Converging slogans: why PN and PL slogans are so similar

Positive and inclusive slogans are meant to compensate for the vitriol and bitter aftertaste of negative campaigning that happens all too often in Maltese elections. And after the bitterness of the 2017 election, both parties may be more keen on emphasising unifying themes.

Both parties have started their electoral campaign by conveying a positive message of inclusion in what could be an acknowledgement that divisive politics are increasingly a turn off for a large segment of voters.

In fact, one of the greatest challenges that both parties face is disenchantment with ‘tit for tat’ attacks, which may translate into a higher abstention rate – particularly among younger and more educated voters.

For the PN, the challenge remains how to reconcile a more positive message with channeling legitimate anger at the corruption and abuse of power, which plagued Labour in the past years. While anger remains crucial for motivating activists, the PN seems to have learnt its lesson from 2017 when its effectiveness in mobilising supporters was not matched with any electoral gains.

On the other hand, since 2013 Labour has excelled in projecting optimism and inclusion in its official message as conveyed by its leaders, while using its media machine and army of sycophants to hit out and diminish adversaries. Labour’s message of ‘togetherness’ is in synch with a strong sense of party unity and common sense of purpose, and represents an evolution of Robert Abela’s constant reference to ‘team Malta’.

Togetherness in Labour also contrasts with divisions in the PN, which returned to haunt back the PN on the first day of the campaign after three former MPs withdrew their candidature.

The PN’s use of ‘Miegħek’ (with you) is also meant to counter a perception of a detached uncaring PN during its last years of power.

2017: L-Aħjar Żmien for Labour

By focusing on ‘Malta’ in their slogans, both parties are appealing to a soft nationalism rather than to their ideological values

Both slogans tap into a soft nationalism, rather than on a more restricted appeal to categories like workers and businessmen or to values like meritocracy, consumer choice or social justice. In this sense both parties are appealing to the least common denominator.

And while for Labour the defence of national interest could tap into its voters aversion to foreign interference and criticism by MEPs on rule of law and citizenship issues, the PN can tap into voters’ concern on FATF greylisting, which undermined the country’s reputation. As Maltese political parties drifted to the political centre, their slogans became blander.

Labour’s ‘Iċ-Ċittadin l-Ewwel’ in 1996 had already moved away from working class tropes but still suggested putting the interests of commoners first in a context where the party railed against the ‘barons’ who were ruining the country.

‘Malta Tagħna lkoll’ in 2013 appealed for both national pride and a yearning for meritocracy and inclusion. The PN also tapped into the social and political malaise of the 1980s in its ‘Xogħol, Ġustizzja, Libertà’ battlecry in 1987, while in 1992 it banked on greater consumer choice through its ‘L-Għażla f’Idejk’ slogan in 1992 which accompanied the ‘Eddie Fiduċja’ slogan.

And despite lacking in substance, the ‘Flimkien Kollox Possibli’ slogan in 2008 which was twinned with ‘GonziPN’, did provide an aspirational message which banked on the possibilities brought about by EU membership.

Labour’s ‘Malta Flimkien’ pales in comparison with ‘L-Aqwa Zmien’ in 2017 and ‘Malta Taghnna lkoll’ in 2013. PN’s ‘Mieghek ghal Malta’ sounds better than its 2017 ‘Jiena Naghmel Malta’ slogan.

For Labour it must have been very difficult to come up with a ‘better’ and more meaningful slogan than those used in 2013 and 2017.

Surely while ‘Malta Tagħna lkoll’ lent itself into a battle cry which supporters could chant, ‘Malta Flimkien’ lacks the same emotional charge. It lacks the striking optimism conveyed by the ‘best of times’ motif which suggested that everything can be forgiven as long as people had more money in their pockets.

But ‘Malta Flimkien’ could be more in syncw with the present mood, which finds Abela correcting some of the excesses of the Muscat era, where even Labour supporters expect solutions to problems created by unbridled economic growth.

On the other hand the PN’s present slogan is meant to convey the impression that Bernard Grech is in tune with the personal aspirations of the common voter, dispelling the idea of a detached and elitist party. And while it has a more personal touch than the clinical ‘I choose Malta’ in 2017, it fails to convey the party’s raison d’etre in this campaign, as could have been the case had the party added an adjective to at least convey its vision for what kind of Malta it wants.

2008 - GonziPN says everything is possible, together

Both slogans lend themselves for presidential campaigns for Robert Abela and Bernard Grech.

As was the case with the PN’s ‘Flimkien Kollox Possibli’ in 2008 which accompanied the ‘GonziPN’ rallying cry, Robert Abela’s ‘Malta Flimkien’ is twinned with the ‘Robert Abela 2022’ motif. ‘Miegħek għal-Malta’ is also being accompanied by an image of Bernard Grech.

And while ‘Robert Abela 2022’ is too reminiscent of ‘GonziPN’ in 2008 and relegates the party to the role of cheerleader for the leader, ‘Miegħek għal-Malta’ does suggest an interaction between leader and voter, albeit one which also removes the party from the equation by conveying a direct relationship between the leader and the voter.

Both parties seem keen on fighting a presidential election in which Labour starts at an advantage due to Abela’s higher trust rating. And while surveys show that Robert Abela is even more popular than his party, Grech is less or just as popular as his party. While such a contest defies the nature of a parliamentary democracy where people vote for parties and MPs, it also reflects the expectations of voters who expect leaders to incarnate their aspirations.

The danger of this political evolution is a repeat of what happened under Gonzi when the PN was overtaken by the pace of debate on social issues like divorce, which were never discussed.

And while Muscat never felt the need to underline his presidential style through a slogan, his towering personality crippled debate in his own party, which was unable to put the necessary brakes on its leader, especially after Panamagate, when few stood up to be counted to force Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri out.

Cassola’s slogan can serve as a template for popular expectations which can be easily fitted in speeches like “we deserve better wages”, “we deserve better planning regulations” and “we deserve better reputation” for our country

Compared to the bland slogans and branding of both major parties Arnold Cassola’s ‘We Deserve Better’ not only sounds better, but also provides a battle-cry for disenchanted voters

Although he is contesting on two districts, independent candidate Arnold Cassola has come up with a competitive brand and a an empowering battlecry: ‘we deserve better’.

Cassola’s slogan can serve as a template for popular expectations which can be easily fitted in speeches like “we deserve better wages”, “we deserve better planning regulations” and “we deserve better reputation” for our country. In this way the independent candidate can incarnate the aspirations of his target audience – younger and tertiary-educated voters who are presently inclined not to vote but who have high expectations for their country.

But the success of Cassola’s slick branding depends on his ability to convince that he is electable. For otherwise, why bother vote for him instead of staying at home or vote for the ‘lesser evil’, and have a say not just on which party will govern but also the margin of victory.

Cassola has also outwitted his former AD colleagues whose “Green Sweeps Clean” (Xkupa Ħadra Tnaddaf) falls short in touching voters on an emotional and aspirational level, and whose ‘broom’ imagery is more reminiscent of witches exorcising political evil than a rallying cry for voters who feel they deserve a better deal from the political system. And while it does convey a strong message rooted in the party’s long history of militancy for good governance, it does not give it a template which can be used in different contexts and social issues.

Still, having been consistently on the right side of history on most issues, AD remains an endangered treasure worth preserving...