Christmas or Xmas? -- Christmas jew Xmas?

Christmas or Xmas?

This week I was at an Indian supermarket in Wentworthville, Sydney. At one point, I saw a rather large crib, with a manger, statuettes etc., I would say not really different from the many cribs I used to see in Malta, even some of those I put up as a kid.

One might not expect to associate Christian symbols with Indians, as this country a billion strong is more associated with Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism and Sikhism amongst others. Nevertheless, it may not be so well known that Indians also have a long Christian tradition that goes back to the Apostle Thomas.

This unexpected sight reminded me, for some reason, in a tendency I've long noted, that Christmas, which is a Christian religious feast, the presence of Jesus Christ is slowly disappearing.

When I was young, I remember receiving Christmas cards with the words 'Merry Xmas' and used to ask my mum what this meant. I was amazed when I was told, with barely concealed annoyance, that the letter X was seemingly used to cut Christ out of the picture. More recently, I read¹ (with considerable relief) that the letter X started being used as an abbreviation of the Greek version of the word Christ (Christos, with the first letter 'chi' written as Χ).

Up till recently I've often had discussions with some friend of mine that holds the Christian faith, that tells me, rather angrily that this year a decision has been made in some place, shop or centre, no crib or other religious symbol associated to Christmas would be set up. Naturally, related commercial music, tinsel, globes and flashing lights are always exempt from this rule, and these start being seen even from November, lest we forget the need to start saving to be able to participate in the shopping orgy towards the end of the year.

The reasons that is always given is that one wouldn't want to drive away those who are not Christian, lest we lose some sales in this important part of the economic calendar. After this reasoning, there is usually some words of anger against these immigrants - Muslim, Buddhists, atheists and the rest that are forcing us to change our culture. What cheek! What have we come to! They wouldn't change their culture in their own country!

Let me confess something with you. I have many friends who are not Christian. I have never heard any one even imply that he feels uncomfortable with Christian symbols at Christmas, even those who are atheists. Naturally, by me not having heard of any, this does not mean that such people don't exist, however I don't get the impression that there is some strong movement against these symbols. Have you, dear readers, personally ever heard anyone directly say something along those lines?

Why would Muslims feel uncomfortable with Christian symbols? For them, Jesus is the 2^nd most important prophet in Islam, second only to Mohammed himself.

For followers of other religions, or for those who are atheist or agnostic, as I heard just this week, Christmas does not mean anything in a religious sense, however they still enjoy the day with a good midday meal or with an outing, which means there is a cultural coexistence. So what is the problem?

I think the problem is not coming from those who are not Christian, but from those who have been responsible for putting up these religious symbols, who were not doing so out of some devotion, but to attract people who were predominantly Christian, with the motivation being purely commercial.

Now that society is much more multi-cultural, the calculation of 'how-are-we-going-to-earn-more-money-than-last-year' is now leaning towards risk aversion.

After all, is this really a problem?

My advice to whoever feels that this is a subject of some importance, is that the most powerful Christian symbol in this world comes when we follow the teachings of Jesus in our daily life, and become the salt of the earth in this earth.² We don't need to make noise or raise any flags.

Where there are Christian symbols that are still visible, let's enjoy and embrace them this Christmas. And in the spirit of tolerance that we expect from others, let's also enjoy the Christian dragon running round the streets at the start of the lunar year, and the lights hanging from the windows of Indian homes in the Hindu festival of Diwali.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.³ Really a golden rule!

Happy Christmas, and peace, to all readers.

1http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Xmas?q=xmas&searchDictCode=all, retrieved 14/12/2014

2Mt 5:13

3Mt 7:12

-----------------------------------

Christmas jew Xmas?

Din il-ġimgħa dħalt ġewwa supermarket tal-Indjani ġewwa Wentworthville, f'Sydney. F'ħin minnhom rajt li kellhom presepju pjuttost kbir, bil-maxtura, il-figurini eċċ, xejn different ikolli ngħid mill-ħafna presepji li ġieli rajt f'Malta, u wħud ukoll li kont narma meta kont għadni tifel.

Forsi wieħed ma jistennix li jassoċja simboli Nsara mal-Indjani, għax dan il-pajjiż ta' biljun ruħ iktar huwa assoċjat mal-Ħinduiżmu, l-Iżlam, il-Buddiżmu u s-Sikhiżmu fost l-oħrajn. Madankollu, forsi mhux daqshekk magħruf li l-Indjani wkoll għandhom tradizzjoni Nisranija twila ħafna li tmur lura sal-Appostlu Tumas.

Din id-dehra mhux mistennija fakkritni, għal xi raġuni, f'tendenza li ilni ninnota, li fil-Milied, li hi festa reliġjuża Nisranija, il-preżenza ta' Ġesu Kristu ftit ftit qegħda tgħib.

Meta kont żgħir, niftakar nirċievi kartolini tal-Milied bil-kliem Merry Xmas, u kont nistaqsi lil ommi xi tfisser. Kont bqajt mistgħaġeb meta qaltli, b'fastidju mhux wisq moħbi, li l-ittra X tintuża biex qisha qed taqta' lil Kristu 'l barra. Iktar riċentement, qrajt¹ (b'mhux ftit serħan il-moħħ) li l-ittra X bdiet tintuża bħala abbrevjazzjoni tal-verżjoni Griega tal-kelma Kristu (Christos, bl-ewwel ittra li tinstema 'chi' tinkiteb Χ).

Sa riċenti spiss ikolli diskussjonijiet ma' xi ħabib tiegħi li jħaddan il-fidi Nisranija, li jgħidli jew tgħidli, b'ton immaħsan li din is-sena saret deċiżjoni li fit-tali lokal, ħanut jew ċentru, ma kinux se jarmaw presepji jew kwalunkwe simbolu reliġjuż relatat mal-Milied. Naturalment, il-mużika kummerċjali relatata, iż-żmontor, il-globi u d-dwal ipetptu huma dejjem eżentati minn din ir-regola, u dawn jibdew jidhru anke minn Novembru, ma morrux ninsew li aħjar nibdew infaddlu ħalli nkunu nistgħu ninfexxu fl-orġja ta' xiri bla rażan lejn l-aħħar tas-sena.

Ir-raġuni li tingħata dejjem tkun li ma jkunux iridu jgerrxu lil nies li ma jħaddnux il-Kristjaneżmu, li ma jmurx jintilef xi bejgħ f'din il-parti tant importanti tal-kalendarju ekonomiku. Wara din ir-raġuni, ġeneralment ikun hemm xi kliem ta' rabja għal dawn l-immigranti Musulmani, Buddisti, ateji u l-bqija li qed iġagħluna ndawwru l-kultura tagħna. X'wiċċ tost! Ara f'hiex wasalna! Mur għidilhom ibiddlu l-kultura tagħhom f'pajjiżhom!

Ħa nqerr magħkom. Jien għandi ħafna ħbieb li mhumiex Insara. Kieku qatt xi darba smajt lil wieħed imqar jimplika li jħossu skomdu bis-simboli Nsara tal-Milied, inklużi dawk li huma ateji. Naturalment, billi jien ma smajtx bihom, ma jfissirx li ma jeżistux, imma m'għandix l-impressjoni li hawn xi moviment qawwi kontrihom. Intom qarrejja. personalment, qatt smajtu lil xi ħadd direttament jgħid dan?

Musulman għalfejn għandu jħossu skomdu b'simboli Nsara? Għalihom Ġesù hu t-tieni l-iktar profeta importanti fl-Iżlam, wara biss Mawmettu nnifsu.

Għal segwaċi ta' reliġjonijiet oħra, jew għal min huwa ateju jew anjostiku, bħal ma smajt anke sa din il-ġimgħa stess, għalihom il-Milied ma jfisser xejn f'sens reliġjuż, imma xorta jgawdu l-ġurnata b'ikla tajba ta' nofsinhar jew b'xi ħarġa, jiġifieri hemm konvivenza kulturali. Allura l-problema x'inhi?

Jien naħseb li l-problema mhix ġejja affattu minn min mhux Nisrani, imma minn min kien responsabbli li jarma dawn is-simboli reliġjużi, ma kienx qed jagħmel dan b'xi devozzjoni, imma biex jiġbed lin-nies li kienu predominantement Insara, bil-motivazzjoni tkun purament kummerċjali.

Issa li s-soċjetà hija bil-wisq iktar multi-kulturali, il-kalkulazzjoni ta' 'kif-se-nagħmlu-biex-naqalgħu-flus-iktar-mis-sena-l-oħra' qegħda xxaqleb lejn li ma jitteħidx xi riskju żejjed.

U wara kollox, din hija verament problema?

Jien il-parir tiegħi għal min dan is-suġġett huwa ta' xi importanza, huwa li l-iktar simbolu qawwi Nisrani f'din id-dinja jiġi meta nsegwu fil-ħajja ta' kuljum t-tagħlim ta' Ġesù, u nsiru l-melħ tal-art f'din id-dinja.² M'hemmx għalfejn jindaqqu t-trombi jew jixxejru l-bandieri.

Fejn hemm simboli Nsara viżivi li għadhom jidhru, ejja ngawduhom u ngħożżuhom f'dan il-Milied. U fi spirtu ta' tolleranza li nistennew minn ħaddieħor, ejja ngawdu wkoll lid-dragun Ċiniż jiġri fit-toroq fil-bidu tas-sena lunari, u d-dwal imdendel mat-twieqi tal-Indjani fil-festa Ħindu ta' Diwali.

Għamlu lil ħaddieħor kif tridu lil ħaddieħor jagħmel lilkom.³ Tassew regola tad-deheb!

Il-Milied it-tajjeb, u s-sliem, lill-qarrejja kollha.

1http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Xmas?q=xmas&searchDictCode=all, retrieved 14/12/2014

2Mt 5:13

3Mt 7:12

Parliament in Australia -- Il-Parlament fl-Awstralja

Parliament in Australia

Those who live in Australia are probably aware of the problems that the Australian Federal Government is facing in passing legislation. At the moment, legislation to reform tertiary education, a minimum co-payment to visit a doctor under the Medicare system and others.

This is happening because although the government has a big majority of members of parliament in the House of Representatives, it has a minority in the Senate. Legislation has to pass through the two houses to enter into effect, and so the government needs to negotiate with minor parties, independent senators and sometimes even with the opposition to pass the laws it wants.

Is this positive or negative?

Those in favour of the Liberal-National Coalition will probably say this is negative, while those favouring the Labour Party, the Greens Party or the rest will probably say this is positive. I would say it would be wiser to take a step back and see if the people are best served with what is happening.

To those who reason on party lines, I'd just like to remind what happened just months ago, where Labour formed the federal government, where the roles were the opposite of what they are today. The Labour Party had a majority in the House of Representatives, and a minority in the Senate, and a similar difficulty in passing legislation.

In its first legislature, the Labour Party did not manage to pass a fundamental law for the reduction of carbon pollution (CPRS) and in its second legislature had to pass a carbon tax, which wasn't then government policy, as a condition of support by the Greens Party, a decision that had a big part in its electoral defeat in 2013.

Who is benefiting from all this? Few people will be happy with this situation, and this is not news. There seems to be a frustration with the parliamentary system, where the people elects a government to implement an electoral program, and in practice discovers that the government is not able to pass the laws it needs to implement it.

Why shouldn't the government be able to follow the electoral programme it presented to the people? I think that government should be able to follow its programme until the end of the electoral term, and if the people don't like the outcome of that programme, it has the opportunity of changing track at the next election.

I'm not saying this because I agree with the policies of the current government. On the contrary, I'm very critical of a lot of what the government intends to do. However I find myself in agreement with Joseph de Maistre, a French diplomat that lived between the 17^th and 18^th centuries - 'every people gets the government it deserves'.

This does not mean that members of parliament which don't form part of the government are obliged to pass legislation that is presented to them by government, as often implied by Prime Minister Abbott. No one should vote in favour of what he disagrees with. The problem, in my opinion, resides in the system.

The Australian Federal Parliament is built on the English Westminster system, with two houses of parliament and a ceremonial head of state (the Queen, represented by the Governor General).¹ Australian states also have two houses of parliament, except Queensland which has one. The ACT and the Northern territory also have one house, as well as the external territories which likewise have only one.

Why are there two houses of parliament? The work of the Senate is to scrutinise government operations, and also be the representative of states and territories when considering legislation coming from the House of Representatives. In practice, however, most senators seem to me to be representing the parties they belong to, rather than the states and territories they are supposed to represent.

Lately there is a tendency for small parties or independents to be elected into the Senate, on whom little is actually known. I don't view this as necessarily a bad thing, except that it seems they are being elected due to secret deals that are made between them before the election on how preferences flow from one candidate to the other in the different stages of the vote count. The problem is that the preferences are not known, and the people have no influence on this.

Currently a desire to have some changes in this respect is being mentioned. As long as the changes lead to the people having a better direct say in which candidates are chosen after preferences are tallied, this is a good thing. If the changes lead to a reduction in the possibility of members of parliament being elected from minor parties or independents, which is in the interest of the major parties, this is a bad thing, and we need to be very careful not to allow this to happen.

As an immigrant from Malta, I found it very strange to see how the Australian Parliament works (or doesn't). Malta is one of the few European countries which has a single house of parliament, similar to Portugal, Sweden and Norway. In these countries, when legislation is passed in the one house of parliament, only the signature of the head of state remains to enter into effect.

This does not mean there are no problems in unicameral systems. In Malta before the government changed in 2013, the Nationalist Party led by Prime Minister Gonzi lost a vote on its budget, when a member of his own party, which had long threatened to vote against the government, finally had the opportunity to do so.

So one can see that a single house of parliament does not guarantee a lack of these problems. However isn't the situation with two houses worse?

I would think there are more advantages than disadvantages in a single house of parliament, rather than two, provided that elected members are truly representative of the people. Small constituencies, where only one member is selected, while representing the majority of the constituency, surely does not represent the views of those in a minority. That is why it is very hard for small parties or independents to be represented in the House of Representatives, as the constituencies are much smaller than those of the Senate.

In Malta, districts are relatively large, and five representatives are elected from each, but even here, 'wasted votes' arise, which we Maltese familiar with past elections understand very well.

I would prefer to see a single house, with constituencies larger than today, with more than one candidate elected from each, and that votes that are destined to be 'wasted' are gathered together on a state or territory basis, and used to elect other members from parties or independents. The party that wins the election can make agreements as necessary to be able to present once, and pass once, legislation in the single house of parliament. The scrutiny of the government's operations can be made by the media and constituted bodies (independent of government), like a permanent commission of audit, a federal commission against corruption and others.

This wouldn't be a minor change! I'm not holding my breath....

1http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Work_of_the_Parliament/Forming_and_Governing_a_Nation/parl#govgen

-------------------------------------

 

Il-Parlament fl-Awstralja

Min qed jgħix fl-Awstralja aktarx familjari mal-problemi tal-Gvern Federali Awstraljan biex jgħaddi l-liġijiet li jrid. Bħalissa jissemmew liġijiet li jirriformaw l-edukazzjoni terzjarja, jiddaħħal ħlas minimu għal meta tmur tara t-tabib fis-sistema tal-Medicare u oħrajn.

Dan qed jiġri għax għalkemm il-gvern għandu maġġoranza kbira ta' membri tal-parlament fil-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti, għandu minoranza fis-Senat. Leġislazzjoni trid tgħaddi miz-żewġ kmamar biex tidħol fis-seħħ, u għalhekk il-gvern irid jinnegozja ma' partiti iżgħar, senaturi indipendenti u kultant mal-oppożizzjoni sabiex jgħaddi l-liġijiet li jrid jgħaddi.

Din hija ħaġa pożittiva jew negattiva?

Min huwa partitarju tal-Koalizzjoni tal-Partiti Liberali u Nazzjonali aktarx jgħid li negattiva, u min iżomm mal-Partit Laburista, il-Partit tal-Ħodor jew il-bqija aktarx jgħid li pożittiva. Jien ngħid ikun iktar għaqli li nieħdu pass lura u naraw jekk il-poplu hux moqdi sew b'dak li qed jiġri.

Lil min jirraġuna fuq linji partiġġjani, infakkru x'ġara biss sa ftit xhur ilu, meta kien hemm il-Laburisti fil-gvern federali, fejn ir-rwoli kienu l-oppost li hemm illum. Il-Laburisti kellhom maġġoranza fil-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti u minoranza fis-Senat, u diffikulta simili li jgħaddu l-liġijiet li riedu.

Fl-ewwel leġislatura tiegħu, il-Gvern Laburista ma rnexxilux jgħaddi liġi fundamentali għat-tnaqqis tal-karbonju (CPRS), u fit-tieni leġislatura kellu jdaħħal it-taxxa fuq il-karbonju, li ma kinetx il-politika tal-gvern, bħala kundizzjoni għall-appoġġ tal-Partit tal-Ħodor, deċiżjoni li kellha sehem kbir fit-telfa elettorali tal-elezzjoni tal-2013.

Min qed igawdi b'dan kollu? Ftit ninnota nies li huma sodisfatti bis-sitwazzjoni, u din mhix xi ħaġa ġdida. Jidher li hawn frustrazzjoni bis-sistema parlamentari, fejn il-poplu jeleġġi lil gvern biex iwettaq il-programm elettorali tiegħi, u fil-prattika l-gvern isib li lanqas jista' jgħaddi l-liġijiet li għandu bżonn biex iwettqu.

Għalfejn il-gvern m'għandux ikun jista' jimxi skont il-programm elettorali li ppreżenta lill-poplu? Jien naħseb li l-gvern għandu jkun jista' jimxi mal-programm tiegħu sakemm jintemm it-terminu tal-gvern, u jekk il-poplu ma jogħġbux ir-riżultat tal-programm, għandu opportunità biex jibdel ir-rotta fl-elezzjoni ta' wara.

Dan mhux qed ngħidu għax naqbel mal-politika tal-gvern preżenti. Anzi, jien kritiku ta' ħafna milli jrid jagħmel dan il-gvern. Però jien naqbel ħafna ma' dak li qal Joseph de Maistre, diplomatiku Franċiż li għex bejn is-sekli sbatax u tmintax - 'kull poplu jkollu l-gvern li jistħoqqlu'.

Dan ma jfissirx li l-membri tal-parlament li mhumiex fil-gvern huma obbligati li għaddu l-leġislazzjoni li jippreżentalhom il-gvern, bħal ma ġieli jimplika l-Prim Ministru Abbott. Ħadd m'għandu jivvota għal dak li ma jaqbilx miegħu. Il-problema, fil-fehma tiegħi, qegħda fis-sistema.

Il-Parlament Federali Awstarljan huwa mibni fuq is-sistema Ingliża ta' Westminster, jiġifieri żewġ kmamar tal-Parlament u kap ċerimonjali tal-istat (ir-reġina, irrappreżentata mill-Gvernatur Ġenerali).¹ L-istati Awstraljani kollha għandhom żewġ kmamar, ħlief Queensland li għandha waħda. L-ACT u n-Northern Territory, kif ukoll it-territorji esterni, ukoll għandhom waħda.

Għalfejn ikun hemm żewġ kmamar tal-parlament? Xogħol is-Senat huwa li jservi ta' skrutinju tal-operat tal-gvern, u anke li jkun ta' rappreżentanza tal-istati u t-territorji meta jikkunsidraw liġijiet li ġejjin mill-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti. Fil-prattika, madankollu, il-maġġor parti tas-senaturi iktar jidhirli li jirrappreżentaw il-partiti li qegħdin fihom, milli l-istati u t-territorji li jirrappreżentaw.

Dan l-aħħar, hemm it-tendenza li jiġu eletti fis-Senat partiti żgħar, jew anke membri indipendenti, li ftit ikun magħruf dwarhom. Jien dan ma naraħx neċessarjament ħażin, ħlief li jidher li jkunu qed jitilgħu minħabba ftehim sigriet li jkun sar minn qabel l-elezzjoni bejniethom dwar kif il-preferenzi tal-votazzjoni jgħaddu minn kandidat għall-ieħor fl-istadji differenti tal-għadd tal-voti. Il-problema hija li l-preferenzi ma jkunux magħrufa, u l-poplu ma jkunx jista' jinfluwenza dan.

Bħalissa qed tissemma r-rieda li jkun hemm xi bdil f'dan ir-rigward. Jekk il-bdil iwassal biex il-poplu jkollu iktar sehem dirett ta' liem kandidati jintagħżlu wara li jingħaddu l-preferenzi, dan huwa tajjeb. Jekk il-bdil iwassal biex titnaqqas il-possibiltà li jitilgħu membri tal-parlament minn partiti żgħar jew independenti, li huwa fl-interess tal-partiti l-kbar, dan huwa ħażin, u rridu noqgħodu attenti li ma jsir xejn minn dan.

Bħala immigrant li ġejt minn Malta, sibtha stramba nara kif jaħdem (jew kif ma jaħdimx!) il-parlament Awstraljan. Malta hija waħda mill-ftit pajjiżi Ewropej li għandhom kamra waħda tal-parlament, bħall-Portugall, l-Isvezja u n-Norveġja. F'dawn il-pajjiżi, meta leġislazzjoni tkun għaddiet mill-kamra waħda tal-parlament, ikun jonqos biss il-firma tal-kap tal-istat biex il-liġi tidħol fis-seħħ.

Dan ma jfissirx li ma jkunx hemm problemi f'sistemi unikamerali. F'Malta qabel ma' nbidel il-gvern fl-2013, il-Partit Nazzjonalista mmexxi mill-Prim Ministru Gonzi tilef vot fuq il-baġit, meta membru tal-partit tiegħu stess, li kien ilu jhedded li jivvota kontra l-gvern, fl-aħħar kellu l-opportunità li jagħmel dan.

Għalhekk, wieħed jista' jara li kamra waħda tal-parlament ma tiggarantix li ma jkunx hemm problemi ta' dan it-tip. Allura żewġ kmamar mhux agħar?

Jien nara li hemm iktar vantaġġi milli żvantaġġi f'kamra waħda milli tnejn, basta li l-membri li jiġu eletti ikunu verament rappreżentattivi tal-fehma tal-poplu. Kostitwenzi żgħar, fejn jitla' membru wieħed fl-elezzjoni, għalkemm jirrappreżentaw l-fehmiet tal-maġġoranza ta' kull kostitwenza, żgur ma jirrappreżentawx il-fehma ta' min huwa fil-minoranza. Għalhekk huwa diffiċli ħafna li jitilgħu partiti żgħar jew membri indipendenti fil-Kamra tar-Rappreżentanti, għax il-kostitwenzi huma ħafna iżgħar minn dawk tas-Senat

F'Malta d-distretti huma relattivament ikbar u jitilgħu ħames rappreżentanti minn kull wieħed, imma anke hawn, ikun hemm l-hemm imsejħa 'voti moħlija', li aħna l-Maltin familjari ma' elezzjonijiet mgħoddija nifhmu sew.

Nippreferi nara kamra waħda, b'kostwenzi ikbar minn ta' illum, li minnhom jitilgħu iktar minn kandidat wieħed, u li jinġabru flimkien il-voti li jkunu se jiġu moħlija fuq bażi ta' stat jew territorju sħiħ, u li jintużaw biex jitilgħu membri oħra mill-partiti jew indipendenti . Il-partit li jirbaħ l-elezzjoni jista' jagħmel il-ftehim li jkun hemm bżonn biex ikun jista' jippreżenta darba, u jgħaddi darba, leġislazzjoni fil-kamra waħda tal-parlament. Skrutinju tal-operat tal-gvern jista' jsir mill-midja u korpi kostitwiti (ċioe mhux dipendenti fuq il-gvern), bħal kummissjoni permanenti tal-awditjar, kummissjoni (federali) kontra l-korruzzjoni u oħrajn.

Din ma tkunx bidla żgħira! M'inix se nżomm in-nifs...

1http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Work_of_the_Parliament/Forming_and_Governing_a_Nation/parl#govgen