Conversing Across the Divide: An Encounter Between Different Viewpoints
Meeting the Participants
One Diner: Peter, 34, London
Occupation Ex- government employee, currently a learner studying public health
Voting record Supported Green recently (also a member of the party); formerly Labour. Describes himself as “progressive, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a teacup he created as a kid was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Participant: A., 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Hailing from the Indian subcontinent, he has resided in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “somewhat moderate right”
Amuse bouche He taught himself to read and write Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I simply found it intriguing”
For starters
The first participant Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The issues Peter and I talked about are UK-centric, but they are also global, because people's lives largely evolve similarly wherever it is. I was expecting someone very liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.
Peter We shared appetizers – seafood rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe he was too. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and Spain. We bonded over our affection for the capital.
The big beef
Akshat I view migration like sprinkling salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the dish tastes wonderful. Use too little or too much and the dish is insipid or overly seasoned.
The second participant He had a metaphor about salt. It would be odd to exist if the state was selecting some preferred demographic of the country.
The first participant There are, sadly, individuals fleeing persecution, but many people arriving in the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily add significant value and can weigh on the welfare system. No one compels you to go to a new country for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives.
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 following a half-decade you obtain permanent citizenship. Nothing is automatic. The climate has been unwelcoming for some time, application costs are really high, you pay an NHS surcharge, access to benefits is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And concerning the recent changes, under which you can’t bring your family over, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I believe we have to have a certain level of compassion.
Sharing plate
Akshat Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. So am I, but simultaneously, wealth creation helps communities and should be encouraged.
Peter We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that some parts of society – politics, the media – benefit from creating conflict. We did find shared understanding in fundamentals and ethics.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that since the UK benefitted from the colonial era, it ought to provide compensation to those countries. My view is simply: you cannot judge history with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Let’s say the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is Britain able to do that? No.
The second participant In the past, I believe there was much reckoning with the colonial past. As an instance, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, people weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the role that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonization isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about looking at what went wrong and where we should be now.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I appreciate his worries. I talk to individuals every day with opinions are contrary to mine. It’s about uniting people to the common understanding, so that all of us can strive for the improvement of the community.
The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of any point, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more open to having conversations with others in the coming times.
