I see no reason for criticizing people when they say the goal behind national dialogue should be spreading the culture of tolerance and making it part of people’s daily lives. It is unfortunate that those who hope to see a highly significant role for the dialogue forum are often victims of unfair criticism.
If we had a culture of dialogue and public debate, our public debt would not have soared to its present height, our per capita income would not have so drastically decreased and our municipality, health and education services would not have deteriorated so that students are unable to find places in universities and other educational institutions.
Our education would have changed for the better had we put into place well-planned policies using the financial resources from the boom years to meet both present and future needs.
If the language of dialogue and discussion and the culture of tolerance and accommodation were prevalent here, people guided by personal advantage would not have made immense personal fortunes mismanaging public funds; managers would not have dared marginalize their subordinates and others working under them because their views differed from those of the managers; the onslaught on our meager water resources would not have continued and our scarce water supplies would not have been wasted on poorly-considered projects.
If we had dialogue and discussion, we wouldn’t have launched projects only to abandon them shortly afterward; we would not have delayed privatization for so long a time when other societies wisely privatized long before us. If we were used to the language of dialogue, we would not have seen major companies sustaining losses because there were no open and objective discussions at board meetings.
The objective behind establishing a national dialogue center should be the spread of a culture of tolerance. The establishment and spread of the culture will mean all members of society will be given the opportunity to express themselves, listen to other points of view and join in the process of decision-making. We should learn how to listen to the voice that praises and the one that criticizes and benefit from both. Every person should be encouraged to think and express himself or herself in loud and clear voices. It is natural that people differ; it is an integral part of human nature and no one is immune from error.
At the same time, no one should claim that he or she alone is right and all others wrong. It is not necessary for people to relinquish their beliefs and convictions to ensure that good relations prevail. What is most important is that every one goes home at the end of the day feeling convinced and content.
