Written by Miguel Azzopardi
Malta’s current political system is broken beyond repair – an unsurprising fact to careful observers. Meaningful debates are stifled by a two-party system and an entrenched partisan divide that seeks to spin issues into being in favour or against the interests of a particular party. For a growing number of people, disillusioned with the way local politics operates, there is no party that can claim to represent them.
The Problem with Two-Party Systems
Two-party systems are unsuited to reflect diversities of opinion. It is no surprise that countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom which also boast two-party systems have found themselves respectively intertwined with deeply divisive societal crises. As it stands, no major party, whichever that may be, is regarded as competent enough to solve. The Maltese reality is that a majority of individuals still consider family allegiances a significant consideration when it comes to casting their vote – something that is rather telling of the nature of partisan influence.
So too is the willful embrace of corruption and the acceptance of favour-trading by a notable part of the population as something desirable within the local political scene. A binary form of thinking which sees everyone representing one side or the other predominates, making it impossible to focus on the crucial issues at hand.
The Activist Lens
From an activist’s perspective, the two-party system currently in place is a poisonous context under which the country operates. Far too often, activists are deemed to be a threatening force against the Government or a particular party, reinforcing the reality that a poor outlook on activism exists and is a product of founded political bias. Education has failed to provide a meaningful space in which subjects of a political nature can be easily debated so much so that politics has become somewhat of a taboo subject, both at home and on school grounds. The national University itself is another example of such, afflicted by factionalism thus making cooperation between departments difficult at times. Partisanship, in the meantime, deflects the focus from significant issues and obscures similarities between the two major parties.
Why Neo-Liberalism in a Two-Party System?
Both of Malta’s major political parties have taken neo-liberal ideologies to heart, oblivious to the fact that neo-liberalism rests on extremely flawed and dubious theoretical foundations. Global inequality has risen to such extreme heights, it is now comparable – if not worse – to those present in France before the fall of the ancien régime in the French Revolution. Pursuing neo-liberal policies at home and entrusting public goods to the private sector risks replicating similar high levels of inequality which are present globally.
While the disadvantaged struggle to make ends meet, we look towards the notorious Mercury Tower in Paceville rising above Malta’s skyline feeding the property magnate’s – Joseph Portelli – corpulent pockets. With Portelli’s (continuously growing) property empire, it is hard not to feel that he, and others like him, have garnered a level of privileged power that is comparable to, if not more than, that of a feudal lord.
Two-Party Systems: A Hurdle for Change
It is not rare that lobby groups, like the MDA, pass on the burden of proposals we, as activists, have put forth onto the people. We were once told that if we wished for more stringent environmental requirements for buildings, the MDA would have to pass the extra costs onto the people. But, why must the MDA pass on this burden when they themselves have profited so much from lax (or non-existent) planning policies? For movements that seek to bring about transformative societal change – some being Extinction Rebellion Malta, Moviment Graffitti, and Young Progressive Beings – the two-party system is an unfortunate context in which these groups have to use their voice.
Few left-wing activists genuinely believe that political parties are capable of confronting powerful lobbies to bring about meaningful change. Grassroots activism is the main and most effective means of bringing about positive and progressive change. It is by creating significant connections with all people that broader movements and coalitions can be built as well as thrive, holding governments accountable. The demonisation of activists – in the name of defending the party, government or the nation – reduces the efficiency of these tactics but nonetheless, it is the best strategy we have.
Monetising Human Relationships
Political parties, but often also society, fail to discuss the issues that have led us to the situation we are in now. The monetisation of basic human relationships with ourselves, others, as well as the environment, is perhaps the main cause of the confluence of crises we find ourselves in right now: the pandemic, the climate crisis, rampant inequality.
It is telling perhaps that post-growth thinking – a school of thought that places societal and ecological well-being within the centre of public policy – has not yet made much of an imprint within Malta. In placing care work, the restoration of the commons, ecological limits, wealth redistribution, and greater autonomy at the centre of public policy, this school of thought is fundamentally at odds with the current economic and political framework and is likely to provoke the derision of vested interests.
If our well-being mattered to our politicians, the least they could do is talk about it but even on that front, they generally fail. We hear much about how we need to stimulate ‘economic growth’ and how we are a ‘strong nation’, with well-being rarely featuring, if at all. Black-and-white thinking (which is itself a symptom of a dysfunctional two-party system) frames complex geopolitical and socio-economic realities as questions of ‘us’ and ‘them’ while growth is presented as the antidote to a failed economic system. The repetition of these mantras, once again, deflects attention from deeper issues and stifles the debate.
Capitalism = Inequality + Environmental Degredation
Nowhere is there a local discussion with regards to how capitalism itself is a driver of inequality and environmental degradation. The IPBES recently identified encroachment into wilderness areas, industrial farming and unsustainable consumption as a driver of pandemics. Our unhealthy relationship with nature has initiated the current global pandemic, similarly to how it has aggravated and fueled the ongoing global climate crisis.
This applies to social contexts as well. When we assign everything a monetary value, we displace people and human relationships from our frame of understanding. Women, for example, end up with a disproportionate weight of work as they are expected to both contribute professionally while also being entrusted with an inordinate share of care work – an undervalued field precisely because it cannot be monetised. This creates reversion to socially constructed gender roles, especially in times of crisis similar to the present day.
Closing Words
Social justice cannot be achieved within a capitalist system because capitalism itself is defined by inequality. Nowhere in our political spectrum is there an acknowledgement that the crises we face are systemic and that technocratic interventions are unlikely to go far. There is a profound spiritual and imaginative deficit in the way we talk and think about society, stifled by partisanship, vested interests and a broad acceptance of the status quo. A principal way of overcoming this is by playing a more active role in the creation of a better society.
Democracy is not just something we exercise every five years when we go to elect our politicians. In the words of Serge Latouche, there is an urgent need to ‘[liberate] the imaginary’ and to reimagine a fairer, better society for all.
