Conversing Over the Divide: An Meeting Between Different Perspectives
Introducing the Individuals
One Diner: Peter, 34, from London
Occupation Ex- government employee, currently a learner studying public health
Political history Supported Green last time (and a member of the political group); formerly Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Interesting fact A drawing of a teacup he created as a child was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Participant: A., 43, Harrow
Occupation Risk analyst in the construction sector
Political history Hailing from the Indian subcontinent, he has resided in the UK for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat right of centre”
Amuse bouche Akshat taught himself to understand Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
For starters
The first participant During the past two decades, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, East Asia, the US. The issues we talked about are UK-centric, but they are also global, because human life largely follows the same curve wherever it is. I anticipated someone very liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.
The second participant We shared starters – seafood rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think he was too. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. I grew up in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We bonded over our love of London.
Key disagreements
The first participant I look at immigration like adding salt to a meal. With a small amount, the food tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the dish is insipid or overly seasoned.
The second participant He had a metaphor regarding salt. It would be odd to be if the state was selecting some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but many migrants coming to the United Kingdom are economic migrants who may not add significant value and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to move to a new country for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support yourself and your relatives.
Peter We became confused with some of the facts. I don’t think it is the case that you come over and work and then following a half-decade you get indefinite leave to remain. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, application costs are quite expensive, you pay an NHS surcharge, access to benefits is limited. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And regarding the recent changes, whereby family reunification is restricted, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I believe we must maintain a certain level of compassion.
Common ground
Akshat Peter questions unchecked capitalism. I am, too, but simultaneously, wealth creation helps communities and should be encouraged.
The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that certain elements of the community – politics, the press – thrive off stoking division. We did find shared understanding in basic principles and ethics.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter believes that since the United Kingdom 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; eras vary, modern people had no control of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay India, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is the UK in a position to manage that? Certainly not.
Peter Until recently, I believe there was much reckoning with colonial history. As an instance, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, people weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the part that imperial rule contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation isn’t just 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 Peter’s concerns. I converse with people regularly with opinions are contrary to mine. It’s about uniting people to the common understanding, in order that everyone can strive for the betterment of the community.
Peter We remained for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of anything, but we each liked dinner, so we might become more open to engaging in dialogues with others in the coming times.
