FPM, C&R, between wrong and popular, or right and unpopular, what to choose?

[Robin Hood]

Originally Posted by ul-eco-aouniste

We have seen that the MoU between FPM and Hizbullah is a very "right" decision, but we noticed also that it's not so popular.
On the other hand, some "wrong" decisions can be popular, imagine GMA asking for movements on the ground after the death of Georges Abou Madi, for example.

Some other decisions, are not that dangerous, but also they are right, and unpopular, rising the taxes on cigarettes, charging huge amounts for cafeterias/pubs/clubs that allow smoking, imposing huge fines for these latter that sells alcohol, cigarettes, arguileh for minors....

These decisions, will help the "sustainable development" (the real goal of the nations, and not the economic growth as some people think)

so between wrong and popular, or right and unpopular, what do you think, FPM and C&R should choose?

FPM is a reformist party, so it should choose the right, eventhough it will be unpopular, becuz it FPM choses the wrong, it will become no different from other political parties.

[ul-eco-aouniste]

Since the majority of FPMers prefer the right/unpopular over the wrong/popular, who is ready to sign a petition asking GMA to work on a law to ban smoking from public places, and rise the taxes on tobacco?
I know these things are not popular, regarding the huge numbers of smokers in Lebanon, but not a single person with a little bit of logic can say that they are not right!

[IamBACK]

The reason some decisions are unpopular is because many people disagree with them, thus contradicting your assertion that they are "right" in an absolute sense.

It appears that your perception is one of a wise all-knowing leadership struggling to educate ignorant followers. That, is simply not right.

[Leb_Rebel]

Originally Posted by Armenian

The best leader or party is the one who knows how to compromise between the two.

But the decisions shouldn't only be what the people at the moment say but what HISTORY will say because history has no mercy and it will label you the right way. So if you take wrong decisions, even if it's popular, history will label you as wrong and a good leadership is the one who takes that into consideration.

When the Armenians in Lebanon decided not to enter the war, it was the most unpopular decision ever at that time, but look what have history wrote about it... It was one of the wisest decisions.

History will decide if you're right or wrong if the decision you took served your country on the long run and not only served YOU as a person or a leader.

Thank you!!

Originally Posted by roch10452

History is writen by the people

History is the lie commonly agreed on.(Voltaire) so History can not judge because History is subjective.

I don't think this question deserves an answer in this forum, but since you are all enjoying this.

We always have been a party that rose above all others because we never compromised in what is right. But now we are actually debating the topic on whether we choose right and wrong.I don't care of the consequences that ensue if we choose either because it doesn't matter.
We stood for what is right , when everyone accused our activists of all kinds of wrongs.
FPM shouldn't compromise(and I say should because its not the case anymore), because every time we do, we lose a bit of what made us better than everyone else.
Principles are not there to be compromised on, else we are just another Lebanese party.(its where we are heading aslan)

[shadow1]

I would undoubtedly and unreservedly choose what is popular.
What is right is always subjective and a matter of opinion and every point and its opposite can be argued with the same conviction.

That is not to say that what is popular always guarantees success as people by nature are very fickle. They may be cheering for you today and jeering the next.

[freemind]

Tahrir war was popular, but not right; Rejecting Taef was popular, but not right.

The above two points made FPM the popular movement it is.

While the MOU was not popular, but right... that according to GMA himself.

The MOU according to GMA has its fruits on the long run; though on the short term it might make lose popularity.

What i don't get, is what makes the decisions onto choosing wrong or right.

[roch10452]

Originally Posted by freemind

Tahrir war was popular, but not right; Rejecting Taef was popular, but not right.

The above two points made FPM the popular movement it is.

While the MOU was not popular, but right... that according to GMA himself.

The MOU according to GMA has its fruits on the long run; though on the short term it might make lose popularity.

What i don't get, is what makes the decisions onto choosing wrong or right.

Are you saying Aoun decision so far have been wrong?

[Shah Massoud]

Originally Posted by freemind

Tahrir war was popular, but not right; Rejecting Taef was popular, but not right.

The above two points made FPM the popular movement it is.

While the MOU was not popular, but right... that according to GMA himself.

The MOU according to GMA has its fruits on the long run; though on the short term it might make lose popularity.

What i don't get, is what makes the decisions onto choosing wrong or right.

Ta7rir war was popular and right....rejecting taef was popular and right , MOU was right but unpopular ..... signing the release of Geagea was popular but wrong....

I guess only history and years to come is able to judge an action if wrong or right...

[roch10452]

Originally Posted by Shah Massoud

Ta7rir war was popular and right....rejecting taef was popular and right , MOU was right but unpopular ..... signing the release of Geagea was popular but wrong....

I guess only history and years to come is able to judge an action if wrong or right...

tell me, since you think tahrir was the right thing to do...
what would have happened if Aoun actually succeded into getting syria out...
how will he deal with all the armed militias at that time?
today we only have Hezbo armed and we dont know what to do with him
What would Aoun do to convince Joumblat, Amal, LF, Mourabitoun....

[Shah Massoud]

Originally Posted by roch10452

tell me, since you think tahrir was the right thing to do...
what would have happened if Aoun actually succeded into getting syria out...
how will he deal with all the armed militias at that time?
today we only have Hezbo armed and we dont know what to do with him
What would Aoun do to convince Joumblat, Amal, LF, Mourabitoun....

your beloved taef ? would it have happened if not the ta7rir war that made the whole world look again in the lebanese war after having let it go for a suicidal statuco since the mid eighies ?

HA was still just another party and didn't reach it's nationwide resistance power that it gained since the mi-90s.....Joumblatt would have shifted the momented the army crossed the Aley-soukelghareb front...Mourabitoun were already finished in 1984.... LF were the stabb in the back that finally they were looking for a christian canton rather than liberating lebanon as Sheikh Bachir started the movment......and that's the real reason the people with GMA still hate Geagea to the guts