Conversing Across the Divide: An Meeting Between Different Perspectives
Introducing the Participants
First Participant: P., 34, London
Occupation Former civil servant, now a learner focusing on public health
Voting record Voted the Green Party last time (also a member of the political group); previously Labour. Identifies as “progressive, and internationalist rather than nationalist”
Amuse bouche A drawing of a teacup he did as a kid was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland
Second Diner: A., 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Originally from the Indian subcontinent, he has lived in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “somewhat moderate right”
Interesting fact He taught himself to read and write the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I simply found it intriguing”
Initial impressions
The first participant During the past two decades, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, South Korea, the US. The issues we discussed are UK-centric, but they are also global, because human life largely follows the same curve wherever it is. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, Peter had mojitos.
Peter We shared starters – fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our love of the capital.
The big beef
The first participant I look at immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the food is delicious. Add too little or too much and the dish is insipid or overly seasoned.
The second participant Akshat had a metaphor about salt. It would be odd to be if the government was choosing some preferred demographic of the nation.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, people escaping oppression, but a lot of migrants coming to the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to go to a new country for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support your own needs and your family.
Peter We became confused with some of the facts. I don’t think it is the case that you arrive and are employed and then after five years you get permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are really high, there is an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is limited. There is no special treatment for anybody. And concerning the recent changes, under which family reunification is restricted, it is astonishing to state: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I believe we must maintain a certain level of humanity.
Common ground
Akshat Peter questions unchecked capitalism. So am I, but simultaneously, wealth creation benefits society and should be encouraged.
The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that some parts of the community – government, the press – thrive off stoking division. We discovered shared understanding in fundamentals and values.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that since the United Kingdom benefitted from the colonial era, it ought to provide reparations to affected nations. I simply think: you cannot judge the past with contemporary ethics; times are different, current society were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose the Britain was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is the UK in a position to manage that? No.
Peter Until recently, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. For example, upon my arrival to the UK, the public weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the part that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about examining what went wrong and where we should be now.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I converse with individuals regularly with opinions are opposite to mine. The goal is bringing everyone to the common understanding, so that all of us can strive for the betterment of society.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we each liked the meal, so we could hopefully be more open to having conversations with other people in the coming times.
