As I have stated before and shall state I again I believe that a coalition in the strict political sense between socialists (MLP) and greens (AD) should not take place now - it is still to early. In this regard I am in full agreement with Arnold Cassola's comments on today's (17/09/2008) issue of maltatoday midweek.However, I am somewhat incensed by Carmel Cacopardo's comments on the same article. Possibly, for the first time you had a particular politician, being Evarist Bartolo, who by forsaking political partisanship, proposed something unique for this island. Cacopardo maintains that "it's only now that Labour is talking on issues that for years were AD's exclusive political agenda" - does he mean to say that progressive issues should be at the sole discretion of AD? He further states that "Labour never said a word, fearing it would lose votes" (I agree with him on this point) but what I deem to be questionable or rather close-minded is his belief that this call for an alliance is "a matter of pure political convenience."
To me this instills a sense of hopelessness and a morbid sense of joy in destroying this discussion before it even properly begins. Yes, for too long Labour has been mum on issues of social liberties, civil rights, greater political freedoms and the environment. For too long have they hid behind the facade of mainstream party populism at times even politically straying towards the center-right.
I would like to mince two phrases, not my own, to make a point - you may say I'm a dreamer but I believe in the audacity of hope. I believe that things can change. Ultimately I believe that Labour can change and is changing regardless of recent internal blunders. I would not be progressive if I do not believe in change and that change can happen. The conservative/populist forces in the MLP may have the upper hand but believe me when I say it's not all doom and gloom. Not everyone in the MLP is a political dinosaur. Thus I completely disagree that Labour should be entirely stripped of this hope and I cannot fathom how such an open-minded party such as AD, for which I have great respect, can come up with such close-minded remarks.
I would like to say that Evarist Bartolo's voice is not alone and that he should continue believing in such an alliance which in my opinion should also stretch to other progressive/leftist organizations who share the same ideals.
See: Unite the Clans!
Posts
3 Responses to Rainbow Coalition
I totally agree with E.Bartolo.
But I hope, that they don't name it (if it ever happens) a 'rainbow' coalition.
Hehe, I'm not such a fan of the name either to be honest...but it's merely a reference to the concept of two or more organizations who share similar ideals and unite for similar causes.
In the strictest and most complete sense I would imagine that they unite under the same banner and during elections as one political party. Or through other bi-lateral agreements such as voting for each other. I agree that it is still too early in the day for this.
However, I see absolutely nothing in wrong in forming closer ties and improving party-to-party relations and uniting together on certain issues which both parties have at heart for the time being.
Yes, I'm familiar with the format. Similar to 'la sinistra arcebaleno' but is besides the point.
I agree with you. Before they get married they should at least go out for dinner first :P
Post a Comment