Let Them Compete, But Let Them Be Civil
The Patriarch’s efforts should be spent less on “reconciliation” and “consensus” and more on promoting a responsible competition.
May the better one win..
Something is off in most of the commentary you read about the Metn elections today. What everyone seems to agree on is that the Metnis are vicious, man-eating animals who are just waiting for an excuse to jump at each other’s throats. If I were a Metni, I’d be really insulted.
To see all those politicians, religious figures and journalists scuttling about warning of the apocalyptic mayhem this election could bring, you’d think people are talking about war, not ballots. The buzz words on everyone’s lips are “consensus” and “reconciliation”, mystical panaceas they hope can mitigate deep seated and historical political differences.
They all seem to forget that elections were invented in the first place because people have irreconcilable differences. The right thing to do in Metn is to hold the elections, and as one commentator in this blog puts it, live with the consequences of their choice.
But does that mean the good wishers should wash their hands from potential sabotage and mob clashes? Not necessarily.
There are two kinds of mediation, a wrong kind and a right one. The wrong kind is basically telling the parties: “Let’s ignore our differences and, for the better of the people, not compete.” Most good Samaritans, including the patriarch, are trying to take this road. But there’s a better way.
The right kind of mediation would be telling the competing leaders: “Listen, we know you two have different points of view, and people will settle this in the ballots. But you have to promise, in public, while shaking hands, that this will be a clean fight, and that the only weapon you’ll use is positive persuasion. You have to also promise that whoever loses will make a concession speech congratulating the other person, in which you say these precise words: I may have lost, but democracy has won”
Do you like this post? Would you like to be always updated with new posts on this website? If so, please subscribe to this blog's RSS feed? (tell me more)Share This Post:
Print it: Email it:
-->
Discussion
Comments are disallowed for this post.
Hello, my name is Mustapha and I blog in The Beirut Spring about Lebanese society and politics. I started in February 2005 after the killing of P.M. Rafik Hariri.
Latest Posts
Lebanese Bloggers
Middle Eastern Bloggers
Blog Featured In
Today In Lebanon (NOW)
Naharnet RSS Feed
Yalibnan RSS Feed
Latest Lebanese News
RSS Subscribers
Categories
- No categories
These by-elections are a prime example why Lebanon needs a proportional election law . In any elections where the winner takes all, there is bound to be two sides competing against each other for the ultimate prize and it’s inevitably going to polarize the people. Too bad the government isn’t doing squat to amend the election law.
Sfeir has been pathetic on this issue and others.
We want elections. We don’t want elections. We want elections with one candidate…
WTF?
Keep Lahoud, don’t keep Lahoud etc…
Enough already.
The gvmnt is even more pathetic, they cling now (as the should) to the constitution. However, the law says a vacancy has to be filled within TWO months, Gemayel died a year ago, and Eido and 8 others may be alive today had they replaced Pierre back then.
You guys already know my take on this subject. I agree with Mustapha and his writings here. The key wording is the following sentence:
They all seem to forget that elections were invented in the first place because people have irreconcilable differences.
This is why I keep repeating that the Lebanese have zero understanding of the very premise of Democracy. Sfeir being the no.1 buffoon in this mess. He needs to shut the **** up and stop trying to tell people what to do. His “consensus” candidate approach is about as undemocratic as can be, and downright idiotic. You HAVE to let the people decide who they want, in a fair and civil manner. Stop trying to tell us who deserves the seat, and stop trying to take our choices away from us. This isn’t the church, where all orders come from above. This is a civil democracy (well, at least we would like it to be so) where the people have a choice. And as Mustapha said, there will ALWAYS be differences. That is what makes us humans. To continue to push for this “consensus” approach (be it for by-elections, unity governemnts, or whatever else) is idiotic. You will NEVER be able to get every single person to be on board a given decision or policy. That’s why the concept of “majority” was invented.
I swear these guys (Sfeir and the rest of them) need to start realizing this ain’t the year 1007 anymore. Feudal lords and god-given rights to rule are no longer relevant topics anywhere in the world except in Lebanon.
Agree completely BV
The concept of “no winner/no loser cannot work with Democracy and neither can “consensus”. The “opposition” thing does not work either. The whole point is that there IS a winner (and a loser) and the winner is the will of the people. The concept of “opposition” seems to be to stop the majority from actually doing anything — this just leads to conflict and stagnation.
Aoun has announced a speech tomorrow where he “reveals all”. You think it’s rough now? It’s only going to get worse. Question for you – if people on the street start dying in violent actions, will the election be stopped?
Lebanese leaders (Aoun and others) have been threatening to “reveal all” for as long as I can remember, going all the way back to the 1970s.
I’ll believe it when i see it or hear it…
These morons never reveal anything of substance.
Just now the Amine Gemayel/Aoun thing, can anyone explain to me what is relevant in the mutula accusations: you protected the Baabda palace/ no you did not protect Baabda palace back in the 90s??
I am still waiting on Johny Abdo, Emile Lahoud, Jamil Sayyed, Walid Joumblatt, Hassan Nasrallah etc to blow the whistle, as they themselves promised, on abuses and corruption in the gvmnt by their opponents.
If you don’t blow the whistle when things actually happen then you are a)dishonest and b) a BLACKMAILER and c) you should STFU.
Of course BV and the boys are right. You want elections and then consensus? Hey go to Syria or the old Saddam Iraq for 99.7% and 100% consensus.
Elections are needed and work PRECISELY when there is NO consensus. Our “leaders” have everything wrong:
Election implies consensus, burning tires is legal protest, the opposition belongs in the gvmt, it’s beyond orwellian.
Orwellian doesn’t even cover it. It’s more like the Twilight Zone and Bizarro World (where everything is backwards) wrapped into one.
I am still waiting for the freaking populace to stop tolerating this shit and start demanding accountability from their leaders. In the end, we (the people) have but ourselves to blame. We let these fucks get away with it and we just watch apathetically while whining about how awful our lot is and “Allah Yestor” and so on.
How about you get off your fat asses and take matter into your own hands?
It’s good to see Mustafa that you have distanced yourself from your earlier, ridicolous notion that holding these elections was “letting Syria back in”. See how you fell for the 14th Feb propaganda at the start?
I’m happy you see it for what it is. An election, a democratic norm/right. A competition between two different idiologies/stances, with the people as the ultimate arbator.