In this world, there are two kinds of people my friends – those with working brains and those who lick.
For those whose brains work, it is clear that the recent news means only one thing: our two National Heroes have to resign. There is no two ways about it.
Of course, for those who lick (and therefore whose brains are either switched off or still wrapped in their original packaging), there’s no wrongdoing and the difference between the attempted, frustrated, and consummated crime does not exist. But those who lick might have other priorities, and good governance is not one of them.
People with working brains are certainly considering two other matters.
1. We have come to know about the secret companies only because somebody decided to leak the records of one legal firm. But we know that there are many legal firms giving the same type of service. So how can we be sure that our two National Heroes did not open other secret structures elsewhere?
2. If the power station deal was indeed influenced by the setup that surfaced recently, how can we be sure that other manoeuvres of the same kind did not take place? For instance, the Mrieħel towers: can we be sure there is no mysterious company somewhere paying some other secret company somewhere else?
I think all upright citizens have but one choice: to echo the call made by one pressure group to investigate all deals involving our two National Heroes, and to applaud the other pressure group which took the epoch-making initiative of going to the Police to actually file a report asking for a criminal investigation.
This is democracy in action.
Please take my writing as a standing ovation to the courage and determination of these people.
(I admit that in the opening paragraph, I have played a little bit with the iconic original line from Sergio Leone’s The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. I trust aficionados of that classic movie will forgive me.)
The Language Question (again?)
In 1934, these Islands saw the elevation of their native tongue to legally recognised language. In 1964, that same language became the national language of the nascent nation-state. In 2004, it was added to the extended family of EU official languages.
And yet, we seem unable to grow out of the language question. It keeps cropping up time and again.
Recently, somebody filed a parliamentary petition to ask that the law be changed to allow all citizens equal access to court services. (https://parlament.mt/en/petition/?id=35&page=1&numItems=10)
The wording of the petition is not exactly limpid, so the objective of the petitioner and the less than three hundred people who signed the petition so far is not all that clear. The petition mentions “non-English speakers” and “non-Maltese speakers” and their need to use either of the two official languages (Maltese and English) in Court.
I wonder how this petition can help non-English, non-Maltese speakers, since the petition refers to equal access in Maltese and English but no other language.
Despite the ambiguity of the petition, it seems to me that this petitioner has, possibly unwittingly, touched on an issue which will certainly acquire more importance in the years to come: namely the hotchpotch that will become the linguistic situation in Malta.
Almost the entire population can more or less make itself understood in English. I say “more or less” because this week, for instance, a British newspaper poked fun at our Prime Minister when it reported that “He went on to claim a closer union between the EU and Arab states could allow them to head in a direction ‘where others fear to tread’.”
The poke was linguistic – the implication being that the Prime Minister does not know how to use the phrase in inverted commas, taken from a poem by Alexander Pope: “For fools rush in where angels fear to tread”. The Prime Minister had unwittingly admitted that the EU was made up of fools – music to the ears of the editor and readers of that newspaper, but certainly not what the Prime Minister intended.
If even our Prime Minister faces these difficulties, we should not delude ourselves about many of the others.
So, at the end of the day there are at least two points to ponder.
One. Not Being Left Out
The Maltese language remains the key that opens the door to the native community. All the talk about cosmopolitan Malta and all that are completely irrelevant.
“Cosmopolitan” means “being familiar with and at ease in many different countries and cultures”. Very few individuals can aspire to be both familiar with and at ease in many different countries and cultures. Usually such individuals travel a lot and are not particularly attached to any one country.
At times, children of diplomats grow into cosmopolitan adults, having spent their childhood in the different countries where their diplomat parent was posted.
Otherwise, people who spend their entire lives in the same place, meeting the same people, and facing the same situations and conditions, do not become cosmopolitan overnight, even if their beloved Prime Minister wants them to. Being cosmopolitan does not depend on willingness and will; it depends on life experience.
I wonder how many Maltese know what it means to spend half the year under an incredibly shy sun and in temperatures of -25º Celsius, like the Nordics do.º
And thus, we go back to the original statement: the Maltese language remains the key that opens the door to the native Maltese community.
If “cosmopolitan” is being used as a by-word for “turn a blind eye” to “weird” behaviour, then we are playing with fire, possibly fostering the culture of de-humanising foreigners... excessive neoliberalism can lead to xenophobia. Too much political correctness ultimately begets hatred. But I will elaborate on this a bit further down, and again in future articles.
Two. The English as she is spoke
In the meantime, I want to analyse the second point. Non-EU nationals, but even EU nationals, who are flowing into Malta, have different levels of English.
There are the native speakers, who most probably often feel frustrated that the nuances of the language go over the heads of the majority of the population.
Then there are those whose English is inferior to that of the average Maltese, and these will have to face difficult situations making them feel short-changed and filling them with resentment.
To me, it seems that the incoming migrant is not someone who necessarily wants to establish himself or herself here. This migrant therefore would not look for a local spouse, missing on the added benefit of having a shield from, and a sincere interface with, the local culture.
Instead, migrants would be temporary residents, giving rise to a social phenomenon of indifference toward their plight or, even worse, a culture of abuse, viewing temporary residents simply as cows to be milked. When all is said and done, in the long run abuse hurts both victim and abuser. If the foreigner is dehumanised, we risk a repetition of Mitteleuropa in the early 20th century.
The Wealth of a Nation
Needless to say, when the policies of the State are inspired by short-termism, all of this ends up occupying a place of secondary importance in the scale of values, the uppermost value being short-term gain and the maximisation of immediate profits. When people are reduced to chattel or to a replaceable resource, then the situation raises many ethical, social, and economic issues.
The Rector of the University of Malta recently argued that migrants should learn Maltese. This is an important idea for those who want to establish themselves permanently. Only a fool cannot reckon the wisdom of the Rector’s words.
But the temporary resident, who comes over to make some money while the boom lasts, might find that the prospect of learning Maltese not that attractive. And this is the sore point that needs immediate and careful attention. Language is the lubricant that oils social interactions. You do not live in a country; you live in a language. Wave after wave of migrants who are not interested in local culture, and are in turn dehumanised, will ultimately erode the social fabric of the country, which is the real wealth of any nation.
The Kappillan of Gozo
I saw some comments on the social media and elsewhere, ridiculing the Żebbuġ (Gozo) community for the triumphant entry they reserved for their new parish priest.
Many comments came from Labourites.
Now let’s analyse this rationally.
1. This must be a Gozitan tradition. I cannot remember and am not aware of any similar tradition on the island of Malta. Is it bad? No. Is it commendable? Indifferent. Should it be stopped? Of course not! Let the people enjoy themselves if it gives them joy to welcome their spiritual leader in that fashion! If it’s harmless, why judge them?
(I suspect that this is a fundamental liberal notion, elaborated by that liberal-socialist philosopher called John Stuart Mill: if an act is harmless, it need not be sanctioned and prohibited.)
2. The Labour Party leader has asked the Maltese to be “cosmopolitan”, that is, to be at ease with different cultures.
3. Some people cannot even be at ease with the different regional cultures of our own country – how on earth can the Labour leader expect them to be at ease with cultures from other countries? As I said last week about Ultra-Neoliberal Minister Dalli, “messy thinking”. It seems the neoliberals are remarkably good at it.
My Personal Library (29)
Dealing with people in a multicultural environment is serious business. It is certainly serious for businesses and managers.
In Managing People Across Cultures (2004), Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner attempt to guide managers tasked with managing employees hailing from different cultures. Though the book is based on research and its approach is scientific, it is written in a light and entertaining style.
But I prefer Richard Lewis’ When Cultures Collide: Managing Successfully across Cultures (1999), mostly because it gives you down-to-earth advice on how to deal with different nationalities.
The two shortcomings of the book are that it’s now 20 years old and it’s slightly based on stereotypes. That notwithstanding, I have discovered that its hints usually point in the right direction. You then only need to find a way of using your sense of orientation and, if you’re lucky enough to have it, your sixth sense. Ultimately, all members of the human family have the same needs. We only express them differently.
Lewis is the creator of the Lewis Model, a chart which explains in an accessible way the cultural attitudes of different nationalities. You can find it online. It might not be 100 per cent accurate, but it’s fun to read and apply in real life. There’s only one snag: although the Maltese do appear on it, it does not distinguish between the Maltese and the Gozitans...