Conversing Across the Gap: An Encounter Between Opposing Viewpoints
Meeting the Individuals
One Diner: P., 34, London
Occupation Former civil servant, now a student focusing on community health
Voting record Voted Green last time (and a member of the party); formerly Labour. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of nationalist”
Interesting fact A sketch of a tea cup Peter did as a kid was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Second Diner: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Profession Risk manager in the construction sector
Voting record Originally from the Indian subcontinent, Akshat has resided in the United Kingdom for five years, and supported the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “slightly moderate right”
Interesting fact Akshat self-learned to understand the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I simply found it intriguing”
For starters
The first participant Over the last 20 years, I’ve lived and worked in the Middle East, East Asia, the US. The topics Peter and I discussed are UK-centric, but they are also global, because human life largely evolve similarly wherever it is. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.
Peter We split appetizers – seafood rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think he was too. Would he criticize me for being a snowflake? 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 love of the capital.
Key disagreements
Akshat I look at migration like adding salt to a meal. With a small amount, the food is delicious. Add too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty.
The second participant Akshat used an analogy about salt. It would be a funny place to be if the state was choosing some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, individuals escaping oppression, but many migrants coming to the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to move to a different nation for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your relatives.
The second participant We got lost with certain details. In my view it is the case that you come over and are employed and then following a half-decade you get permanent citizenship. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment 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 anyone. And concerning the new policies, under which 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 questions unregulated markets. I am, too, but at the same time, economic growth helps communities and ought to be promoted.
The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that certain elements of society – government, the press – benefit from creating conflict. We did find common ground in basic principles and ethics.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the UK benefitted from colonial times, it ought to provide reparations to affected nations. My view is simply: you cannot judge history with present day morality; times are different, modern people were not responsible of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is Britain able to do that? No.
The second participant Until recently, I don’t think there was much reckoning with colonial history. For example, when I first moved to the UK, the public had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the part that imperial rule contributed to it. I hold that decolonization is not merely about signing a cheque, it ought to involve looking at what went wrong and where we should be now.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I appreciate his worries. I talk to individuals every day whose views are opposite to my own. It’s about uniting people to the same page, so that everyone can strive for the betterment of the community.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had a Japanese dessert wine. I didn’t persuade him of any point, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more open to having conversations with others in the coming times.
