Turkey was founded as a secular republic by Ataturk. Its secular tradition lasted for almost a century between the fall of the Ottoman Empire and President Erdogan's transformation of Turkey into a popular autocracy. People in Malta and Gozo may hate the comparison, especially since part of Malta's identity is recognised as being built around the Great Siege.
The analogies with Malta are easy to make, especially when one wonders how it is possible that with all its mistakes, the government here retains great public support. In Turkey, Erdogan commands majority support and was able to change the constitution via a referendum.
However, the question I have been asking myself is how is it possible for a country like Turkey, with such a long tradition of secularism and pluralism, to so quickly change into the Turkey we know today. Today, Erdogan blames foreign conspiracies for the coup and the country's problems at home, and people who speak out against the government are said to be traitors working for foreign powers. Clearly, time will not guarantee the improvement of a country.
Of course, there are many crucial differences between Erdogan and Muscat, and there are no purges taking place in Malta. The repression is more subtle - for example by ensuring that key positions and resources go to loyalists - and people who do not support the government are treated like second-class citizens, especially in the civil service. The jobs are for the boys. The free press is repressed.
The point that must be made however is: it is possible for a functioning democracy to very quickly see its standards slip with popular support. However, neither Turkey nor Malta have histories of being perfect democratic countries. Both are relatively young republics. Time is not a guarantee of better governance, however, and inexperience cannot always be blamed. Latin America suffers continuous problems of corruption, and much of it has been independent and nominally democratic since the days of Napoleon.
A core of voters who have the moral fibre and understand what good governance is all about, citizens who know right from wrong must not permit poor democratic practice. One cannot turn a blind eye on bad habits just because certain politicians are on one's own side. Turning a blind eye creates an aura of hypocrisy which repels people from voting against corruption, as they perceive no better alternative. It is also why civil society must remain free of political capture.
Malta cannot afford to keep on letting its standards slip. Other countries show by example that reaching rock bottom does not guarantee getting back to the surface. Instead, we may limp along for the next century, shackled by our own lack of standards and by our own indifference. We must never cease to fight for what is right, and make no excuses. Otherwise, our long road and our potentially misguided struggle will lead nowhere.