With the events that took place in France last week, I have to ask myself , "Has compromise become obsolete?" Where was the face to face conversation that may have provided information? Where was the conversation that may have provided a small unit of understanding which may have prevented the murderous outburst?
People may have widely opposing views, but they don't have to kill each other. It's not a black and white world. The winner takes all is a poor way to play the game.
It seems that when two opposing views collide there's only room for one. Fight the opposing view until it is obliterated and then you get your way.
In France it was an extremist group that insisted that Mohammad should not be depicted in a graphical form. The other guys looked at it as a free speech issue. Somewhere there should have been a point where both sides could be accommodated and everybody wins. Now that would take compromise.
Some Muslim denominations want Sharia law. Fine for them, but it doesn't have to be forced on those who are a majority and do not support Sharia law
Compromise is missing in the Canadian Government. Prime Minister Harper wants to maintain power at any cost so he splits the opposition. He governs with 35% of the vote while 65% voted against him. Our election procedures allow him to use the system to gain power. Of course, he also cheated in the last election. Two of his members have lost their seats because of breaking election spending rules. Many other constituencies have reported robo calls but only one was charged and is now facing a jail term. He governs catering to his supporters but has no consideration for the good of the whole country.
Christians show intolerance to each other. Ireland is a good example where Catholics and protestants slaughtered each other for many years. They had to be drawn kicking and screaming into an agreement that was a compromise.
Why is it that groups with different views can not show some tolerance that would allow satisfaction for each. It's not win at all costs. It's not completely destroy the other guy and then you can do what you want. Doing things this way is a major failure.
There are many examples of cooperation and compromise to show us that compromise works. I think in Iceland the parliament members sit in a circle instead of facing each other in opposition. That's a simple idea but it works. They have to listen to each other and do not sit in an opposing way.
We have to concentrate on looking for examples of how compromise and cooperation work. We have to keep our eye on the positive and work hard to obtain the greatest good for all.