Conversing Across the Divide: An Meeting Between Different Perspectives
Introducing the Participants
First Participant: Peter, 34, London
Profession Former civil servant, now a learner focusing on public health
Voting record Voted the Green Party last time (and a affiliate of the political group); previously Labour. Describes himself as “progressive, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Amuse bouche A drawing of a tea cup he created as a child was once hung in the Irish National Gallery
Second Participant: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Profession Risk analyst in the construction sector
Voting record Originally from India, Akshat has lived in the UK for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “somewhat right of centre”
Amuse bouche Akshat taught himself to understand the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I simply found it intriguing”
For starters
Akshat Over the last two decades, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The issues Peter and I discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because people's lives more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I anticipated someone very liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.
Peter We shared appetizers – seafood rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I believe Akshat was. Would he criticize me for being a snowflake? We’re both immigrants. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and Spain. We bonded over our love of London.
Key disagreements
Akshat I look at migration like adding salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the dish is delicious. Add too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.
Peter Akshat had a metaphor about seasoning. It would be odd to be if the state was selecting some preferred demographic of the country.
Akshat There are, sadly, individuals escaping oppression, but a lot of people arriving in the UK are economic migrants who may not contribute much and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to move to a new country for opportunity, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your family.
The second participant We got lost with certain details. In my view it is the case that you arrive and are employed and then following a half-decade you obtain indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are really high, there is an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is limited. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And concerning the new policies, whereby family reunification is restricted, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I think we have to have a degree of humanity.
Common ground
The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unchecked capitalism. So am I, but simultaneously, wealth creation helps communities and ought to be promoted.
The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that certain elements of the community – government, the media – thrive off stoking division. We did find common ground in fundamentals and ethics.
For afters
Akshat Peter believes that since the UK profited from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to those countries. My view is simply: it is unfair to assess history with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people had no control of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of money. Is the UK in a position to do that? No.
Peter Until recently, I believe there was much reckoning with the colonial past. As an instance, upon my arrival to the UK, people had little knowledge of the Great Famine and the part that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonization isn’t just about issuing payments, it ought to involve examining what went wrong and where we should be now.
Final thoughts
Akshat It won’t change the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I talk to individuals every day with opinions are contrary to my own. The goal is bringing everyone to the common understanding, in order that all of us can strive for the improvement of society.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had a Japanese dessert wine. I did not convince him of any point, but we each liked the meal, so we could hopefully be more receptive to having conversations with other people in the coming times.
