The Malta Independent‘s editorial on Wednesday 15 July was a good piece on how the European dream is fading away in Malta. The editor did not mince words. He used strong words of criticism both with regard to the Prime Minister, Dr Joseph Muscat,as well as the Leader of the Opposition, Dr Simon Busuttil, on how they broached the whole Greek crisis. The Prime Minister was more in favour of Germany and less on the side of Italy and France who wanted to give some respite to the Greeks. The Leader of the Opposition toed the line of the members of the Popular Party in the European Parliament. The latter were squarely against Tsipras.
Thestand of the two leaders had its repercussion on party followers. Supporters of both started criticizing Greece and expressing words of praise for the German Finance Minister Schäublefor the way he is dealing with the crisis. But Schäuble is not after Europe’s common good. He is only interested in safeguarding Germany’s interest or worse still, to make Germany a new colonial power in Europe.As a Second War World survivor, he sees himself a saviour and the builder of a new Germany. He is not seeking to construct a common European homeland. His approach brings to mind Hitler’s reaction to the Treaty of Versailles in 1918. Yanis Varoufakis is right in comparing the German behaviour towards Greece to that of the Allies towards Germany in that famous treaty.
The only wise words I have heard about this crisis were those pronounced by Pope Francis who rightly described these new austerity policies by the European Troika as a form of "new colonialism". First and foremost, Europe is no longer an association of nation states but of mega - states that want to colonize the smaller ones. Like in Orwell’s famous book Animal Farm, in Europe of today, some members are more equal than others. Secondly, this political policy is leading to a new power struggle in Europe that will only suit one country;Germany.
For these and other reasons, I cannot but disagree with Dr Simon Busuttil who defined the Greek Government’s effort in this whole struggle as “populismu” or populism. I did not expect the use of such a word from a leader of a party that brands itself as a popular one. As already explained, Busuttil was toeing the line of the European Popular Party. But the European Popular group should remember that the term itself “popolari” or “Popular Parties” started to be used, when the European Conservatives ceased to be inspired bythe Evangelical message of the Bible for their political inspiration. Hence, they adopted the term “Popular”, which after allis of a Christian matrix even if today thehidden agenda is to join the Marxists in annihilating Christianity from Europe.
It was Don Luigi Sturzo who used the term Partito Popolare, when he founded his political organization in Italy. This political movement was imitated in Malta by Monsignor Ignazio Panzavecchia with his Unione Politica Maltese and gave life to the current PN party.
On my part, it is not my interest to enter into issues of religion or theology. But I am concerned that when a party removes the principles and ideals that brought it to life, that party or organization is heading towards oblivion.
The term “populizmu” has the same semantic origins of the word “popolari”. The term ‘ism’ has now assumed a negative meaning whenever it is used, as are words like socialism, communism, etc. Perhaps, it was this ‘ism’, which prompted Busuttil to react as he had reacted. But in forestalling their support to the people of Greece, the Popular Parties in Europe are actually backing the creation of a new European Empire albeit not a holy one.
If the PN discards its Catholic tradition and startsbacking the Liberal or worse Imperial politics, it will be playing with fire. It should be remembered that this party was founded to fight the politics of Lord Gerald Strickland,whose views werenot very different from the new colonial stand that some countries are now adopting in Europe. As a party, it originated to defy colonial rule and not to join the aspiration of colonial powers.
Unfortunately, in recent years,taking inspiration from the Bible came to means imply being anti-divorce or anti-abortion and nothing else. Definitely these issues are more complex than that. Yet, the founders of the party had a greater vision. It went beyond the local shores. This is why there is reference to “Latini” or Latins (standing for Europe) in the PNs party hymn.
The same analysis applies to the local Socialist Party. If the Malta Labour Party starts defying its Socialists roots, and throwing its ideals into the dustbin, it will be writing its own auto-destruction. When it did so, the people condemned Labourto 25 years in opposition.
No party can afford to lose its sense of history. When this happens, it will be losing its sense of existence.
The PN was inspired by Christian values and morality. Once the PN defied these values, (finally the claims of corruption are in themselves a defiance of one’smoral beliefs) the electorate expressed its dismay and gave Labour a massive victory. PN risks remaining in Opposition, if it starts seeing its position in Europe as being servile to the big powers as Muscat is doing rather than embracing the well being, not of one single nation, but that of a European Common Wealth.