Fear and excessive optimism - Alfred Sant

The COVID-19 pandemic has reached a stage at which people have become increasingly wearied by its effects, while at the same time increasingly coming to the realisation that it is more serious than they had previously believed. The weariness is underscored by how social and personal restrictions have become too much of a social and personal burden for many, even as economic concerns have multiplied.

This is generating a sense of fear which must be contested. It is never a good idea to allow pessimistic feelings to spread too far in society.

Still, pessimism cannot be countered by encouraging a false sense of confidence... as for instance President Trump does. Such an approach triggers a lack of caution in the ways by which citizens behave and observe sanitary regulations. Also, if such optimism is based on exaggerated expectations (such as that an anti-COVID vaccine will become available shortly) and these get disappointed, chances are that feelings of disquiet will grow much more.

Excessive optimism can be as harmful as a state of fear.

The American elections

More than the previous one, the ongoing American presidential elections have turned into a confrontational show between “modern” populism and the political traditionalism practised in the conduct of political affairs since the end of World War II. If COVID19 weren’t around, the confrontation would likely have been sharper still.

On the one hand, we had a black and white presentation of the world we live in, though what might have been white yesterday, could have turned black by today. Factual correctness has had limited importance so long as what was being declared could be understood as a strong statement which quickly showed how problems can be solved fast. No matter, then, that what was the right solution this morning could by tonight be considered as a huge mistake by the same speaker.

On the other hand, we had the attitude of one who believes that the best way forward goes through the middle – which you reach through compromise and the exercise of common sense. The problem here is that one also needs to do so in partnership with various strata of the society which will lead towards compromises that are valid, true, but which a substantial segment of the people will fail to comprehend.

Polarised or in coalition?

Maltese politics were and have remained deeply polarised (as obviously on a vaster scale has been the case for the UK and the US). Frequently, the argument is made that if over the years we had shifted away from a two party system, we could then have followed European models of political governance, based on coalitions.

But do we really know which political structure promotes the best governance? The claim is that with coalitions, extreme decisions are avoided, while the abuses resulting from aggressive political patronage and corruption can be contained better.

Really? Since the Democrazia Cristiana lost its dominance of Italian politics, it does not seem like clientelism and corruption have declined so much.

Above all, which political structure is in better shape to deliver effective and timely decisionmaking?

Budget

I still believe that success or failure in the budget of this week for the year 2021 will eventually be judged about how it has succeeded on the one hand, to sustain the financial activity of so many enterprises which have been caught in the mangle caused by the huge drop in work and sales; and on the other hand, to keep in abeyance enough reserves to be able in the near future, to contain further bursts of economic disruption.

The balance that has been secured with the measures which have been laid out... in the funds they mobilise, in how they will be targeted, and in how their impetus is going to be spread out... makes sense. Yet good sense does not always ensure successful outcomes. The equilibrium that has been sought and I think achieved, can only be called prudent, though prudence also sometimes leads to disappointment.

No one truly knows how to reply to a query that remains pending: What shall be the endpoint of this ceaseless effort to control completely the Covid 19 threat to public health and to economies? Shall we have enough resources to go on to the bitter end if this war goes on for much longer?

Victory well won

The big election victory achieved by the New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was well merited.

She did not need to... I believe she did not want to either... dilute the social emphasis of her proposals in order to soften the outlook of right-leaning segments of the electorate. She did her best to show that what was being promised by social democrats would be implemented. That’s how it should be.

Today Ardern has the majority she needs to implement all needed reforms: and this is what is being said about her government. It is a dangerous moment. Mistakes start being made as soon as one starts to believe one has all the power it takes to get things done.

However, Ardern hardly appears to be among those who get overtaken by hubris.

Amnesia

“The amnesia displayed by people who want to preach to us about how, according to them, corruption in this country took off after 2013, is worrying”

The amnesia displayed by people who want to preach to us about how, according to them, corruption in this country took off after 2013, is worrying.

Always, it has to be made clear that what was done wrong in the past cannot in any way be used to justify what maybe now is not being done quite right. Yet: How come that those who today are so loud in their expression of shock at what is happening now, never in the past were in any way sensitive to the scandals of yesterday?

And there might be a more telling concern: Let us allow that at that time, they did not protest or demonstrate. But today, how come that they still ignore and fail to mention those past scandals? They could at least accept that they did exist and that the abuses of that time also deserved the furore which they are creating today.

In terms of the language that they themselves employ, they should be apologizing for their actions, or lack of them, then.

Nothing of all this. One could perhaps check about the bios of these present-day champions of justice. Quite a number held in other days interesting jobs with the government then in office, like consultancies, ambassadorships, managers of special assignments...