Tribute to Adrian Vassallo
Come election time, Labour MP Dr Adrian Vassallo will step down. He has served his party loyally for as long as he has been in the House: the only exception being when he refused to vote in favour of the introduction of divorce legislation. Although Labour had supposedly given its MPs the right to exercise a free vote Dr Vassallo has accused the party leadership of heaping all sorts of indirect pressure on him and other likeminded colleagues.
Dr Vassallo supported Prime Minister Gonzi’s stand against the introduction of divorce legislation and confides that, “Dr Muscat basically told voters that if I contest the next election they should kick me out.” The Labour MP feels he no longer has a place in the PL and, as he says, has reached the conclusion that “I am more of an embarrassment than an asset.”
Far from gloating over Labour’s loss of a popular MP, I am old enough to recall that following the defection of an Opposition MP, Nationalist supporters were cock-a-hoop and equally deflated years later when one of ours migrated in the opposite camp.
I salute Dr Vassallo’s loyalty to his principles and the sober way he has gone about saying farewell to politics. Silly histrionics, pseudo-reformism and prima donna postures are not his scene. The clear, concise and circumspect manner in which he expresses himself singles him out to be entirely different from run of the mill objectors.
In his valedictory letter Dr Vassallo tells his leader that, “The party doesn’t consider me to be as moderate or progressive as the leadership wishes.” Perhaps now that he will have more freedom to enjoy his pastimes he will have time to read Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind. This West Virginia University social psychologist contends that the principal differences between conservatism or for that matter Christian Democrats, and being liberal, moderate and progressive are that unlike conservatives the latter do not really understand their opponents.
Haidt is of the view that most systems of morality are underpinned by six key ideas: care, fairness, liberty, loyalty, authority and sanctity. Liberals are “almost exclusively concerned with the first two” and solely “pre-occupied with suffering and social justice” while conservatives are animated by all six.
For the record, the Nationalist Party in government, which the Labour Party and a sprinkling of fellow-travelling journalists and opinion formers who play the independent card do not consider liberal and progressive, has regularly driven policies to decentralise power, set up local councils, empower NGOs, instituted the office of Ombudsman, armed citizens to combat abuse and corruption thereby effectively liberalising, rolling back and renouncing powers which successive Labour governments had snatched up so avidly and greedily.
According to Haidt the self-righteousness of the left and their inability to empathise with those who do not share their point of view is tiresome and contains the seeds of their own destruction. Therefore, when conservatives think about politics they enjoy an advantage because their view of the world also encompasses the first two categories. Although they do not prioritize these principles, conservatives and Christian Democrats understand the importance of protecting people from harm and shielding them from economic serfdom. On the other hand, Haidt maintains that liberals cannot understand the moral significance of the other four categories and consider appeals to freedom, honour, patriotism, chastity, law and order as hot air and a smokescreen to hide an agenda designed to perpetuate injustice. Plus ça change!
As Dr Vassallo rides into the sunset he takes a few steps up the ladder of the thinking man’s estimation. This self-confessed conservative who shares my aversion to “turncoats” other than of the Damascene category, will undoubtedly find comfort in Haidt’s way of thinking. I wish him well.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
17 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
M Sciberras
May 12th 2012, 17:50
Adrian Vassallo contributed nothing in his years as an MP. His attendance record - or the lack of it - is proof enough.
Charles DeMicoli
May 12th 2012, 04:41
It is sometimes confusing when reading quotes from American authors in reference to Maltese politics. Let me explain. The GOP (Republican Party) leans towards conservatism, with factions from both sides of the conservative spectrum. GOP adherents usually tend toward patriotism, religion, less government interference, etc., while the Democrats espouse liberal policies, social welfare, more government, more taxes, etc. As an example, President (now in campaign mode for the November election) came out in favor of gay marriage, while GOP Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney maintained the stand that marriage is only between a man and a woman. So when Haidt is writing about conservatives and liberals, he's writing about Republicans and Democrats. His ideologies are firmly planted in the conservative, Republican camp.l have a hard time understanding Refalo's interpretation of Haidt's work, other than to justify his thinly veiled gloating self-serving article.
R. Gauci
May 11th 2012, 23:45
Zmien l-Inkwizizzjoni spicca! Zmien li persuni ohra jindahlulek x'taghmel u x'tara fil-kamra tas-sodda tieghek ilu li ghadda snin u niskanta kif Dr. Vassallo baqa sa l-2012 fix-xena, vera l-MLP/PL hu partit tolleranti. Kullhadd ghandu dritt jghix kif irid sakemm ma jaghmilx hsara lil proxxmu u tal-misthija kif ghad hawn nies li ma jhallukx tghix fil-liberta' ghax il-liberta` tieghek tmur kontra dak li jemmnu fih huma.
pat muscat
May 11th 2012, 20:43
Comparing Dr Adrain Vassallo to Michael Refalo is simply not on. Dr Vassallo was a catalyst for social justice: Michael Refalo? I don't know where he stands!
Edgar Azzopardi
May 11th 2012, 18:39
Issa bdejn bit ' tributes' !!!!!
U halluna.... these tributes are due because he has turned against Jospeh Muscat not more and no less..so please do not be sheep in wolf's clothing because we are not idiots!
Stanley Iles
May 11th 2012, 18:26
How could he have served his party and his constituents loyally when he himself said and admitted that he was rarely present during parliamentary debates? Anyway I respect his position and decision.
Francis Sammut
May 11th 2012, 17:59
Mr. E. Muscat just what do you mean and who are the: '' only 52% and that includes EU non-Christians'' and ''we will wait for the eventual family bust-ups?'' ( as if they weren't there for years, already!)
We have to be careful when speaking of percentages. The government is there by the will of a few voters. We are in the EU because a percentage of Maltese voters opted to join the Union, etc. etc. That's democracy as it should be.
MD Fenech
May 11th 2012, 17:39
It seems to me that you did not watch Bondi+ yesterday!
Carmel Camilleri
May 11th 2012, 15:32
At least he acted like a gentleman and remained loyal to his party unlike Nationalists' turncoats.
Victor Laiviera
May 11th 2012, 14:39
A cheap and obvious attempt to jump on the bandwagon.
Wally Vella-Zarb
May 11th 2012, 13:13
A candidate is elected to parliament as a representative of the people. He is put there to provide a voice for them and not to obtain a platform for his own ideals. When we had the referendum, everybody had the opportunity to cast his own, single, vote in the manner that best fitted in with his principles/priorities/ideals etc. The people's verdict was loud and clear. The people had spoken. At that stage a proper 'representative' of the people would acknowledge that decision which, as democracy dictates, needs to be respected.
This does not mean that an MP should throw his principles to the wind, as some spinners and apologists would have us believe. If an MP feels so strongly about a decision shown by 'vox populi' that is diametrically opposed to his own principles such that he cannot vote for it in parliament, the honourable solution would be to abstain - as some MPs did in fact. On the other hand, those MPs who, like Dr Vassallo, voted against the wishes of the 'vox populi' showed a total disregard for the people that they are supposed to represent. Such people do not deserve to be representatives of the people. They do not belong in a democratic parliament; they do not even belong in any party unless one that is of their own making.
Who knows? Maybe, one day, we shall have a fourth party, possibly called 'Ghaqda Fundamentalisti Maltin'? From someone who is so petulant about media exposure and who has an imagination that is vivid enough to label the leader of the opposition 'dictator' and 'communist' it might not be impossible.
Emanuel Muscat
May 11th 2012, 13:42
Wally,what goes around,comes around!
Now let us watch very carefully,with our ears to the ground and our eyes to look inside facades, what eventually happens to Adrian Vassallo.
Your 'the people have spoken' only meant 52% and that amount includes EU non-christian non-maltese voters :again we will wait for the eventual family bust-ups and then you can explain it away using pseudo-logic.
m. borg (slm)
May 11th 2012, 14:50
What do you expect to happen?
Explain please.
Wally Vella-Zarb
May 11th 2012, 18:57
The point, Mr Muscat, is not the merit or otherwise of what the people vote for in a referendum. A proposal is put to the vote. Everybody - and that includes serving MPs - has an opportunity to vote for or against. Once the result comes out and turns out to be against the opinion of an MP, that MP has already had his say - like the rest of the people who voted - and can now take one of two honourable courses of action. He can either go with it or else abstain if he feels uncomfortable with what the majority of those who voted has decided. Voting against the result is nothing less than a total disregard for the people that the MPs are supposed to represent. It is the dishonourable course of action, one that Dr Vassallo and others have chosen at their political peril.
One cannot, as a public officer, let his official decisions be influenced by his subjective opinions; he needs to be objective when carrying out his duties. Can you imagine an application for a sausage factory being refused because the public officer in the relevant department happens to be a committed vegetarian?
m. borg (slm)
May 13th 2012, 10:12
@Wally
I agree completely.
Mr Andrew Camilleri
May 11th 2012, 12:48
Wow! Talk about jumping on the bandwagon and taking any opportunity to beat the opposite party! Dr. Vassallo is suddenly so suddenly loved and respected by the PN! I wonder why.
Francis Sammut
May 11th 2012, 12:09
Dr. Michael Refalo with respect to Dr. Vassallo and your good self, I must take you to task when you erroneously stated he has served his party loyally for as long as he has been in the House! But can't you see that his time when he attended the Parliamentary sessions were very few and far between? I can understand you're wanting to give a gentlemanly tribute to an otherwise good man and doctor, but this cannot be right!
Please choose the reason of your report below: