One of the greatest challenges in contemporary Brazil is not disagreement itself, but the inability to resolve it in a peaceful and civilized manner. The country seems to have forgotten that dialogue is a tool for coexistence, not a battlefield.

In the past, there was a sense of respect and structure that guided human relations. At the old Círculo Operário de Jaguaribe, for example, young people learned to live with differences through Robert’s Rules of Order, a set of principles that shaped civic character. Every member had equal rights, privileges, and obligations; decisions required a quorum; words followed order and purpose; and, above all, personal comments were unacceptable.

These rules taught that democratic coexistence depends on listening and mutual respect. One learned that the chairperson must be impartial, that silence implies consent, and that the majority decides without suppressing the rights of the minority. The goal was not to win the debate, but to ensure that it took place fairly.

Today, however, the opposite prevails. Public spaces — from social media to café tables — have turned into territories of shouting and resentment. Patience has given way to haste, and reason to emotion. Instead of reflecting, we react. Instead of dialoguing, we attack. People confuse conviction with intolerance and begin to believe that another’s silence means defeat, not respect.

This erosion of civilized coexistence is reflected worryingly in the younger generations. Among youths, a simple foul in a soccer game can turn into a fight, and minor disagreements into physical confrontations. The problem is that the adult world has been a terrible example of how to handle differences. When adults solve everything through force, irony, or disdain, they teach — even without words — that empathy is weakness and peace is naïveté.

This logic must be reversed. Every school should include in its curriculum the teaching of conflict resolution and mediation, with activities that promote listening, respect, and the pursuit of “win-win” solutions.

In the United States, for instance, debate teams are a long-standing tradition that serve precisely this educational purpose. Through structured debate, students learn to defend ideas with arguments, listen carefully to their opponents, and respect speaking turns. The focus is not to defeat the other, but to build reasoning, empathy, and self-control — rare and essential qualities for life in society. Brazil could benefit greatly from adopting similar practices, adapted to its own reality, as tools for civic and emotional education.

Teaching young people to handle conflict means teaching them to turn disagreement into learning. It means showing that yielding is not losing but maturing; that the other person is not an enemy but a mirror; and that coexistence depends on empathy, not obedience. These are values not learned from manuals, but from living examples — the ones that parents, teachers, and leaders have a duty to offer.

If we want a less violent and more humane country, we must begin with the essentials: forming citizens capable of disagreeing without hatred, of discussing without aggression, and of reconciling with dignity. Conflict is inevitable, but violence is a choice.

Teaching the young to resolve conflicts peacefully is more than a pedagogical act — it is a civilizing gesture. In a world where intolerance disguises itself as courage and empathy seems like weakness, true strength lies in those who can dialogue without wounding.

Peace, after all, is not the absence of conflict. It is the conscious choice to face it with respect. And perhaps that is the most urgent lesson Brazil needs to relearn — in its schools, its families, and in the very soul of its collective life.

By Palmarí H. de Lucena