Conversing Across the Gap: A Encounter Among Opposing Viewpoints
Introducing the Participants
One Diner: P., 34, from London
Profession Former civil servant, now a student focusing on community health
Political history Voted the Green Party recently (also a affiliate of the party); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a tea cup he did as a kid was once hung in the National Gallery of Ireland
Second Participant: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Profession Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Hailing from the Indian subcontinent, he has lived in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “somewhat moderate right”
Amuse bouche Akshat taught himself to read and write Urdu. “I have no use for it, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
The first participant Over the last 20 years, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, East Asia, the US. The issues we talked about are UK-centric, but they are also universal, because human life more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I anticipated someone very liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, he opted for mojitos.
Peter We split appetizers – fishy spring rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were excellent. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe Akshat was. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the United States and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our affection for London.
Key disagreements
Akshat I view migration similar to sprinkling salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the food is delicious. Use too little or too much and the meal is insipid or overly seasoned.
Peter Akshat had a metaphor regarding salt. It would be a funny place to be if the government was choosing some preferred demographic of the nation.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but many people arriving in the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the welfare system. Nobody forces you to go to a new country for opportunity, so you should only go if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives.
Peter We became confused with some of the facts. I don’t think it is the case that you arrive and are employed and then following a half-decade you get permanent citizenship. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment since Theresa May, application costs are quite expensive, you pay an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And regarding the new policies, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I believe we have to have a certain level of compassion.
Common ground
The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unchecked capitalism. So am I, but simultaneously, economic growth helps communities and ought to be promoted.
The second participant We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that certain elements of the community – government, the press – benefit from stoking division. We did find common ground in basic principles and ethics.
Dessert and debate
Akshat Peter is of the opinion that because the UK profited from the colonial era, it ought to provide reparations to those countries. My view is simply: you cannot judge the past with contemporary ethics; eras vary, current society had no control of events decades or a century ago. Let’s say the UK was obliged to repay India, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is the UK in a position to manage that? Certainly not.
Peter In the past, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. As an instance, upon my arrival to the UK, the public had little knowledge of the Great Famine and the part that imperial rule contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about issuing payments, it should be about examining past errors and where we should be now.
Takeaways
The first participant It won’t change the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I converse with individuals regularly with opinions are contrary to mine. It’s about uniting people to the same page, so that everyone can strive for the betterment of society.
The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I drank a Japanese dessert wine. I didn’t persuade him of any point, but we each liked the meal, so we might become more open to having conversations with other people in the coming times.
