Conversing Over the Divide: A Meeting Between Opposing Perspectives
Introducing the Individuals
One Participant: P., 34, London
Occupation Ex- government employee, now a learner studying community health
Voting record Voted the Green Party last time (also a member of the party); previously Labour. Describes himself as “progressive, and globalist rather than nationalist”
Amuse bouche A drawing of a tea cup Peter did as a child was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Diner: A., 43, Harrow
Profession Risk analyst in the construction sector
Political history Hailing from India, he has lived in the UK for five years, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat right of centre”
Interesting fact Akshat taught himself to understand Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
For starters
Akshat During the past 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 follows the same curve wherever it is. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.
The second participant We shared appetizers – seafood rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I was a little nervous, as I believe he was too. Was he going to attack me for being a snowflake? We’re both immigrants. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the US and Spain. We connected through our affection for the capital.
Key disagreements
Akshat I view immigration like adding salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the dish tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the meal is insipid or overly seasoned.
Peter He used an analogy regarding salt. It would be odd to exist if the state was choosing some preferred demographic of the nation.
The first participant There are, sadly, individuals fleeing persecution, but many migrants coming to the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much 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 yourself and your family.
The second participant We became confused with some of the facts. I don’t think it is the case that you come over and work and then after five years you obtain indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. The climate has been unwelcoming for some time, visa fees are quite expensive, you pay an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is limited. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And regarding the new policies, under which you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I think we have to have a degree of compassion.
Sharing plate
The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. I am, too, but at the same time, economic growth benefits society and should be encouraged.
Peter We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that some parts of society – politics, the press – thrive off creating conflict. We did find shared understanding in basic principles and values.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the UK benefitted from the colonial era, it ought to provide reparations to affected nations. I simply think: you cannot judge the past with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people were not responsible of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Let’s say the Britain was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is Britain able to manage that? Certainly not.
Peter Until recently, I believe adequate reflection occurred with the colonial past. For example, upon my arrival to the UK, people weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the part that imperial rule 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.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I appreciate Peter’s concerns. I talk to individuals regularly with opinions are opposite to my own. It’s about bringing everyone to the common understanding, so that everyone can work towards the betterment of society.
The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of any point, but we both enjoyed dinner, so we could hopefully be more open to having conversations with other people in the coming times.
