Conversing Across the Divide: A Encounter Between Different Viewpoints
Introducing the Individuals
One Diner: P., 34, from London
Occupation Former government employee, now a student studying community health
Voting record Supported the Green Party recently (and a member of the party); previously Labour. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of patriotic”
Interesting fact A sketch of a teacup he created as a child was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Participant: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Hailing from India, he has resided in the United Kingdom for five years, and supported Conservative. Describes himself as “slightly right of centre”
Amuse bouche He taught himself to understand the Urdu language. “I have no use for it, I simply found it intriguing”
For starters
The first participant Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, South Korea, the US. The issues Peter and I discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also universal, because people's lives largely follows the same curve across the world. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
Peter We split starters – seafood rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were excellent. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was 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 like sprinkling salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the dish is delicious. 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 government was choosing some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.
Akshat There are, sadly, individuals fleeing persecution, but many people arriving in the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily 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 your own needs and your relatives.
Peter We got lost with certain details. In my view it’s like you come over and work and then following a half-decade you get permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are quite expensive, you pay an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is limited. There is no special treatment for anybody. And regarding the new policies, under which family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we reject you as a person. I believe we must maintain a degree of compassion.
Common ground
Akshat Peter questions unchecked capitalism. I am, too, but simultaneously, economic growth benefits society and ought to be promoted.
The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that some parts of society – government, the press – thrive off stoking division. We discovered shared understanding in fundamentals and values.
For afters
The first participant Peter believes that since the UK profited from colonial times, it ought to provide compensation to affected nations. My view is simply: it is unfair to assess history with contemporary ethics; times are different, current society were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay India, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is Britain able to manage that? No.
The second participant In the past, I believe there was much reckoning with colonial history. For example, upon my arrival to the UK, people had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the role that imperial rule contributed to it. My view is decolonisation isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about examining what went wrong and our current responsibilities.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I talk to people regularly whose views are contrary to mine. The goal is uniting people to the same page, in order that all of us can strive for the improvement of the community.
The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I drank a Japanese dessert wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we each liked dinner, so we could hopefully be more receptive to having conversations with others in the coming times.
