There is a word that clearly expresses the political situation in Malta at the moment and this is qualunquismo. Qualunquismo appeared in Italy, after the Second World War, in reaction to Fascism and the defeat that this ideology brought to the country. After the War many fascists either joined the Christian Democratic party or became Marxists intellectuals within the Partito Communista. This led a section of Italian society to express dismay towards the new political class.
In time, this term came to signify a particular political behaviour, which was far more inspired by the reasoning of the man in the street. This term thus came to mean a political position that intentionally sought to ignore one fundamental aspect of politics – the ability for a nation to live together. Therefore, I agree with both the President of the Republic and the bishops when they expressed their concern regarding the current political situation in Malta. I have no problem with political diatribes. They are part and parcel of any democratic system. But when the debate becomes extremely tense and the language highly charged, doubts start to emerge as to how much the Maltese can live together.
In this situation, the risk of qualunquismo is destined to increase. The governing party is reverting to this type of rhetoric to divert the attention from the real issues – political corruption of its ruling elite. For this reason, I appreciate the stand taken by both Alfred Sant and Evarist Bartolo. These two gentlemen did not mince words and their constructive criticism was appreciated by many on both political fronts.
A sense of general distrust of political institutions is steadily growing. This may appear as a simple mistrust but this could lead to an overall mistrust of politics that would start to be perceived as a distinct activity, which is there to solely gratify individuals rather than benefit the common good of the community. This could lead to a collective depression where many people start to refuse participating in the political debate of the country.
Issues of public betrayal assume important meaning in such a scenario and parading as new trophies of honesty those individuals who were on the opposing side does not augur well. This will only work against any party and government that relies on such tactics.
I found Minister Chris Cardona’s speech extremely inappropriate. Resorting to the expression of retaliation with an axe for any one who wants to strike with a dagger as absurd. It highlights the fact that Cardona has no knowledge of military tactics and does not even know that daggers in battle were always superior to the axe. It is opportune here to remind him of Dom Mintoff's wise words when, at the start of his political career, he stated that “the pen is mightier than the sword”. This is what made Mintoff great. When he resorted to other torturous tactics, he changed his own destiny.
In the current climate, I prefer to remember Mintoff for his expression rather than his political tactics. Cardona should remember that it was this type of language that led Labour to remain in opposition for practically 25 years. Cardona's type of talk is adopted by those in politics who think that their party's chances of being elected and/or re-elected are meagre.Thus they resort to these expressions to assure their personal re-election. More importantly, such language over shadowed the Prime Minister's positive discourse about opening doors and avoiding building barriers.
What the Opposition needs to avoid in the present climate is to appear as forming a sort of “Fronde”. This term is used in contemporary politics with reference to the political movement that developed in sixteenth-century France. This political movement of obstruction in France led to political absolutism. Even the perceptions of a general strike and discussing civil disobedience towards the government should be avoided. The Chamber of Commerce should be positively commented for taking the bull by the horns and asked Dr. Busuttil about such an initiative. Simon Busuttilrightly replied that he has no intention of calling a national strike.The words of the President Emeritus George Abela come together wisely: a Government in Malta is elected for five years.
Resorting to the use of certain unacceptable foul language towards the Government, or anyone else for that matter, only indicates how immature we still are and serves only to portray a bad image onto the concept of the nation. Even the language itself, that is, Maltese, is being on purpose demeaned by such images. When the Maltese language is used for such a purpose, it is no longer a source of unity but becomes an expression of disunity. The risk here is for both main political parties to lose the support of the intelligent elector.
This qualunquismo in Malta is producing a new political class, which is germinating from within factions existing within the main political parties. Through the manipulation of the laws, these groups turn the local situation to favour their personal interest. For this reason, they need brokers whose job is not that of bringing about unity but to try and destroy anyone who contradicts their mission. This explains why we are being inundated with vitriolic personal attacks on social media. These attacks are emanating from individuals, from both side of the political fence. Unfortunately, these factions are not acting in the interest of the Maltese nation. Once again, Malta is at a crossroads and it is time for the Maltese to stand up and defend the honour of the country. In this moment of distress, the island needs a strong voice to put and end to these rapacious individuals. If we fail to do so Malta's future is blown to smithereens.