[ANALYSIS] Five lessons of disruption from Muscat to Europe’s socialists

After being heckled by left-wing Portuguese MEP Ana Gomes at the Party of European Socialists conference in Lisbon, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat took the stage to promote his own brand of “progressive disruption” to his audience of counterparts and MEPs. In showcasing his remarkable achievements on the economy and civil liberties in Malta, he tried to project his local policies as a model for embattled European socialists.

But can a Maltese model rooted in an island economy which exploits niches in the capitalist global economy to its advantage, be applied by a political family whose internationalism is rooted in a critique of economic inequality?

1. We have to think outside our comfort zone

“When a conservative takes one of our ideas he is called smart. When one of us takes a sensible policy from somewhere else we call him a traitor.”

Muscat could have been more honest by giving some examples from his own considerable repertoire of appropriating right-wing concepts to illustrate his point. Over the years he distinguished himself by thinking out of the box and exploiting some sectors which are anathema to many fellow socialists. These include the Individual Investor Programme which was widely condemned by the socialist family and his keen interest in promoting Malta as a hub for crypto-currencies and lately Artificial Intelligence.  

Yet Muscat shows a profound understanding of the deep chasm between the expectations of European electorates and the sensitivities of the European left. “We have to admit that some of us were absorbed in debates which mean little to families who struggle to make ends meet… We have been talking to the mirror while people were asking different questions.”

Once again Muscat fails to give any examples of these useless debates in a context where the political right also attacks the left as being out of touch with daily reality. The gist of Muscat’s speech is that socialists can only win when they can convince voters that in government they can secure a better living standard for voters.

As an alternative Muscat coins a new catchphrase, proposing a “politics of progressive disruption” – “We are living in an era of political disruption which has been fertile for others... It is time to start some disruption of our own.”

It is here that Muscat offers examples more in line with the socialist tradition, like introducing free childcare and turning Malta from a laggard in civil liberties to ranking first in ILGA’s rainbow index. Not surprisingly it was this aspect which earned Muscat a well-deserved applause from the socialist audience.

2. We must embrace change, not oppose it

“If politics was the music industry we simply cannot hope that people will turn back to cassette tapes. We have to become the Spotify of politics not the Walkman of politics.”

Once again Muscat – a former journalist who understands the media – excels in coining phrases which capture the imagination of his audience. He even gives a personal twist referring to the “archaeological curiosity” of his twins upon the discovery of an old Walkman in the attic.

But using Muscat’s own musical analogy, doesn’t the return of the vinyl record also say something about our times being characterised by an increased appeal on the left of politicians like Bernie Sanders in the US and Jeremy Corbyn in the UK?

Muscat does give a concrete example here by inviting fellow socialists to understand and embrace the changes brought about by Artificial Intelligence. “We progressives cannot afford to be the Luddites of the new industrial revolution… We should not oppose but embrace change.”
In the short time at his disposal Muscat could not focus on the crucial issue of how AI can be harnessed to ensure that these serve the common good rather than sheer private interest. For the pitfall of technological determinism is that business, rather than community interests, often drives it.  

In this aspect Muscat betrays his Blairite lineage, giving the impression that the division in the socialist camp is between old-fashioned ideological dinosaurs and forward-looking business friendly pragmatists. In reality there are also those who endorse change but want to harness it differently.

While Muscat speaks of “progressive disruption” he is wary of disrupting business as usual when it comes to inequalities rooted in economic wealth and privilege.   

3. We can still be patriotic in Europe

“We want our countries to be stronger as it is by walking with others not walking alone that we are stronger.”

Once a Eurosceptic himself, Muscat now manages to convey a compelling narrative for socialist parties confronting increasingly nationalistic electorates. Yet his catchphrase once again skirts around the complexity of determining which policy areas require more Europe and which don’t. Malta’s tax competitiveness is a case in point. While some may argue that it is better for Malta’s economy to walk alone in this aspect, other socialist colleagues may think that this is an area where Europeans are stronger together.

MEP Ana Gomes

4. Malta is a showcase for European progressives

“We have the best performing economy which is run by progressives… We have arrived at a fiscal surplus with no austerity” – “Economic growth and responsibility do stand together side by side.”  

Muscat is more than justified to flaunt his greatest political achievement – that of sparing Malta from the kind of austerity, which has ravished entire communities in Europe, making them fodder for populism. And Muscat did this while still achieving high rates of economic growth and a budget surplus. While other socialist parties talk about increasing taxes to finance social investments or argue for greater fiscal leeway from the EU to give their battered economies some breathing space, Muscat has literally managed to square the circle.

Muscat is also clear on how he has managed to do what has eluded other socialists on the continent. “We managed to do this by believing in business and enterprise.”  

What Muscat seems to conveniently ignore is that Malta benefits from its competitive advantages as a small island state with a favourable tax regime.

Moreover, Muscat’s economic success is also interlinked with a construction boom which is bound to have a greater impact on a small island than larger countries.

Adopting the Maltese model on matters like citizenship and taxation regimes on a universal scale may well result in a race to the bottom as countries seek to outsmart each other. In short, a dog-eat-dog situation rather than a socialist paradise.

Right-wing populism in Europe is tearing apart centrist parties. Muscat has so far managed to keep the extreme-right at bay. The question is, for how long?

5.  We need to empower people not foster dependency

“We should help those who have been left behind not by giving handouts but by making it easier for them to earn a living by making work pay.” 

Muscat convincingly illustrated this by showcasing Malta’s universal childcare system, which has empowered women to join the labour market. But he ignores one important aspect of socialist ideology, which is that of narrowing economic and social inequalities.

Muscat believes in social welfare as a pass for greater social mobility – not as a way to redistribute wealth and level inequalities, ignoring the risks posed to democracy and social cohesion by the emergence of a class of super-rich people.

Moreover, a welfare system increasingly dependent on economic growth rather than income redistribution may be vulnerable to the risk of economic contractions. This increasingly makes governments even more dependent on big business to sustain growth rates in what increasingly looks like an economy on steroids.

What Muscat did not say

Naturally a 15-minute speech cannot cover all aspects of policy. But the absence of some themes dear to other left-wingers was striking.
Completely absent from Muscat’s speech was any reference to some of the greatest global challenges like the threat posed by organised crime and corruption, tax avoidance, climate change, global poverty and immigration.

Muscat’s silence on corruption is understandable in view of the bad reputation he enjoys across Europe on this issue. His silence on immigration was even more striking. Muscat did hint in his speech that the commitment for human rights should not preclude socialists from addressing problems related to “crime and security”.

Muscat largely avoided this one issue that is contributing to the great chasm between the European masses and left-wing parties. Perhaps this reflects Muscat’s uneasiness, something over which he changed his opinions in a more liberal direction. Insulated by Malta’s own economic success story, Muscat has so far managed to keep the extreme-right at bay. The question is, for how long?