This word 'compromise' has an awful history attached to it and yet there have been very positive compromises.
The classic modern historical example of 'bad compromise' was UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's 'Peace for our time' on 30 September 1938 in relation to his policy of appeasement toward Nazi Germany.
The phrase "peace for our time" concerned the Munich Agreement and the Anglo-German Declaration, echoing Benjamin Disraeli who upon returning from the Congress of Berlin in 1878 stated "I have returned from Germany with peace in our time." It is primarily remembered for its ironic value, as the German occupation of the Sudetenland began on the following day.
Less than a year after the agreement, following continued aggression from Germany and its invasion of Poland, Europe was plunged into World War II.
Examples of attempted 'good compromises' of national interests might be Australia's and East Timor's territorial oil rich waters agreements – which ended up in the International courts in The Hague. Then there is the Australia – New Zealand talks in discontinuing passports between the two countries! It's ended up with a machine for your passport. Another is medical research where the benefits for mankind's well-being are historically evident.
Australians enjoy a liberal democratic society where recognition of good compromise and bad compromise in many situations that whatever choice is made - both are far from the ideal.
There are innumerable 'good compromise' situation in every day scenarios such as a child's simple wish for strawberry jam on their lunch sandwich for school, but the reality is, there is only marmalade or apricot available.
There are many more significant 'good compromises' made every day such as choosing for our ourselves, one brand of tyre over another for our motor vehicles when the price range has an impact on the budget. The same can be said for our grocery shopping when deciding to purchase Fair Trade products.
Bad compromise has serious outcomes
'Bad compromises' similarly affect every area of life, illustrated by a child's bad behaviour with a corresponding lack of discipline, or an adult choosing a short cut with a likely deleterious outcome over a proven steadier solution.
The number of occasions where the media have highlighted 'bad compromise' has been the alarming and disturbing consequences of 'politically correct' decisions that illustrate little logical benefit to anyone. In Britain for example, a woman was sacked for wearing around her neck a necklace with a cross.
But there are real situations of security where 'bad compromise' could lead to serious consequences. For example, Australian airports have security checks for everyone. Not to have such security would be 'bad compromise'. At international airports it's 'bad compromise' to ignore this reality.
In a previous article I cited John Stevens, the former commissioner of the British Metropolitan Police who asked the UK Muslim community to 'accept the absolute, undeniable, total truth: that Islamic terrorism is their problem!' Lord Stevens defended 'racial profiling' at airports and other security hotspots,
He said "it's exactly the same as recognising that, during the Northern Ireland troubles that left thousands dead, the IRA were totally based in the Catholic community and the UVF in the Protestant." The Irish are white.
In a more recent titled "Declining options" 30 September 2016 I looked at the previous nine years citing the progress of how the Australian community has handled this constant threat. That same was a service remembering it was 12 months to the day that a Sydney Police worker was shot and killed by a Muslim terrorist.
The Sydney Muslim riots showed that 'bad compromise' was off the agenda. Video footage was used by Police to bring offenders before the courts. Then, the Sydney Morning Herald's Gerard Henderson took to task Australian Muslim media personages for their diversionary attacks on the West. He illustrates that any such 'bad compromise' would lead to disaster for the nation. Today, this is even more important.
Similarly Victoria’s current dictatorial legislature giving the premier un-presentenced powers on public health issues has rightly bought forth criticism from the legal profession, business leaders, community groups, churches and civil libertarian groups – sand the massive crowds at rallies.