Conversing Across the Gap: An Encounter Between Different Perspectives
Meeting the Individuals
One Diner: Peter, 34, London
Profession Former civil servant, now a student studying public health
Political history Supported the Green Party last time (also a member of the political group); formerly Labour Party. Describes himself as “progressive, and internationalist rather than patriotic”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a teacup he did as a kid was once hung in the Irish National Gallery
Second Participant: A., 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the construction sector
Voting record Hailing from India, he has lived in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat moderate right”
Interesting fact He self-learned to understand Urdu. “I have no use for it, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
Akshat Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, East Asia, the United States. The topics Peter and I talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also universal, because people's lives largely follows the same curve across the world. I was expecting a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a productive, logical conversation. I had a couple of beers, he opted for mojitos.
Peter We shared starters – fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I think Akshat was. Was he going to attack 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 bonded over our affection for the capital.
Key disagreements
The first participant I look at immigration like adding salt to a meal. With a small amount, the dish 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 exist if the government was selecting some preferred demographic of the nation.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but many migrants arriving in the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who may not add significant value and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to go to a new country for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support your own needs and your family.
Peter We became confused with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that you arrive and are employed and then after five years you get permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming for some time, application costs are really high, there is an healthcare levy, access to benefits is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And regarding the new policies, under which you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we desire your labor, but we don’t want you. I believe we have to have a degree of compassion.
Common ground
The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unchecked capitalism. So am I, but at the same time, wealth creation helps communities and ought to be promoted.
Peter We’re both internationalist. And we concurred that certain elements of society – politics, the media – benefit from stoking division. We did find common ground in fundamentals and values.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter believes that since the UK benefitted from colonial times, it ought to provide compensation to affected nations. My view is simply: you cannot judge the past with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people were not responsible of events decades or a century ago. Suppose the Britain had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is Britain able to do that? Certainly not.
The second participant Until recently, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. For example, when I first moved to the UK, the public weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the part that colonialism played in it. My view is decolonisation is not merely about issuing payments, it should be about looking at what went wrong and our current responsibilities.
Takeaways
Akshat It may not alter the my perspective, but I appreciate Peter’s concerns. I talk to individuals every day with opinions are opposite to mine. It’s about uniting people to the common understanding, in order that all of us can strive for the improvement of society.
The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I had a Japanese dessert wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we both enjoyed dinner, so we could hopefully be more receptive to having conversations with others in future.
