What is wrong with compromise? I think it tends to solve a lot more problems than being black and white about things.
2006-10-03 07:33:24 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You are totally correct. One of the major problems in the USA today is the polarization of the two sides.
2006-10-03 07:35:30 · answer #1 · answered by Chuck N 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The result of compromise has to be more important and achievable than the simple PRACTICE of compromise.
Agreeing to agree is relatively easy if that is in your character or serves your personal interest. But to serve the national interest, sometimes compromising undermines that effort and works in opposition to it. I don't think compromise tends to solve a lot more problems than being 'black and white' about things. I think compromise tends to dilute the solution, and lessen the impact of those decisions, thereby addressing the problem unsuccessfully or insufficiently.
As I posted in another response, I think the 'compromising crowd' in our Congress today is indicative of the old adage: "If you don't stand for something, you'll FALL for anything". Right now, this nation needs to stand firmly on certain issues, or risk fraying the fabric of our society even further. Reaching a solution just to reach a solution is not enough. It has to be the RIGHT solution, and if compromise can achieve that, then it is preferred to inaction. But compromise for the sake of compromise is never enough or acceptable.
2006-10-03 07:51:47 · answer #2 · answered by rohannesian 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Some people, that feel comfort only when "you are on their side", will feel threatened that you may go either way on a topic. I dont think there is anything wrong with any part of the road.
Above friends, even family, the truth, hard work, etc, all you may ever have is your ground. So stand firm.
In the end, if you have an opinion, and not necessarily a compromise it doesn't matter where in the road you are.
2006-10-03 07:41:39 · answer #3 · answered by designer_brian 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nothing, except when you are "middle of the road" you get traffic coming at you from both directions, so it can be a lot tougher position to take. Compromise is the real name of the game in Washington politics. If you really want something done, you will probably have to give a little to get a little.
2006-10-03 07:37:46 · answer #4 · answered by Paul H 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I am a left wing, ultra liberal and I tend to agree with you. Middle of the road is a good balance. How ever there are right wing close to Nazism repuglicans, those are our leaders now. The system of checks and balance is a good one and needs to be restored, you will never replace the far left or the far right so the middle can be the deciding factor. The best legislation is built on compromise, as nether view of the world is completely correct.
2006-10-03 07:39:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'm with you. It seems like everything has to be an argument now days.
Most disagreements in politics are either not understood well enough or not important enough to argue about. Discussion should be the order of the day.
Why would anyone emphatically assert that gay marriage will destroy heterosexual marriage? Many may feel strongly about it but I doubt anyone could apply an intellectual argument to that stance.
Same is true for flag burning, individual accounts in SS, lower taxes spur the economy, etc...
2006-10-03 07:41:57 · answer #6 · answered by imnogeniusbutt 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well I am a firm believer if you stand for nothing you will fall for anything, but it is quite possible to remain neutral in regards to certain subjects. We should not base our opinions on black and white because there are so many shades in between.
2006-10-03 07:49:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There once was a hunter who wanted to shoot a bear because he wanted a fur coat.
The bear approached him and said "Let's discuss this reasonably and see if we can't compromise."
The hunter agreed to talk.
The bear said "Okay, you want a fur coat, and I want something to eat."
Ten minutes later, the hunter was surrounded by fur, deep inside the bear's full belly.
2006-10-03 07:43:04 · answer #8 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing is wrong with it occasionally, but being "Middle of the Road" on everything is called apathy!
2006-10-03 07:42:14 · answer #9 · answered by Slut 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There's nothing wrong with the middle ground. I actually think people are by nature more moderate than they act like on here; extreme views are largely for the sake of argument.
2006-10-03 07:39:11 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋