Conversing Over the Divide: A Meeting Among Opposing Viewpoints
Meeting the Participants
First Diner: Peter, 34, London
Profession Former civil servant, now a student focusing on public health
Voting record Supported Green recently (and a member of the party); formerly Labour. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of nationalist”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a tea cup Peter created as a kid was once hung in the Irish National Gallery
Second Participant: A., 43, Harrow
Profession Risk manager in the construction sector
Political history Hailing from India, he has resided in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat right of centre”
Amuse bouche Akshat self-learned to read and write Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
Akshat Over the last two decades, I have resided and been employed in Qatar, East Asia, the US. The topics Peter and I talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because people's lives more or less evolve similarly across the world. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
The second participant We split starters – fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our affection for the capital.
Key disagreements
Akshat I look at immigration like sprinkling salt to a dish. With a small amount, the dish tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.
Peter He used an analogy regarding salt. It would be a funny place to exist if the state was selecting some preferred demographic of the country.
Akshat There are, sadly, people fleeing persecution, but a lot of people coming to the UK are those seeking better finances who may not add significant value and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to move to a new country for opportunity, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives.
The second participant We got lost with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that you arrive and work and then following a half-decade you obtain permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, visa fees are really high, you pay an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And regarding the recent changes, whereby family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I believe we have to have a degree of compassion.
Common ground
The first participant Peter questions unchecked capitalism. So am I, but at the same time, economic growth helps communities and ought to be promoted.
Peter We’re both internationalist. And we concurred that some parts of society – politics, the media – benefit from creating conflict. We did find shared understanding in fundamentals and ethics.
For afters
Akshat Peter is of the opinion that because the UK profited from colonial times, it should pay reparations to affected nations. My view is simply: you cannot judge the past with contemporary ethics; times are different, current society were not responsible of events 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the Britain was obliged to repay India, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is the UK in a position to do that? No.
Peter Until recently, I don’t think there was much reckoning with the colonial past. For example, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, the public had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the part that imperial rule contributed to it. My view is decolonisation is not merely about signing a cheque, it should be about examining what went wrong and where we should be now.
Final thoughts
Akshat It won’t change the way I think, but I appreciate his worries. I converse with individuals regularly whose views are contrary to my own. The goal is uniting people to the same page, in order that everyone can strive for the betterment of society.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we each liked dinner, so we might become more open to having conversations with others in the coming times.