Conversing Across the Gap: A Encounter Between Opposing Perspectives
Meeting the Individuals
One Participant: P., 34, from London
Profession Former civil servant, now a student focusing on public health
Voting record Voted the Green Party last time (also a affiliate of the party); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of patriotic”
Amuse bouche A drawing of a teacup he created as a child was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery
Second Participant: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Profession Risk analyst in the construction sector
Political history Hailing from the Indian subcontinent, Akshat has lived in the UK for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat right of centre”
Interesting fact He self-learned to understand Urdu. “I have no use for it, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
The first participant During the past 20 years, I’ve lived and worked in the Middle East, East Asia, the United States. The issues Peter and I talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because people's lives largely evolve similarly across the world. I anticipated someone very liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
Peter We split appetizers – seafood rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I believe he was too. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our affection for the capital.
The big beef
The first participant I view immigration like adding salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the dish tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.
Peter He had a metaphor about seasoning. It would be odd to be if the state was selecting some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, individuals escaping oppression, but many people coming to the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the welfare system. Nobody forces you to go to a new country for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your relatives.
The second participant We became confused with some of the facts. In my view it’s like you come over and work and then after five years you get indefinite leave to remain. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, application costs are really high, there is an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And concerning the recent changes, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we don’t want you. I think we must maintain a degree of compassion.
Sharing plate
The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. So am I, but simultaneously, wealth creation benefits society and ought to be promoted.
Peter We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that certain elements of society – government, the media – benefit from stoking division. We did find common ground in basic principles and values.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the United Kingdom profited from colonial times, it should pay reparations to those countries. I simply think: you cannot judge history with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people were not responsible of events 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the Britain had to compensate India, it would be a significant sum of money. Is Britain able to do that? No.
Peter In the past, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. As an instance, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, the public weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the role that imperial rule played in it. I hold that decolonization is not merely about issuing payments, it should be about examining past errors and where we should be now.
Final thoughts
The first participant It won’t change the way I think, but I understand his worries. I converse with people regularly with opinions are contrary to my own. The goal is bringing everyone to the common understanding, so that all of us can strive for the betterment of the community.
The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I had some sweet Japanese 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 the coming times.
