We have just had a hugely disappointing election. Disappointing not because the Labour Party won it so handsomely but because this specific Labour Party won it and won it so easily. Disappointing also because it highlighted how cheaply votes can be bought and how easily political spin and lies can be managed and manipulated.

Further disappointing because so many believed there was no real, effective alternative with the official opposition offering no realistic alternative vision or strategy. And disappointing still because so many now feel disenfranchised and locked into an either Red or Blue cul-de-sac for the foreseeable future.

Disappointing because it has reduced Maltese democracy to a huckster shop of cheap and often unrealised baubles. The richness, complexity and intricacies of Maltese life were reduced to utter banalities while the country faces fundamental challenges in so many areas.

Yet again, disappointing because it seemed to lock Maltese politics and Maltese society into an unproductive and negative binary - either Red or Blue – the impression given is that there is little else. Disappointing because it suggested that the coming five years and possibly the following five will simply and unavoidably amount to more of the same.

It appears as if a large cohort of Maltese society is paralysed and unable to effectively object and alternatively characterise their identity as separate and in opposition to the current dominant definition of Malta as invariably corrupt. 

Like so many on these islands, I have taken part in numerous conversations on the subject. These have swung between elation that ‘our side’ won and utter dejection that ‘our side’ was politically hammered. These conversations have taken place in the local square, around dinner tables, in places of work and, of course in the media, whether independent or regime-controlled.

It seems to this ‘outsider’ that Malta has lost its sense of itself and its agency.  Too many now stand passively by watching the cruel and ugly circus, muttering negatively while keeping their heads down.

Accepting Malta’s false political dualism is deeply damaging. There is either an air of invincibility and unquestioned triumph or one of dejection and almost complete despair. 

Nothing could be further from the truth and buying into the Red-Blue political cul-de-sac amounts to nothing more than a denial of Malta itself. Insisting that everything from environment to infrastructure, democracy and agriculture, foreign policy and culture must be viewed through either a Red or Blue lens is utter nonsense.

Arguing that the foremost political agenda item is to build up Blue to challenge and replace Red is, to this observer, a zero-sum game. Preserving Malta’s old and very tired political mathematics will not serve us well in any sense.

To state the obvious, Malta like all societies is multifaceted.  There are multiple agendas at play from environment to women’s rights to European affairs, faith, and sport.  Each agenda has its own dynamic, its cast and its institutional agency despite the attempts of Malta’s political class to force them into the failed dead-end dualism.

Nationalist Party supporters wave flags at a political rally in March. Photo: Jonathan Borg

If we are concerned in any way about Malta’s well-being and future, we simply must attend to these non-Red or Blue agendas. It is long overdue that we bypass and challenge the practice of the dominant political parties in dictating the agenda.

To effectively challenge now evident and likely increasing disillusionment with the country’s politics, the agenda simply must be extended beyond its current boundaries. There is endless scope to do this. Our disappointing election does not have to inevitably translate into another decade of destructive politics and social development. 

As was argued recently in this paper, Malta is faced with a serious democratic crisis caused in large measure by its two dominant political parties. It is time to move on, to refuse to allow them to define agendas, to bring other concerns and areas to the fore (via, for example the country’s rich and still active civil) and to thereby create other sites of energy and activism.

If our only reference points when discussing Malta’s future trajectory or the state of its social development or its democracy remain simply Red or Blue, then we are fundamentally failing ourselves. 

Malta is and needs to be much more than this reductio ad absurdum.