Friday, 8th February 2008
Le Blog
I'd been toying with the idea of writing a blog for quite some time. The problem is, you put the thing up onto bloguwant.com or lostinblogland.net or wherever and unless you promote yourself, no-one's really going to read it. Then there was the other problem, that column the Beck guy writes, which takes up a bit of the meagre energy resources PlanetMe owns. But it was always a case of sooner or later, probably sooner rather than later, and it's now sooner, since the guy who takes care of timesofmalta.com asked and pushed me over the edge into committing to writing a blog.
Since you're reading this, you needn't be told what a blog is. Anyway, there's been so much hype about blogging being the new message that you'd think that Marshal Macluhan (if he's the bloke I'm thinking about) had come back from the other place. Generally, the mysticism surrounding blogging seems to have been created by the bloggers themselves, many of whom seem to be wannabe columnists but who lacked the raw talent necessary to break into real writing. I'm the opposite, a columnist who wasn't sure whether it was worth wannabeing a blogger. Incidentally, I'm using Notepad to write this, as an experiment in trying to keep myself spelling good, with the added benefit of not having those irritating red and green squiggles under any word or phrase I've invented. So, if there are any spelling or syntax errors, it's my fault, not Bill Gates'.
I'll be trying to use a different style of writing to Beck's. He writes in a manner designed partly to irritate the people that that manner irritates, who are usually the people he wants to irritate and partly to impress. In respect of the former, I can say it works, of the latter, well, maybe. Beck has taken on a bit of a life of its own, though it is rather inter-twined with mine, so I've no doubt there'll be cross-leaks from one to the other. In accordance with the ill-disciplined way thoughts are expressed in blogs, there are no deadlines and no fixed word-counts, which is going to be a bit of a bind, since I've always believed in putting off to tomorrow what can be done today. The only tomorrow which counts, for me, is the one which defines my deadline. I'm going to have to sort this one out for myself.
When it comes to subject-matter, my brief was to write about things that interest me, again reflecting the navel-gazing main characteristic of blogging. Most bloggers seem to think that if it interests them, it is by definition, interesting, which is why most blogs fade into oblivion after some time. In effect, it is arrogant in the extreme for me to think that if something interests me, it's going to interest you, but I've been assuming that for years in Beck and, now, I've been told to carry on. Who am I to argue?
What's interesting at the moment, then? There's an electoral campaign on and the way the various parties are doing their thing is interesting, sure enough.
For instance, even if it's not part of the Labour campaign, what I found interesting, recently, was L-Orizzont's use of a picture of Alfred Sant's mum on its front page quite a few days ago, now. Obviously, they're trying to give us a picture of Sant the human being, rather than Sant the politician, a human being who has had a pretty major health scare. Fair enough, it's a relevant consideration for campaign strategy but did the picture really have to be of Mrs Sant kissing her son's hand? I'm not dragging her into politics, that was done by whoever chose that particular picture a couple of Mondays ago, I'm questioning whether the image of Sant as one who lets elderly women kiss his hand is one the MLP strategists really think is a good one.
As the campaign drags on, we're going to hear plenty of whistling in the dark, most of it coming from the Nationalists' side. The PN has been in power - minus that little blip - for nigh on 20 years now and any party that's been there that long, in a real democracy, which we are now, has to feel the cold breeze of change wafting across the back of its neck, whether it deserves it or not. That's not to say that the electorate won't return them to power: given the option that's hardly a statement of earth-shattering improbability.
The loudest whistle in the dark I've heard, though, came on a Sunday not too far back, when I read that Harry Vassallo, admittedly while admitting to being an optimist, believes that AD have a chance of getting 4 seats. I've got a pretty rudimentary grasp of the way votes distribute themselves, for all that I've been involved in the electoral process quite closely a number of times, but does AD have a snowball's, really? Maybe Harry knows something I don't, which would not be surprising since I'm not an electoral grass-roots person, but our electoral history really doesn't give him much to cling to, I'd have thought. Still, if it happens, it will be a seismic shift, which will make things intersting and then some. The problem is, though, that if you do the math, a vote for AD, much as it is a gesture that someone who wants to wave two fingers in the direction of the PN but doesn't want to give the MLP any comfort will think is worth making, will actually be a vote for the MLP.
Ironic, isn't it, the way the "a plague on both your houses" motto so beloved of those who pose as apolitical animals will turn into a vote for the less loved of both these houses?
Political stuff isn't only party-related, of course. Lobby groups seize onto times like these to push their point home, sometimes with the threat of a vote withheld, sometimes with persuasion. The hunting lobby tends towards dangling votes in front of the salivating faces of politicians, along with macho posturing. Last week, they went one better: they sued the Government and the MIC, ignoring the fact that this last no longer exists. Apparently, the hunters are saying that their rights have been denied them. I wonder which right they're referring to: the right to kill birds? The right to behave as if they own the countryside? The right to threaten?
I hope the parties that count tell them where to put their threats. Azzjoni Nazzjonali doesn't count, of course, so they can tell them what they like.
There it goes with the first blog, then. Hope you enjoy it - or if not enjoy it, are annoyed by it - and if not either of those, at least inspired to comment. I might answer and I might not, that's the beauty of blogging from the bloggers' point of view: it's my party and I'll cry if I want to.
RSS
Comments
What you might not fully appreciate however is that votes for minority entities are votes much better spent than non-votes, statistically counting for something.
It is patently clear that PN & MLP are representative of the present and the past - which includes problems, acknowledged or not, as well as a few successes. However if they do not get their act together any individual predisposed to critical ponderation would (or should) realize that the minority parties represent the future.
Abuses have occured due to an excess of comfort amongst the two(?) parties, not least including a unanimous vote for party funding out of the tax-payers' pockets as well as the undemocratic ratification of the Lisbon treaty.
Malta 'needs' a change and 'any' minority representation in parliament would likely be a step in the right direction, all the better if the people choose them wisely.
Fear of any entity is not conducive to a level-headed & meritable decision, hence MLP's chances shouldn't weigh in much upon the matter.
A vote to AD is loud and clear. It is an expression of a vote for AD, and no one else. It is a vote for a party who is consistent and has principles.