For quite a few decades, politics has had an underlying ideology that manifested itself in laws, policies, education, perspectives, economics and social models. Very often, there have been thinkers, philosophers or leaders who came up with ideas that created these ideologies which influenced the masses.
Since the start of the industrial revolution, two predominant ways of governing have developed.
The left-leaning parties and politicians would include socialists, communists and those with heavy inclinations towards governments that initiated ideas and which had a strong say in the development of the nation.
The right-wingers would be those drawn to the open markets and economic policies that favoured private property, creativity, business and less dependence on the state. They believe in a government that is more of an overlooker facilitating free will and legislating minimal controls.
These ideas have played about in the local political scene for a number of years as well.
In the last two elections in Malta, the ideological concepts of left and right have not been so evident. There has, however, developed new unscripted and unofficial ways of doing things. They cannot really be called ideologies, nor are they that evident to be pigeonholed but they are definitely values that have influenced our voters’ choice of government.
One can give a name to these concepts: egoism and altruism. These are not qualities that define political parties or politicians. But they actually shape society because they apply the values in many of the things one goes about doing daily.
Officially, no one will claim these qualities as ideologies at a party level or on an individual level. But the evidence is there and they influence the choice. Some people vote seeking personal gain, others vote for the common good.
Evidence to support this claim needs to be observed with an open mind that does not try to organise the anthropology into traditional boxes. It needs to seek to reclassify behaviour and draw the new reality into ideologies that have not been thought of before or proposed by some prominent individuals like Smith or Marx as political beliefs.
The observable evidence needs to direct to the trends of behaviour; an exercise that starts from the people and reflects itself in the ultimate choice of leadership in government people elect; then maybe label that party whose supporters favour egoism more than altruism and be seen as an unstated ideology.
What one needs to observe therefore is whether people think of themselves in an egocentric way or whether they consider others when they have a choice – if they see the choice. The way people are conducting themselves reflects itself even at the ballot – “we live that which we believe”. These are but a few cases:
Two people are walking on a pavement and one person is coming from the opposite direction. Does one of the first two people consider moving behind the other so that the single person does not have to go down the pavement? A person acquires land on which he can build apartments. Does he consider how it will affect his neighbours or will he maximise his permit to make the maximum profit? A person has loads of money. Does he consider the environment in the way the money is spent or does anything go?
In a society that is doing away with a Christian moral compass, a vacuum for ethically moral right action has been created- David Pace O'Shea
A person likes to play loud music. Does he consider the neighbours or does it not even cross his mind unless they complain? A person knows friends in high places and can skip a few grades. Does he consider the impact and frustration he causes to others?
A woman is pregnant and wishes to terminate the pregnancy. Does she consider the other person in her? People have the phenomenality to procreate life in such a beautiful way as sex. But do they treat sex and its procreating ability to regenerate humanity in an altruistic and pleasurable way or is sex a recreational asset they abuse of? A person walks his dog in the street. Does he consider if the dog is peeing against someone’s wall and being a nuisance?
These are just a few observable behaviours that can be classified between egoistic attitudes and altruistic ones. Without people organising themselves into this or that party or group under whose flag they identify themselves, ideologies are emerging that are shaping society. For a moment it would sound like people are turning into a society without values. But everyone knows and realises ethical and legal values when things touch them personally.
In a society that is doing away with a Christian moral compass, a vacuum for ethically moral right action has been created and the pivot around which we are deciding is the self. It is being felt at every level of society and it leaves the people of goodwill and those who are altruistic ask themselves: what the hell is happening? Egoism has a short-term gain but a long-term loss. Altruism has a long-term gain but is a very difficult concept to persuade people to live by.
In an egoistic society, individualism creeps in and loneliness follows. When what we care about is only our space, everyone is left on their own and then we expect others to do the same. In an egocentric society, a government can wield a lot of power and people have no strength because they are not united in any other way.
For those who really wish to see a better, happier, just society the altruistic way is still the better one. The individual, those in politics and those who occupy positions of leadership, who care need to push in that direction.
David Pace O’Shea, thinker and well-wisher for a better society