Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1512911
I hate to say it – largely because I agree with most of what he said, at last week's PN General Con- ference – but Mario de Marco may have unwittingly opened a can of worms, with his comment that: 'The PN has always been a centre-left party'. Now: for the sake of accuracy, what he REALLY said was: "Our politics aren't right-wing, but they have their roots in Christian Democrat ideology. In the words of Alcide Amedeo Francesco De Gasperi, we must be a centrist party that looks towards the left. While we believe in giving every- one opportunities, we have always believed in those at the bottom, workers and politics of solidari- ty…" And while it all seems harmless enough, on paper… those words may one day return to haunt the Nationalist Party, in the months and years to come. Right, let's start with the obvi- ous. The above quote may be an accurate reflection of what Mario de Marco himself THINKS, about the history of his own party – and he is not alone. It seems: writing in the Times this week, Ranier Fsadni pointed towards the PN's 'Fehmiet Bazici' (a document published in 1986) as 'proof' of the same claim. By no means does it follow, how- ever, that the vast multitudes of people out there, who identify as 'Nationalists', will actually agree with Mario de Marco on this point. Indeed, a great many of them might struggle to understand what he was even on about… see- ing as 'Alcide Amedeo Francesco De Gasperi' is hardly what you would call a 'household name', in contemporary Maltese politics. (Be honest, now: how many peo- ple below the age of 50 had ever even heard of 'de Gasperi', before? And of those who has: how many mistook it for a mispronunciation of 'Casper the Friendly Ghost', in Italian…?) But the problems run far deep- er than that. Let's stick with de Gasperi, for the moment. Mario de Marco quotes this post-war Italian prime minister, almost as though he were one of the PN's own 'Founding Fathers'… instead of the founder of Italy's (now de- funct) 'Democrazia Cristiana' par- ty, in 1943. Oddly enough, however, the Na- tionalist Party very recently cele- brated its 135th anniversary: sug- gesting that it must predate both de Gasperi, and the emergence of 'Democrazia Cristiana', by any- where up to 70 or 80 years. Needless to add, the 'Partito An- ti-Riformista' founded by Fortu- nato Mizzi in 1880 (which evolved into the 'Partit Nazjonalista' we know today) was very far from being the 'centrist party, looking towards the left', envisaged by Mario de Marco (even for the sim- ple reason that 'centrist politics' didn't really exist, anywhere in the world, at any point before World War II…) Speaking of which: it is also a little difficult to reconstruct the PN's 135-year history; and some- how fail to notice that (under En- rico Mizzi) it had openly support- ed Italy's Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, in the build-up to the Second World War. And yes, yes; I am well aware that the PN's affinity towards Fas- cism was of a more 'cultural', than 'overtly political' nature… but still. To describe the Nationalist Party as 'having its roots in centre-left, Christian Democratic ideology' – when the same party had adopt- ed the Fascist anthem as its own, in the 1930s – well, it's a bit of a stretch, wouldn't you say? But let's not resuscitate long- dead political controversies, for no reason. My point is that – far from being a quintessentially 'cen- tre-left' party, since its inception – the Nationalist Party has actually gone through countless political transformations, in its long and chequered history. It started out as a movement opposing the Colonial imposition of the English language (instead of its own preferred choice, Ital- ian); it evolved into a fully-fledged 'nationalistic' party, demanding 'Self-Government' (and later, 'In- dependence') from Britain; and along the way, it allowed itself to be shaped and moulded, by the political context of every age it happened to go through…. over, and over again. At which point, an uncom- fortable truth begins to emerge from our historical reconstruc- tion [Note: and a similar exercise would reveal equally glaring con- tradictions in the Labour Party's history, too]. The reality, it seems, is that the PN's current (real-or-perceived) identity as a 'Christian Democrat- ic party, along the lines proposed by Alcide Amedeo Francesco De Gasperi', is NOT – as Mario de Marco argues – one of the PN's 'defining characteristics', as a par- ty. On the contrary: it seems to be just another of the many 'phases' that the PN has passed through, since 1880; and as such – just like all the others - it cannot be expect- ed to 'last forever'. This becomes exceptionally visi- ble, when you consider the precise circumstances under which Eddie Fenech Adami reforged the PN's identity, in the 1970s/1980s. That document Ranier Fsadni alluded to this week – 'Fehmiet Bazici' – actually marked the culmination of a decade-long transformation, that had started before Eddie Fenech Adami had even contest- ed the pivotal 1977 PN leadership election. And there was a rather pressing reason why Eddie Fenech Adami – flanked by numerous 'co-con- spirators' – felt he had to unseat Borg Olivier, after almost three decades at the helm. By 1976 – when Labour inflicted a bruising defeat on The Nation- alist Party, for the last time – the PN was, quite simply, 'going no- where'. And Eddie Fenech Adami understood, at the time, that two things desperately needed to hap- pen, for any of that to change. 1) The PN needed to re- place the ageing (but undeniably charismatic) Borg Olivier, with someone dynamic enough to ac- tually confront Mintoff, head-on; 2) It had to 'reinvent' it- self – and fast! - to appeal to the type of voter who would other- wise simply 'continue supporting Mintoff', indefinitely. In other words, Eddie had to sweep the 'left-wing' carpet from right under Mintoff's feet, if the PN were to stand any chance of ever defeating Labour in an elec- tion. And he did so, by quite lit- erally re-positioning the previous 'right-wing' PN, towards the left- of-centre. This, by the way, is where de Gasperi comes into the picture. For unlike Eddie Fenech Adami (a self-avowed de Gasperi disciple, to begin with) George Borg Olivier did NOT subscribe to the tenets of Italy's Democrazia Cristiana. [Note: I have this only on sec- ond-hand sources: but Borg Oliv- ier is believed to have said, "I am a Christian; I am a Democrat; but I am not a Chrisian Democrat"]. Now: I wasn't around, when any of this happened (well: I WAS, ac- tually… but only six years old). So I can't tell you whether the politi- cal atmosphere of the late 1970s, was in any way 'comparable' to maltatoday | SUNDAY • 10 DECEMBER 2023 10 OPINION If the PN reinvented itself in the 1970s… why can't it do the same today? Raphael Vassallo Mario de Marco may have unwittingly opened a can of worms