Conversing Across the Divide: A Encounter Among Different Viewpoints
Meeting the Participants
First Participant: Peter, 34, London
Occupation Ex- government employee, currently a student focusing on community health
Voting record Voted Green recently (also a member of the party); formerly Labour. Identifies as “progressive, and globalist rather than nationalist”
Interesting fact A sketch of a tea cup Peter did as a kid was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery
Other Diner: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Political history Originally from India, he has resided in the UK for five years, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “slightly right of centre”
Interesting fact Akshat self-learned to understand Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
For starters
Akshat Over the last two decades, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, East Asia, the United States. The topics we talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also universal, because human life more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I was expecting a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
The second participant We shared appetizers – fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think he was too. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and Spain. We connected through our affection for the capital.
Key disagreements
Akshat I view immigration like adding salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the food is delicious. Add too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.
The second participant Akshat used an analogy about seasoning. It would be a funny place to exist if the state was selecting some ideal ethnic makeup of the nation.
Akshat There are, sadly, people fleeing persecution, but many migrants coming to the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much and can weigh on the benefit system. Nobody forces you to move to a different nation for opportunity, so you should only go if you can take care of yourself and your relatives.
The second participant We became confused with certain details. I don’t think it’s like you arrive and work and then after five years you get indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are really high, you pay an NHS surcharge, access to benefits is limited. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And concerning the recent changes, whereby family reunification is restricted, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I believe we must maintain a degree of humanity.
Common ground
The first participant Peter questions unregulated markets. So am I, but at the same time, economic growth benefits society and ought to be promoted.
Peter We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that some parts of society – politics, the media – benefit from creating conflict. We discovered shared understanding in basic principles and ethics.
For afters
Akshat Peter is of the opinion that since the UK benefitted from the colonial era, it ought to provide reparations to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with present day morality; times are different, modern people had no control of events decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK had to compensate India, it would be a huge amount of money. Is the UK in a position to do that? No.
The second participant In the past, I believe adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. As an instance, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, the public weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the role that colonialism played in it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about issuing payments, it should be about looking at past errors and our current responsibilities.
Takeaways
The first participant It won’t change the way I think, but I appreciate Peter’s concerns. I talk to people regularly with opinions are opposite to my own. It’s about uniting people to the same page, in order that everyone can strive for the betterment of society.
The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of any point, but we each liked dinner, so we might become more open to engaging in dialogues with others in future.
