Conversing Over the Divide: A Meeting Between Different Viewpoints
Introducing the Participants
First Participant: P., 34, from London
Profession Former civil servant, now a student focusing on public health
Political history Voted the Green Party last time (also a affiliate of the party); formerly Labour Party. Identifies as “left, and internationalist rather than patriotic”
Interesting fact A drawing of a tea cup Peter created as a kid was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Second Diner: A., 43, Harrow
Profession Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Originally from the Indian subcontinent, Akshat has resided in the UK for half a decade, and voted Conservative. Describes himself as “slightly right of centre”
Interesting fact He self-learned to understand Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
Akshat Over the last two decades, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, South Korea, the US. The topics Peter and I talked about are UK-centric, but they are also global, because people's lives largely evolve similarly across the world. I was expecting someone very liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.
Peter We split appetizers – seafood rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I think Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our affection for the capital.
Key disagreements
The first participant I look at immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the dish tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty.
The second participant Akshat used an analogy regarding salt. It would be odd to be if the government was selecting some preferred demographic of the nation.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, people fleeing persecution, but many people arriving in the UK are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily contribute much and can weigh on the benefit system. Nobody forces you to move to a new country for opportunity, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your relatives.
Peter We got lost with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that you arrive and work and then following a half-decade you obtain permanent citizenship. Nothing is automatic. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, visa fees are quite expensive, there is an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is limited. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And concerning the recent changes, under which family reunification is restricted, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I believe we have to have a degree of humanity.
Sharing plate
Akshat Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. I am, too, but simultaneously, wealth creation helps communities and should be encouraged.
Peter We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that some parts of the community – politics, the press – benefit from creating conflict. We did find common ground in basic principles and ethics.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter believes that because the UK profited from colonial times, it should pay compensation to affected nations. My view is simply: you cannot judge history with present day morality; times are different, current society were not responsible of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay India, it would be a huge amount of money. Is Britain able to manage that? No.
The second participant In the past, I believe there was much reckoning with the colonial past. As an instance, upon my arrival to the United Kingdom, people weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the role that imperial rule contributed to it. I hold that decolonization is not merely about issuing payments, it ought to involve looking at past errors and our current responsibilities.
Final thoughts
The first participant It won’t change the way I think, but I appreciate his worries. I converse with people every day whose views are opposite to mine. The goal is uniting people to the common understanding, in order that everyone can strive for the betterment of the community.
The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. Akshat had dessert and I had a Japanese dessert wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we could hopefully be more open to having conversations with others in future.
