The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.
Edward Kennedy

It may be a cliché but time truly flies by. It has been just over a year since my first post on this blog, which defined the scope and ambitions of this little corner in cyberspace. The dream of a Progressive Malta, a truly secular Malta rooted in social democracy and guided by the concept of equality in diversity in all her decisions is, one year on, still but a mere dream. Nonetheless, I believe it is a cause worthy of dreams and one worth fighting for.

Last year I praised the GonziPN government for placing 'sustainable development' at the heart of its fresh mandate. I stated that "one hopes, that the government lives up to its promise much to the benefit of our common future. Malta is waiting. Malta is watching." Unfortunately, GonziPN has left us waiting and watching. In all honesty, I am tired of waiting and can't see any changes. The recent power station saga is a case in point. Dr. Gonzi threw sustainable development out the window and raised emission limits in the middle of a tender process. to get some shaky, 2c cheaper deal. The MEPA reform leaves much to be desired. I sincerely pity all men and women in GonziPN's entourage who genuinely hold the environement at heart. They are with the wrong party.

Due to exams I require a time out. See you all on the 8th of June.

I believe that true progressives in the country should get organized in order to make a difference. As things stand progressives, myself included, are too detached from one another and declarations on a computer screen and the occasional interview/statement/meeting, although extremely welcome, are having negligible effect.

Over-seas they have think-tanks, lobbies and civil liberties unions which collaborate to pursue common positions and pressure politicians and governments not to forget about human/civil/animal rights, etc.

In Malta we have a strong hunting, real-estate and business lobbies all of which fall on the right of the political spectrum. Over and above, political parties have a free hand in fashioning for themselves their own twisted ideas of progressivism. Sadly they are using progressivism and back-drop youths to give them a young, spicy look but they don't pursue it with conviction. If they did, divorce would be a real right and not a political tool that crops up from time to time. Co-habitation rights would be a reality, not empty promises. Migrants would not be treated as animals. In other words, they are free to hijack this socio-political orientation at leisure. Just because Labour happens to fall on the left (at times I wonder) it does not make it progressive, certainly not with archi-conservative political dinosaurs on its back-bench. And I hate it when AD claims that progressive politics is its "exclusive political agenda".

Neither is there a strong enough response to Church declarations against secularism and homosexual rights. Some panellists on Peppi's Xarabank is great but it is not enough. Facebook groups are a good forum, but again not enough.

If we want a progressive lobby we should encourage secular organisations like MGRM, Moviment Graffitti, Zmienijietna, Migrants Solidarity Movement and others to support each other and work together. I would definitely include the green lobby, and unionists but a number of these (especially unionists) are unfortunately too tainted with partisan politics. One must not exclude members of a religious order, like Fra Gwann Xerri and Father Mark Montebello (Mid-Dlam ghad-Dawl) and religious organizations like JRS.

Abroad such non-partisan coalitions exist and we should also have them in Malta.

Yesterday I felt both liberated and hurt as I shoved my letter of resignation from Partit Laburista down a letterbox in Msida. Anyone who has been following my blog of late could have seen this coming. I felt liberated because I am no longer tied to a political party that abandoned basic principles to the extent that it now panders to xenophobes and racists. On the other hand I felt hurt because I now realise that there exists no mainstream outlet for leftists and progressives in this country; only a mild collusion of some NGOs and bloggers which form a small part of civil society. I am hurt also because I held Muscat in high esteem and am now cheated by this.

In James' words I feel politically unrepresented.

I think that the main reason for my resignation could be summed up in this statement:

'...Il-Partit Laburista ma jireffletti xejn l-aspirazzjonijiet u t-twemmin tieghi ta' zghazugh socjalista li jemmen li d-drittijiet fondamentali tal-bnedmin jigu l-ewwel u qabel kollox, u mhux l-interessi tan-nazzjon'

I do not regret my choice. It was a most natural step to take. Whilst it could be perceived as being defeatist, I very much doubt that I had the clout to change a mainstream party's policy on a given issue of such sensitivity and importance so close to election time. The very fact that Labour adopted such a hard-line and ultra-nationalist policy was, for me, time to call it a day.

In politics you need to be ruthless and a politician who has mastered the Machiavellian doctrine is most likely a successful one. Any political ideology must also be flexible enough to renew itself and cross some traditional boundaries from time to time, unless it is content to pass into oblivion. But some lines you cannot cross. If you do so, you are neither a shrewd Machiavellian, nor a flexible reformist but a pitiful opportunist who is so blinded by his quest for power that he can no longer differentiate between reason and madness.

On 6th of June I'll be immersed in contract and tort law.

When human beings are dehumanized and stripped of basic human rights, something is seriously, seriously wrong. Something is seriously wrong when the Maltese government starts to 'tango in tandem' with the fascist government of Italy. Something is seriously wrong when all of a sudden, Libya (who's leader and human rights record have been harshly criticised by many well-to-do "Christian democrats" when it was convenient to do so) becomes a safe-haven for migrants. And the worst part of it all is that the political leaders who are supposed to condemn such travesties are completely and utterly silent, perhaps even in agreement.

There are several ways or ideologies on which politicians may base their choices. Let me mention two. The cosmopolitan, generally speaking, strives for international solidarity and cooperation. He does not build walls, rather he tends to bring them down. He holds a broad view of globalisation which is not merely limited to the greedy sprawl of corporations and exploitation of workers, but includes international solidarity with peoples all over the world. The nationalist, on the other hand favours insularity and is most eager to erect walls. For the nationalist it is a sin that other nations or international organisations meddle in internal affairs. Anything beyond the border is the enemy. A chief example of nationalism is Berlusconi's statement that his government "won't do like the left governments and become a multi-ethnic Italy."

In Malta cosmopolitanism, which on political lines I identify with the left, does not exist. Many times, the Labour Party turns out to be far more nationalist than the Nationalist party itself. It was doing so in the immigration situation until the Nationalist Party, which was pursuing diplomacy, started to kiss Maroni's un-diplomatic ass and regard him as a hero. For suspending international obligations (many of which incorporate human rights) and threatening to destabilize European progress of all forms with the use of the veto is nothing but ultra-nationalism. The closest thing to cosmopolitanism that I have seen was cross-border trade union solidarity in the dockyard issue, solidarity with anti-hunting organisations in Malta and Europe, and a recent international solidarity of NGO's on migration. Now, Labour is dangerously silent or in secretive agreement with the forced repatriation of migrants which falls foul of the basic human rights etched in the Universal Declaration.

AD may be more cautious in approach, and has indeed criticised Maroni in the recent past, but I was not so happy with Cassola's statement the other day (in a GWU-Youths seminar on 'What's Left?') who claimed that the situation is what it is...we must not discard the people's sentiment on the issue. I'm sorry to say but the people's sentiment is disgusting and becoming worryingly more so. The people's sentiment is very important yes but leaders are also there to lead. It is dangerous to think that the people's sentiment holds stronger weight than the basic rules of law.

For that is what is happening. Basic and fundamental norms which play a central role in any democracy are being discarded for political ends, namely to gain votes. This has always been the practise of the far right. Mainstream leftist parties must not be an accomplice to this. Labour and AD need to pull off the tape and speak up NOW.

There's no other way to put it. Italy's action in repatriating 220 migrants back to Libya constitutes a fundamental breach of human rights and international law. The basis stems from Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."

I fear that for political reasons, Malta will be forced to follow suit and commit the same barbaric crimes against humanity by sending migrants back to Libya, without giving them any hearing. And in the meantime the EU Commission remains completely and utterly silent...

Supposedly, and by virtue of the Treaty of Amsterdam, matters of asylum and integration which used to fall upon the untouchable Second Pillar (concerning Common Security and Foreign Policy) now fall within the the competence of the Community (First Pillar). I suggest, if it is possible, that the EP draws up a report calling for a ban on Member States from entering into forced repatriation agreements, ultimately guaranteeing and securing the fundamental human right to asylum from persecution. Unless the European institutions are content with the development of fascist pariah States that is...

It is apparently the Third Way, the political philosophy which transformed the centre-left into a winning hegemonic bloc in the mid-90's, that is coming back to haunt it in 2009. The Third Way, which saw the hard-line democratic socialism of the 60's and 70's embrace Western capitalism and take the left almost to the radical centre, was mainly characterized by the Clinton and Blair governments.

In Eastern Europe the left is in deeper trouble. There is a huge distrust, shared even by those who were born after the fall of Communism. Józef Oleksy of the SLD and former Prime Minister of Poland has indeed admitted that he had 'a quasi-religious belief that there was no other way than the capitalism proposed by the West'. The ghost of Communism and the lingering haunt of neo-liberalism pushed by the left itself leave much to be desired and it is no surprise that Conservatives in religious Poland are set for a landslide victory in MEP elections.

The PES itself is deeply divided especially when it comes to the choice of Commission President. Shocked by the surprise unanimous endorsement of Barroso by the EPP, including endorsment from the social-democratic and labour governments of Spain and the United Kingdom, the PES' weakness is exposed. The French socialists on the other hand are deeply opposed to Manuel, whom they view as being chiefly responsible for the Commission's (in)actions during the financial crisis. The German SPD which is in a coalition government with Chancellor Merkel is silent. It is ironic that the European Green Alliance are perhaps far more supportive of Poul Nyrup Rasmussen (of the PES) for Commission President then the PES itself.

Caught in this harsh theoritcal conflict and by the suddenness of the economic crisis the PES is in a deep state of paralysis and it is not surprising that they are set to remain second best. The fundamental problems are twofold:

- The Third Way social democracy has led to the distrust of the left by many who are attached to historic principle and by those who are victim to the widespread economic liberalism of the West, for which the left played a key role in the 90's.
- On the other hand, a return to the 70's hard-line socialism cannot function in the 21st Century.

I refuse to believe that the left has come to extinction, but despite all the years it has spent re-fashioning itself and the stint of success it enjoyed in the 90's, it seems that the left has yet to come up with new ideas for its revival as a trustworthy force capable of victory.

The economy "is like a football game" according to Antonio López-Istúriz, Secretary-General of the European Peoples Party (EPP). "This is the market economy, this is the free market economy and then you have a referee that controls that there is a fair play. That the game is playing with rules, to have the rules clear for all the participants. This is social market economy."

The problem with capitalists is that they blindly believe that the "referee" is somehow always ready to ensure fair play. Thus there is no need for intervention. The fundamental problem, however, is that this "referee" is the root cause of the financial crisis: he did not ensure fair play, rather he was wholly absent for far too long. Besides, how can López-Istúriz speak so highly of non-intervention when capitalist governments all over Europe were so quick to bail out their own failures?

It would be suicidal for the European economy to be left wholly in the hands of the free market as the EPP so desires. They speak of 'social market economy' now but the they will change tack as soon as world economy gains some form of stability.

Unfortunately, the PES is destined to remain second best and Barroso to remain Commission President. Some hope remains in Socialist-Communist-Green unity in the European Parliament, whose powers are set to grow further with the Lisbon Treaty.

I would like to express my great respect for Bro. Gwann Xerri regarding his courageous comments on today's Sunday Times interview. I share his thoughts, emotions and worries completely - he truly hit the nail on the head. Our politicians, Labour and Nationalist should be ashamed of themselves for the situation they are creating and for falling prey to far right parties like AN.

Read the interview here: Losing our humanity

I read with utmost disgust an article on The Times today entitled 'Muslims gather in prayer along Sliema front'. My disgust does not stem from the fact that Muslims gathered in prayer but from the cold-heartedness and the grave levels of intolerance which is becoming more and more synonymous with a good number of Maltese people. "Malta is a Catholic country. They have no right to come here and pray in front of us" said one observer and the other warned that "there will be trouble" if they gathered again.

Other intellectuals, such as Prof. Giuseppe Mifsud Bonnici, also hold that society in all its aspects should be governed by the morality of the Catholic Church. If this is the Catholic morality then it is a horrible one. Of course, they would argue that the true Catholic would welcome 'strangers' - it is only the pretend-believer or non-believer that leads a life of prejudice. Is that so? Then why is it that a non-believer like me (who supposedly lacks morality) openly supports tolerance and respect towards other religions and the astute Church-goer is disgusted by such concepts? What answer exists to such a question? The next remark would naturally be that I am generalizing. This may be so, but the pronouncements of hatred far outweigh those of tolerance - the latter are in fact largely silent. Also, if the true-believer was truly tolerant then he would have no qualm with the omission of any reference to a particular creed from the Constitution, right?

I am now in serious doubt whether the Maltese people are tolerant. All the signs, gestures and comments are pointing otherwise. Ironically, Malta is losing its identity not because of European liberalism, which preaches the freedom of religion, but precisely the opposite for we once had the fame of showing solidarity and compassion towards others. That was our true identity.