How to Agree to Disagree (Part II)


Sometimes, no matter how much discussion occurs, you’re unable to agree on one particular point. In some cases, that single disagreement prevents further discussion. However, other times, you might be able to switch to other topics. If so, it’s best to “agree to disagree” on the point of contention and move on to the other areas. Maybe later you can return to the disagreement and work through it. But try to make progress in spite of the issues about this one thing… [read more]


One comment on “How to Agree to Disagree (Part II)

  1. Gedlu metaferia on

    How to disagree politely,- a very timely topic.

    With a devided political nation among parties discussions take ugly turns among proponents and oponents. Even in a highly developed democratic society like the US it pains me to see the logic of TEA Party Folks and the MSNBC. To me MSNBC is more logical, more seasoned, more reserached and more acceptable by any human standard. I agree with MSNBC not because of my liberal tradition, but their argument is persuasive. Although I watch FOX news, their arguments are shallow and they demonize the current president. Some of the Right Wing radio Talk Show Hosts like Rush Limbough, Sean Hannity and others scare me very much. Civility is lost, and it affects me personally because they devide the people and the congress to take detrimental position on war and the economy. When I come to Ethiopian politics civility is a rare comodity among the opposition and their opponents. This is common in all parts of Africa. People tend to be bitter, usually violence follows. In the west we are restrained because of the laws, even a little fight is considered as an assult and can destroy the application for permanent residency. It is OK to hold a firm position to better the lives of our people in Ethiopia. If we follow pragmatic ways civility can pave ways for forgiveness and reconcilliation. The only possible method for winning ones enemy and leave the throne is dialog and reconcilliation. Guns do not work now like the pre 1990s revolutions. The world was bi-polar then. You can persuade the enemy to open the space for political participation, even persuade him / her to leave, not by threat but by providing exit strategy. Am I crazy to suggest this type of dialog? I am not. When the oponent and proponent enetr into cancellation and elimination three outcomes are possible. 1) The marginalization of oponents- both of them 2)The marginalization of one and the other becoming victorius without having sustainable peace 3) the condition of atrition and degredation. The Ethiopian situation needs careful reflection and soul searching on the part of every person who is concerned. The last scenario that worries me to death is the arrival of the millenial and the young generation that is self-centered and materialistic. If there is proper dialogue, listening to each otheron the basis of forgiveness and transformative reconcilliation is achieved. I am 100% sure that Eritrea will join Ethiopia and usher in an era of great black civilization within 1-2 decades. Good things are possible if you work hard for it. I will continue writing such ideas with truth and genuine feeling without seeking money, fame or power. To convert even one person to my way of thinking is a victory. Stand for practical wisdom, forgiveness, civility and transformative reconcilliation. You have nothing to lose except your headache!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.