Latest News Of Kashmir And Daily Newspaper

On the thin line of Compromise It is Never Always ‘Let’s Agree to Disagree’

SHAHID ANDRABI


On this planet, man is born free. His choices are his own, his discomfort is his discomfort. People meet people when they sniff human like feelings, friends, foes and laughter enemies are fossils of human gathering. The cacophony of relations is somewhat more complex than any mathematical matrix or equation.
Inclination, whether hatred or contempt is somewhat parallel to disagreement and sometimes agreement. In social living, we are supposed to agree on certain notes. I rather say, it is natural imposition on us to agree when our confinement is society. Survival, though is paramount, draws its lines from agreement. We agree, we survive. We disagree, we vanish.
In debates, we agree dowry is anti-societal. In marriage ceremonies, we agree dowry is societal. We fall in an agreement by virtue, our social lines are virtually wielded to agreements. We rather have no sorry to say. The quick fix of life bounces our stand from agreement to disagreement and vice-versa.
Agreement is somewhat our counter certification to an idea. All agreements may not be unconditional. Notes, cautions and warranty indeed make agreements conditional. Marriages on earth are never unconditional agreements, we agree to live with a person, share her joys and sorrows. We understand her family, she sacrifices her life, leaves father’s lap. All comforts, New World, New Order. She has agreed.
Disagreements anywhere and disagreements here are tantamount to disrespect. Dissent is a sophisticated form of disagreement. Sometimes, people disagree the way things are done by state. Sometimes, state disagrees when things are done by people. On every page and every note, we come across dozens of disagreements. Post-world war Second, Countries agreed to put ban on making of nuclear weapons, but after that all countries went for nuclear weapons. Agreements sometimes are only thumb impressions. Validation is never a promise.
Confrontations stall easy agreements. Criticism takes away charm of agreement. Opinions on people, viewpoint on any personality, leaning towards an idea are human choices. Liking or disliking is a free matter. Blind faith in any person or institution is a personal choice. People are not supposed to issue corrigendum, clarification to address the idea of disagreement. People not liking me or you ought not to wait for my explanation or show cause notice. I like you, is my choice. You like me, is my privilege. You dislike me, is your choice. I should not rely on course correction, to let you to like me. You are free to reach a compromise on me as well.
Friends are fellow beings. Sometimes hard work is key to success of one friend, and sometimes luck is key to another. The only place on earth, where compromises are reached easily is our friendship line. Any place on earth I find worth agreeing is friendship. Disagreement if any comes at the cost of emotional outbreak. Separation is a painful idea. If separation is my choice, pain should not be public affair.
Somewhere you don’t trust the institutions, or persons, or somewhere I don’t like who said what. Knowing that, there is no scale or yardstick to measure the mood mania, of my likers or haters, I have found the burial ground in myself, My Patience. Suggestion if any comes from me, will always be, you agree by virtue, you disagree by choice. This world is free. Relations are simple, Definitions are mathematical.



(Shahid Andrabi comes from Lolab Kupwara. He is a PG In Mass communication and Journalism from Media education research centre, University of Kashmir. He is a random author and part time blogger, and can be reached at [email protected])