Conversing Across the Divide: An Encounter Among Different Perspectives
Meeting the Participants
First Diner: P., 34, from London
Profession Ex- government employee, now a student studying public health
Political history Supported the Green Party recently (and a affiliate of the party); formerly Labour. Describes himself as “left, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a tea cup Peter did as a kid was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Participant: Akshat, 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Originally from India, Akshat has lived in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and voted Conservative. Describes himself as “somewhat moderate right”
Interesting fact Akshat self-learned to understand the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
For starters
Akshat During the past two decades, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The issues we talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also universal, because people's lives more or less follows the same curve across the world. I was expecting someone very liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, he opted for mojitos.
The second participant We split appetizers – fishy spring rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think Akshat was. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and the Iberian Peninsula. We bonded over our affection for London.
Key disagreements
The first participant I view immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the food is delicious. Use too little or too much and the meal is insipid or overly seasoned.
Peter He used an analogy regarding salt. It would be odd to exist if the state was choosing some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.
The first participant There are, sadly, individuals escaping oppression, but a lot of people coming to the UK are economic migrants who may not contribute much and can burden the benefit system. Nobody forces you to move to a different nation for opportunity, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your family.
Peter We became confused with some of the facts. In my view it is the case that you come over and work and then following a half-decade you obtain permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, visa fees are quite expensive, there is an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is restricted. There is no special treatment for anybody. And concerning the new policies, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I believe we must maintain a degree of humanity.
Sharing plate
The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. I am, too, but at the same time, economic growth benefits society and should be encouraged.
Peter We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that certain elements of society – government, the press – benefit from creating conflict. We discovered common ground in fundamentals and values.
For afters
Akshat Peter is of the opinion that since the UK profited from the colonial era, it ought to provide reparations to those countries. I simply think: you cannot judge the past with contemporary ethics; times are different, modern people had no control of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Let’s say the Britain was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is the UK in a position to manage that? Certainly not.
The second participant Until recently, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with the colonial past. As an instance, upon my arrival to the United Kingdom, the public weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the part that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about signing a cheque, it should be about looking at what went wrong and our current responsibilities.
Final thoughts
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I converse with people regularly with opinions are opposite to my own. The goal is uniting people to the same page, in order that all of us can work towards the improvement of the community.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I drank a Japanese dessert wine. I did not convince him of any point, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more receptive to having conversations with others in the coming times.
