (rixtellu at Versailles?) to his dramatic Copperfield stunt complete with an imaginary Empire Station, for a moment I thought that the whole conference was one big candid camera moment scripted by Ricky Gervais.

bert4j_100213-1

Your mom threw away your best porno mag

And just to make sure that our country goes completely nuts about what rights are and how to use them, we get the very helpful pink press at work. In case you have not noticed there is an Internet battle going on. It pitches the Forces of Good vs. the Forces of Evil. Of course who is good and who is evil depends on who you read but there’s plenty going around. So while the nutters in red call for the head of the Wicked Witch (their words not mine), the nutters in blue have suddenly decided to dedicate some time to investigative journalism and patch together a story about unsolved crimes left over from the lovely Labour era.

The nutters in red, headed by an irate Saviour Balzan, are now calling for the government to shut down a private blog because of its content. They do not sue for libel; they do not make use of normal legal means in a democracy related to presumed abuse of freedom of expression. No. They expect the government of a democratic country to shut down a private blog − presumably by use of force or expropriation of private property. I am not surprised that they do not see the irony in all this. Given that among the supporters for this move are most of Labour’s press, you cannot help but link the move to Karmenu Vella & Co’s nostalgia for the “jalla immorru lura ghas-sebghinijiet” era. Freedom of expression − the red way.

For their part the nutters in blue react with visible enthusiasm. The Nationalist fold were handed reams of propaganda material on a plate what with all the nostalgic statements at the Labour conference. Where’s Everybody wasted no time in pasting a collage of the best selections that played like a set of bloopers from the Oscars. Meanwhile on Internet, the battle between Malta’s most read pink blog and its ugly spin off continued. This week we witnessed an experiment in “investigative journalism” that might have been, in any other time (preferably around 1988), a welcome stimulus to whoever is responsible for bringing criminals to justice. Instead it quickly transpired that the only interest behind the whole write-up was an attack by association on Illum journalist Julia Farrugia. The words “Why now?” echoed once again − almost a year to the day after the infamous Plategate outbursts.

Your Mum busted in and said “What’s that noise”?

In the end, all you can do is reflect that it is useless fighting for freedoms if you have no idea how to use them. Behind Nasser’s revolution in 1952 lay the hope for a new Egypt. In 2011 Egypt is having another stab at it, thanks to a people who have had enough of the old regime. Our national narrative teaches us that we have been fighting for freedom since 1919. Along the way we have gathered two tribes who laid claim to the next step along the road to freedom. The two tribes are in the middle of an identity crisis right now − both have long exhausted the bank of new ideas and are now resorting to cashing old cheques.

Right now we are all tweeting and messaging our solidarity with the people of Egypt and their happiness at smelling the air of newfound freedom. Unless we notice that for a revolution to start you don’t just need the square but you also need a freethinking people, we might just be deserving of our current state of inertia.

www.akkuza.com brought to you with headings courtesy of the Beastie Boys. We recommend Coldplay’s Viva la Vida as an after-article digestive (stream available on the blog).

Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Nolens Volens

Art is not dead. The Front Against Censorship (FAC) may parade along Republic Street in a make-believe funeral, along with the usual suspects and hanger-on politicians, proclaiming that Art with a capital “A” is henceforth to be considered defunct and that the muses shall muse no more. They may paint the words “Art is dead” along the length of the coffin carried solemnly to the beat of the drums and the roar of the megaphone, but what they profess is a lie.

Art is not dead. It is alive and kicking in all its forms – from the amateur to the mediocre to the professionally entertaining. Whether it is to be seen prostituting itself in exchange for monetary tokens of appreciation, or whether it spontaneously erupts from the pen, the voice or the flash of one who has just been visited by the aforementioned muses, it continues in its existence quite happily and oblivious to all the fuss being made about its very own death.

Last week’s procession of the dozens (I am guilty of not attending but not for the same reasons as John Attard Montalto MEP) only contributed to the general theatrical air surrounding the whole issue of “censorship v expression” and risked becoming another caricature in the running saga. The Front has come up with a list of instances when art and expression have supposedly been on the wrong end of the long arm of the law. They range from the banning of biblical figures during carnival to various photo shoots being called off (remember the model in a cemetery?) to the infamous instances of Realtà and Stitching.

It’s now official – the Front has become a full-fledged whingeing member of this molly-cuddled pseudo-democracy. Theirs is not a reaction of artists angered by risible instances of conservative hypocrisy but the reaction of brainwashed citizens who actually believe that a coffin and a couple of megaphones is what it takes to get the dominant elements of our society to wake up and smell the coffee. In this country, where counter-culture translates into simply being a normal 21st century cosmopolitan person, our “artists” have chosen to abdicate their responsibilities.

‘Opera morta’

I shall not pretend for one moment to be able to define art. What I do believe is that in times of societal poverty and intellectual blandness, society sub-consciously depends on its reserve of artists and intellectuals for inspiration for change. Rarely has society welcomed artists and intellectuals with open arms – rather, it has more often than not kicked them down and attempted to silence them. On the other hand, those artists who have been trampled upon and shunned did not congregate in the middle of the main thoroughfares of Europe to protest “It’s not fair” but preferred to use their art to expose the hypocrisy of their very persecutors. Action. Reaction.

Not in Malta though. My suggested choice of action for the artistic fraternity would have been a self-imposed nationwide moratorium on the arts. No more plays by actors, no more songs to be sung and no more paintings to be exhibited (continue in this vein). A silent veil would be drawn over the whole works as the supposed audience is starved of such outlets of expression. For if the Civil Court – when assessing a play from the point of view of a reasonable man – is unable to grasp concepts such as suspension of reality, metaphors and the very essence of representative art, then it is not art that is dead but the very spectators that have slipped into some sort ofpermanent coma.

The FAC should not be angry at the “authorities” (even in their wide definition of the term that includes private art galleries) but should get busy urging artists to embark on a nationwide awareness campaign of what art is about and why it is an integral part of the soul of society. They should be provoking the man in the street to think himself out of the self-imposed rigidity and vacuum bubble. Rather than writing eulogies on Art’s tomb, they should be making the sorts of noises (or silences) that bring the current situation to everyone’s attention – using the very medium whose death they are supposed to be lamenting. My idea of a moratorium is only one way of making the right impact. When I bounced that idea off some friends they reacted typically: “Who would notice?” Would anyone notice that the artists have gone on strike? Is our situation that dire?

Willy-nilly

It all boils down to the “audience” or rather to the citizens that make up our Republic. They are citizens brought up on the Myth of Saint Paul, the Bedtime Story of Count Roger, the Saga of the Great Siege and the Narrative of Malta – Blitzed but Not Beaten. Our tiny nation has had its defining moments that were then cemented with the musical chair moments of Integration – Independence – Republic – Freedom – European Union Membership. We read the story line convinced that, like the Israelites, we too are the chosen people and that fate will inevitably look favourably upon us and that everyone and everything in the world will owe us a living because we are after all the islands where civilisation practically kicked off – how else would you explain the Neolithic temples?

Try to look back at the narrative again and introduce one new element – inevitability. Think of every step as having been inevitable – that it would have occurred with or without, and not thanks to, the inhabitants of the time. Saul of Tarsus or no Saul of Tarsus, we would still have had a couple of hundred years as a mostly Muslim people and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Roger was the last of many of Tancred’s sons scrambling for some territory, and although the story of the Great Siege would make for a lovely Guy Ritchie film it would not be the last of its kind.

There were similar perils to “Christendom” faced in Vienna and Buda, and the Ottomans only turned away because they got distracted elsewhere. Meanwhile “Christian” Europe – seeing another day and another Hail Mary thanks to the valiant Maltese (no doubt) – would soon be immersed in a fratricidal war that would render any effects of La Valette’s last stand hugely inconsequential (the Thirty Years War pitting Christian versus Christian).

The Malta-centric narrative is badly in need of a couple of blows to the stomach. Our political representatives have long feasted on our gullibility within this context and fed us more propagandistic drivel fit for the 20th century. I have once before drawn the opprobrium of die-hard Nationalists by stating that European membership was an inevitable obvious step for this country and we got there in spite of our political establishment and not thanks to any part of it. The PN was lucky enough to have a blind, incompetent adversary who believed (for an incredibly long time) that membership was anathema and thus could step into the shoes of supposed saviours of the nation – much like good old Dom had conned the other half of the nation into believing the Helsien joke a couple of decades before. In a normal, civilised and rational country, we would have been joining the EU without so much as a referendum. The equation was all too clear – out was not an option, it was a disaster.

Yet. Yet. Yet. Even in the most obvious of situations – a no-brainer – a large part of the population had to have the wool lifted from its eyes and had to be dragged unwillingly – nolens volens – along with the rest. Still I find the assertion of Nationalist flag-wavers that “dahhalnikom fl-Ewropa” (we put you into Europe) so pathetically absurd. Little do they know what a great part they had in almost getting us to miss this supposedly most obvious of targets. Sic transit gloria Melitae (Thus passes the glory of Malta).

Mules and asses

The latest “discussion” (should I say dialogue) on censorship and divorce has once again brought out the nolens volens element of Maltese society and of its most honourable representatives. You can imagine one great mass insisting as obstinately as possible on moving against the signs of the times: “because it has always been so”, “because those are our values and traditions”, “because God wants us to be his soldiers” and other such drivel. We are by nature a people who would have been ignored by history but who, through an incredible twist of geopolitical necessity, seem to always end up in the thick of some action or other (and manage to take the credit).

The fundamental right of expression and the civil right of divorce are a bit more complicated than the no-brainer of inevitable membership of a large economic and political union. This time, fate and destiny might not be so willing to lend a helping hand and we risk becoming the victims of our own obstinacy and our conservatism founded on myth. It is time to break the old narratives and rediscover our true likeness in order to better understand where we want to go next. It’s not going to be an easy task.

The tsk-tskers and tut-tutters in Balluta who turned on the bikini-clad lass like a mediaeval crowd of peasants minus the pitchforks exemplify the type of people who will have to be dragged nolens volens into the age of reason. Then there were those who harassed the prankster who had the audacity to pitch a deckchair on the hallowed ground of Saint George’s Square (The Times report claimed that some people hurled insults at him). There’s the huge mass of automatic voters who cancel each other out at the poll every five years, and then there’s plenty more where those came from so it will take more than a coffin ride through Republic Street to swing the balance away from their considerable (voting) clout.

bert4j_100801

‘Eppur’ si muove’ (and yet it moves)

Meanwhile, Tonio Fenech’s men have published the Pre-Budget Document and I am using it as my choice bedtime reading for the next week. I’m already horrified by the government’s idea of “creative works” – surely, given the current environment, a statement like “Government is committed to championing the creative economy” is grossly misplaced. There are other interesting insights to be had from this pre-budget document entitled “Ideas, Vision and Discussion” and I’ll have more to say about it next week.

In the meantime, a bit of news from that other intransigent, conservative institution of power. The Vatican has been getting some heat with regard to the radio masts of Radio Vaticana. In response to allegations linking their masts to tumours the Radio responded: ““Il nesso tra tumori e onde elettromagnetiche non è scientificamente dimostrato” (The link between tumours and electromagnetic waves has not been scientifically proven). Scientifically proven? The Vatican? Now if you don’t see the irony in that one, don’t ask me to help you…. I’d hate to have to explain it in (the civil) court.


www.akkuza.com is back at the home away from home. The weather here is miserable, which probably explains the time we have to spare for “Ideas, Vision and Discussion”.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Show me the funny

Laughter, they say, is the best medicine. More often than not a good sense of humour is the ideal sort of equipment to deal with hard times – that and a constant reminder that “this too shall pass”. The intelligent ability to make light of one’s own troubles must not be confused with ignorance of the predicament in which one finds oneself. Any event has an inherent absurd ring to it and humour is the exploration of the absurdity in a conscious decision to highlight the very absurd while assuaging the potential discomfort.

There comes a point though when the shield of humour starts to melt in your own hands. It’s the point where it stops being funny. The joke is old, the joke is stale or, worse still, the joke risks backfiring into something more dangerous. At that point it becomes very difficult to continue to rely on the medicine that is laughter. At that point it is difficult to “find it funny”.

It stops being funny when it happens too often

Take Thursday morning. I’m sure quite a few who found themselves waking up to what seemed to be the zillionth power failure thought of a hundred new jokes. The first reaction is the “Only in Malta” syndrome – you know the type; we’ve been cracking this kind of joke ever since Freedom/Indepen-dence. As a kid I remember finding the “Malta, We Love Malta” song side-splittingly hilarious what with all its references to driving wherever there is shade and all. In the eighties period of electricity by ration, we coped and we coped through humour. In the noughties we developed a panoply of repartees about the infamous Boiler No. 7.

Yep. The inanimate creaking boiler in Marsa became the star of the show with its own Facebook page and fans. Meanwhile, where was everybody? Everybody was in the dark. The humour had been accompanied with a sort of resignation. The “Xi trid taghmel?” (What can one do?) mentality stepped in. It is the net result of a coping mechanism on a national scale: the humoured tolerance of mediocre alternation at the head and administration of our country. We’ll joke about it even when another committee is appointed, in James Hacker style, to investigate the latest fault and conclude to a bemused populace that: “Yes, we can screw it up… again (and again)”.

Humour can help us cope with the darnest of abuses in a democracy. We joke that it is only in totalitarian countries that facts are suppressed – in democracies they take decisions not to publish them. Once the joke is said it is practically OK. A little mantra that delivers these sins away from our heads. Like the gaseous build up in the stomach, it is soon forgotten once the fart is delivered. (Pardon my toilet metaphor but hey, I HAVE to make you laugh along the way).

So while we have been regaled with sufficient blackouts to qualify for BBC Africa’s online competition for “Best Power Cut Story” (yes, it’s true – and there is no European version), we still find no problem with the fact that our two surest bets for representation (on current rules) seem to be taking the joke a bit too far. I am not too sure how much longer the man in the street can keep wielding his humour shield the next time the South is thrown into chaos because of one traffic light (one,) but somehow I think it has all got to do with the inability to link that occurrence to Labour’s walk-out from the Committee of Strengthening Democracy and PN’s Sir Humphreyesque flustering away from accountability. Vote for change? Ha! Now that’s a funny one.

It’s not funny if the wrong people heard it

Karl Farrugia, aged 24 with a residence in Swieqi, was reluctantly rocketed to the top ten list of “Only in Malta” notoriety under the special section ‘weird but true’. Farrugia provided more living proof of the current human inability to manage his Internet presence with the necessary care. As a citizen of proud Roman Catholic Malta, he should have known better than join the Facebook group called “No to the Pope in Malta”. His greater crime was to suggest in a comment on the same group that should Ben XVI want to feel closer to J.C. then all we had to do was to perforate his limbs with the use of projectiles. In other words shoot bullets through the papal palms and feet.

No doubt, Farrugia’s comment will not register as the most intelligent to date but there is something infinitely sad in the story that followed. Farrugia was prosecuted under the Press Act provisions on, among other things, “incitement to violence” and ended up being fined €500 for his fine work on the website. You guessed it Karl… it ain’t funny and nobody is laughing. I had quite a few problems digesting this case and a thorough discussion is still open ended on J’accuse the blog. I will refrain from such legalistic phraseology like context and intent, but I’d like to dwell on the relative issues involved.

A man called Mario Grech gave a speech to an assembled congregation in a largish hall last week. During that speech Mario warned the congregation of the perils of liberalism while describing such liberalism as a “disease” that required some form of “cure”. Quite exactly what kind of pills Mario would be suggesting to cure this latest affliction (I hope it’s not as bad as avian flu) is beyond me and beside the point. Now this speech could (and I stress the could) have offended a few individuals who call themselves humanists. They are appalled that an individual can stand up before a crowd in public and make such calls that are vaguely reminiscent of purges and suchlike.

It simplifies matters no end that the aforementioned man Mario is one who is often seen wearing a pointy hat and armed with a long stick (mostly harmless though), and that the largish hall was a temple of worship of what is by many considered the dominant religious denomination of the country. Yep. Bishop Mario Galea thinks liberalism is up to no good and the humanists are furious. They are doubly furious actually – firstly that His Pointy Hattedness should even consider equating their philosophy to a disease, and secondly that the laws of the land did not pounce to their rescue with the same readiness and willingness as they did in the case of Karl. Ben XVIth was after all a foreigner in our land – humanists such as Raphael Vassallo are not. What then?

I find all this contradictory mess worrying. Malta is not alone in asking these questions (and in having had enough with the coping mechanism that is humour). A colleague recently pointed out a brilliant essay by Gustavo Zagrebelsky – former Italian constitutional court judge. Written in 2006, it is called “The Paladins of Identity and Tolerance in the West”. Here’s Zagrebelsky on the problem of democratic society: “Whoever recognises himself in democracy would say: in order to defend it let us operate with a spirit of concord, let us battle the arrogance and plutocracy, let us respect each other, cultivate legality, promote solidarity, give security to the poor and slow down social competition. In other words: let us not give up on ourselves, on what we are and what we believe, let us correct the defects and combat that which disfigures us. Instead no. Instead we say: enough of this (identity), let us give ourselves another, a militant identity that makes us recognisable not to each other but against each other. Instead we say that the institutions should not be neutral but should serve this battle and all the worse for he who does not recognise them. Instead we believe that identity justifies the sacrifice of others. Giving ourselves this very kind of identity means precisely to promote a battle between civilisations.”

I want to live in a society where both the Church and the Humanists can feel comfortable expressing themselves and their idea of what a just society is about. I don’t want to live in a society where any of the two (or anyone else) is busy imposing their idea on all the rest. I’d hate to live in that kind of joke, and quite frankly I don’t think it’s funny.

bert4j_100523

The secret of comedy? … timing

Someone who has no time for humour at the moment is Madame Merkel. She’s been shaking the markets like there’s no tomorrow, and although I never thought I’d say this, I think that the Germans do have a point. The euro states cannot expect to have a free ride only to go sucking at the German breast whenever there is a problem. The benefits of the eurozone will require the strict rigours of better discipline. Even General Sarkozy has recognised that as he prepares to amend the French Constitution to that effect.

Another unfunny bit of sabre rattling is going on in the Far East. The two Ks are at it again as a report has finally shown that a North Korean torpedo had actually sunk a South Korean warship. It’s not exactly battleships we are talking about and there is a real risk of war that would only add to the unsettling state of affairs that we have witnessed in Thailand in the past days. All the more worry for the economic markets – all the worse for our beloved euro.

Lastly, look out at the big battle of Facebook v the World as the social networking giant faces its moment of truth. Will its lackadaisical treatment of private data signal the beginning of the end for the facebook model? Will Facebook and Google recover from recent slips in PR thanks to their gaffes on the data protection side? All that and more promises to be an interesting development – is Web 3.0 round the corner?

www.akkuza.com featured Humanists, Catholics, Bondiplus and the BA this week. More fun coming up next week as the sun has finally come to Luxembourg.