Sunday, 15th November 2009
BE CROSS, YOURSELVES
As I write this edition of the thoughts of me, penned to educate, irritate and amuse, the soon-to-be previous one is somewhere in the middle of the "most commented" table that the Times publishes, presumably to spur us writers on to greater depths of provocativeness, a word which William Gates Esq, assures me does not exist.
My rise to the dizzy heights mentioned owes much to the efforts of some people who I have resolved to ignore, and such was their smugness in the comments section when I mentioned this that I thought I'd better explain why I have decided to ignore them and not comment-in-answer myself.
Incidentally, I will be ignoring them only as long as I feel like: if I feel it would be more conducive to a sense of well-being on my part to expose their logical or intellectual shortcomings, I'll do so. My decisions are not written in stone.
The thing is, these, very often, these people have a personal axe to grind with me. They believe that they have been wronged by me in other areas of my life and, in what I can only describe as a pretty craven manner, they use their right to comment and find fault in my thoughts (not a difficult task, granted) in order, they fondly imagine, to wound me.
Sadly for them, by doing this they only demonstrate to me that I wasn't far wrong in my position towards them in the first place. Not that I had any particular animosity towards them then, it is only in their fevered imagination that whatever it was that brought us to cross-purposes was personal on my part, though of course they will not, even now, believe this. For people like this, as their attitude now confirms, everything is personal and everything that happens to them is a result of other people's hatred of them and in no way are they ever at fault.
Such is life, and it is impossible to convince such people, so the only thing to do is ignore them.
Others who I ignore are those who twist what I may have written or said in the past to justify their criticism of something else I might have written.
This, for instance, is why Dr Francis Saliba finds himself on the "ignore" list: he wrote that I have advocated smoking "as being not so harmful" and that I believe that obscene pornographic "art" should be encouraged on the public stage. Both statements in my regard are utterly inaccurate.
Then there are others who, self-evidently, are beyond redemption and should not be given more oxygen. The racists and bigots that pollute the blogosphere thrive on the "yah boo, sucks to you" manner of dialogue, so the only proper course of action is to starve their ideas and let them stew in their own bile. Luckily, their positions are usually so comically ludicrous that they tend to implode and rid us of their poisonous presence all on their own.
As a side comment, incidental to the main thrust, which is now exhausted anyway, could some psycho-linguistic expert apply himself to determining why most comments and posts by the genus now identified as Lil'Elves are in execrable English? Their grasp of syntax, grammar and vocabulary is - to put it charitably - tenuous in the extreme and the research for the underlying reason for this deserves a doctoral thesis on its own.
Is it, possibly, the fact that it was the Labour Governments of the Seventies and Eighties that raped education in this country, combined with the fact that the Lil'Elves are clearly admirers of that form of Governance, that leads to the result described?
Or is just that, quite simply, many of the Lil'Elves don't have the intellectual capacity to write decent English? Even the ones who think they do?
Nothing to do with anything I've written so far, but I was a bit dubious about the Labour Party's establishment of a LGBT Section, since I tend towards the belief that human beings are individuals whatever their orientation and for a mainstream political party to distinguish between individuals wasn't quite the done thing. The mere fact that a special section was being set up somehow gives credence, perversely, to those who think that gays or lesbians or whatever are somehow lesser mortals.
I didn't feel the same about the General Workers' Union taking a similar route, because it is a fact, sadly, that bigotry at the work-place still exists and more vigorous means of fighting it are still needed.
But from the way the leader, and probably half the membership (work it out) of the Alleanza Nazzjonali came out against the Labour Party's move, it became apparent to me that perhaps there is a need for the Labour Party's position. To put it bluntly, if something irritates Josie Muscat, then it's probably a good idea.
This is a philosophy that I find stands the test of consistency.
RSS
Comments
Sounds like a bitter rant from some 90+ m8 :)
Carefull there you may start showing your age ...
No matter though ... when you've got it; flaunt it and you certainly do have it.
- http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20091115/fr-joe-borg/no-prosecution-please-we-are-artists
this blogger seems to have captured quite well what 'us, illiterate and non-artistic peasants' think about crud, freedom of expression etc.
You see, believe it or not, there are those who disagree...
A step forward, it called democracy.
Agree with you 100%.
Just like to add that it seems that "the One" simply thinks others are idiots.
The "self imposed omerta"is nothing but a convenient way to avoid answering direct questions.
Add to this,the fact that "these,very often, these people have a personal axe to grind with me. " is pretty much as vague as one can get!
(A more credible stance would be to name these people and what their problem is so that they might revert?)
If "the One" is genuine about his (veiled) threat that he might come out of his closet (so to speak) and stop playing Coventry (how silly!) then I for one challenge him to do so and expose these "blaggards".
Being one on "the list", I declare openly (once again) that my disagreement with "the One" is not in any way personal or as he claims to "wound him":it is the absolute BIGOTRY in his writing that I object to.
For instance:
-he wants to express his oppinion but then puts himself in omerta soas not to answer to his writings
-he himself goes out of his way to wound others yet accuses others of wounding him! etc
Glove thrown...
The PL has set up a separate section for LGBTS. Maybe to garner votes. Maybe yes. Maybe no. But, as long as people keep gasping, 'gosh! who would have known he was a homosexual' and 'gosh! and he's got five kids and another on the way', and 'but how can she be gay, she's so glamorous', and so on and on and on. People feel very threatened by difference especially when there is no apparent difference but for that big frightening difference that people are conditioned to feel uneasy about. Advanced societies take these things in their stride. Malta lags behind. But, the way out of a problem is through it. Likewise, the 'neither here nor there' situation needs putting up with teething problems. Also known as 'visibility'. Seeking controlling comfort in recognising the perceived enemy short-changes one so. So visible and non-stereotypical it'll be. Or spoon-feeding of the uncomfortable. Martinelli, I understand you reside in Canada. This should not really apply to you. Or should it now?!
"The thing is, these, very often, these people have a personal axe to grind with me. They believe that they have been wronged by me..."
You manage well to push forward the same monochromous political agenda behind the subtle mask of an independent columnist. This might be one of the reasons why some people may "believe that they have been wronged by" you. Although some may consider your strategy to be wise because it has a better chance to influence the uncommitted voters, I guess that, others, may perceive this "manner" as a "pretty craven" one.
I can hardly add to Mr. Antoine Vella's comments except that the cases you mentioned were principally to remove discrimination. The LGBT movement within the LP does exactly the opposite, so you cannot use your references as a comparison.
I think that your comments should be addressed to the ordinary man-in-the-street since prejudice does exist and education is the answer. The LP crowning itself with the glory of forming a 'special group' within its structure, singles itself out as fostering discrimination of the LGBT from the mainstream.
MORE LIKE A MARATHON than two steps backwards.
Today Malta has slipped to 45th place in Transparency International's 2009 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) from 36 last year and 33 the year before. It also ranks 20th in the 30-country region incorporating Europe.
"Did Mrs. Pankhurst the British political activist take a step backwards when she founded the British suffragette movement, which won women the right to vote ?"
Universal suffrage was the one step forward for the MLP. The two steps backwards were the uninterrupted decades of repression, moral and physical political violence, routine mob rule and istitutionalised contempt of human rights.
Two steps? More like a marathon.
“For every one step forward, the LP insists on taking two backwards”. (Sic)
Did Mrs. Pankhurst the British political activist take a step backwards when she founded the British suffragette movement, which won women the right to vote ?
Was Martin Luther King, Jr. taking backward steps when he was leading the African-American civil rights movement?
The PL recognises the hurt emanating from injustices and prejudice which our gay community suffers and are legally subjected to and it wants to do something about it. Is there a better way than allowing the LGBT group to join its forces in its mission to fight against the emargination of minority groups?
The setting up of an LGBT group within the LP will makes it distinct and the discriminating more visible until such time that the difference becomes a "neither here nor there"
I would emphasise that the problem is not with "immigration" and not even with "irregular immigration". It is with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!
"I don’t know who’s right, William Gates or Encarta. Encarta says ‘provocativeness’ is a noun"
An Ole'! for you and, I guess, another one for me.
@ David Seychell
I don’t know who’s right, William Gates or Encarta. Encarta says ‘provocativeness’ is a noun.
I would say a dozen !
In the last MEP election, the PN and LP spoke against illegal immigration in a very hard manner.( only words) AN even harder and IE are the people that are the real thing, the solution.
That leaves you with AD on your side and I have heard, that they are changing their mind also in their majority.
All thanks to your pro immigration articles, people open their eyes to the only truth. Keep up the articles against the Maltese with all its oxygen.
You do have the ink but all the wrong ideas.
"I trust there will come a time when homosexual people's visibility or otherwise will be neither here nor there"
Very well said and that is why setting up an LGBT group within the LP will makes it distinct, visible, discriminating and far from being a "neither here nor there" affair!
For every one step forward, the LP insists on taking two backwards.
While I'm here, putting my arm round a younger brother's shoulder is not patronising, is it?
@anyone else who might be reading - provocation doesn't quite convey the same nuance of meaning for which I was groping
I would try to appease Gates dictionary by using "provocation" instead of "provocativeness".
I trust there will come a time when homosexual people's visibility or otherwise will be neither here nor there. We still have some way for that to happen I'm afraid.
@ Daviid Seychell - ole'
Reminds me of the red cape used in the corrida.