Ethiopia: without constructive dialogue, history will repeat itself

I feel the sense of déjà vu these days. Politics in Ethiopia today looks like Ethiopia in the mid-1970s. So as now, the country was going through rapid changes. Certainly, change was more revolutionary than revolutionary, not to say unprecedented. But again, there was as much if not more hope than now. There is an unmistakable similarity in the public euphoria we are experiencing.

Considering how it ended, it's easy to forget how it all started. He enjoyed wide support in the country, and there was a broad coalition of different interest groups that came together under the umbrella of the progressive movement.

In the widespread collective exuberance, there was a proliferation of ideas discussed on how to take the country forward. The laws on censorship have just been lifted for the first time in the history of the country, heralding the beginnings of public discourse

. No social media, YouTube or even mobile phones. As incredible as it may seem to the younger generation, opinion pieces like this one had to either be delivered physically to the editor of a newspaper, or sent by mail.

Now I could instantly post this piece of my laptop. I also do not need one of the old media to agree to publish my article. This is an amazing transformation that is extremely useful in disseminating information. But it can also be fatal because it is just as effective in spreading false news and hate speech.

Even on what now looks like archaic platforms – like official journals and underground pamphlets – the discussions did not last long to deteriorate into agitated arguments. Caller name and labeling soon followed. It was a slippery slope from there.

The big umbrella of progressives began to fall back into fractured groups of enemies who could not stand each other. The shameful history of badbadinations and the resulting deterioration in dictatorship outright were a natural result of these early mistakes of intolerance.

Unfortunately, the early stages of this familiar failure creep into public discourse these days. An increasingly intolerant attitude towards those who have a different point of view becomes rampant. Temperaments begin to fray before even the most complex and difficult political issues are addressed. The way in which disagreements are framed as we against them is unhealthy. He follows a strangely familiar path taken before.

It is crucial that the similarities end here. It is not inevitable that we follow the same old scenario towards devastation. A new script can be written. The first thing to do is to learn to have a constructive dialogue.

William Isaacs, director of the MIT Dialogue Project, succinctly defines constructive dialogue as "the art of thinking together". This is what distinguishes dialogue from discussion or debate. Most of what happens as a conversation in our country is not dialogue but advocacy.

There is a time and place for advocacy. But we can not do it all the time on all forums, when there is also the need to listen.

Constructive dialogue begins when we hold our sense of self-importance in check. We must recognize that there may be a slight possibility that our ideas are not the only answer available. We must accept that other people can also come up with good ideas from time to time. It is crucial to listen to others – this is the most important part of the dialogue.

Anyone can talk. But few are those who master the art of listening. Listen with real interest to see the position of the other party, with more empathy than judgment, and with the intention of understanding instead of countering the blow, that's what what does it mean to think together?

Once we understand the problem, we can work to consider a way to approach it. Trying to find creative solutions to problems instead of blaming the victim is what will move us forward. No amount of name-calling or defaming on the other side will make the problem go away. Together, we must find a common ground

If we do not want to waste another opportunity for reform in this country, we must recognize that no one has the monopoly of the truth. We should be willing to receive different ideas. It is then that we can come to a mutual understanding of our relative positions and find the middle term.

We should challenge ourselves to give others and their ideas the benefit of the doubt before touching the "post" or "tweet" buttons on our easily accessible social media walls.