Conflicts continue when views differ and views continue to differ for a number of reasons: 1. there still are arguable opposites to a viewpoint, 2. an unknown aggravator is warming the pot.

The Maldivian people, the Maldivian economists, the Maldivian government and the political activists (aka. the 'better halves' of the government) are all parts of an equation of arguable differences. Given the lack of an aggravator, arguments will reach various culminations based on the differences in opinions only. That is to say, the argument does not stray from the issue at hand.

When the aggravator comes into the picture, the argument often diverts from the case in question and wanders into the realms of hatred, despise, jealousy, wrath, etc. These other emotions are what is consuming the arguments between the social, economic or political entities (be it governmental or non-governmental). Aggravators in our midst - and from beyond - are constantly applying heat to conflicts which would otherwise take rational exchanges for resolution. Weed out these moles and you will find your conflicts more manageable.