Conversing Across the Divide: An Meeting Between Opposing Perspectives
Introducing the Participants
First Participant: P., 34, from London
Occupation Former government employee, now a student focusing on community health
Voting record Supported the Green Party last time (also a member of the political group); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “progressive, and internationalist rather than nationalist”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a teacup he did as a child was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Diner: A., 43, Harrow
Profession Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Hailing from India, Akshat has resided in the UK for five years, and voted the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “slightly moderate right”
Interesting fact Akshat taught himself to understand Urdu. “I have no use for it, I was just fascinated”
For starters
Akshat Over the last two decades, I’ve lived and worked in the Middle East, South Korea, the US. The topics we talked about are UK-centric, but they are also universal, because people's lives largely evolve similarly across the world. I anticipated someone very liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we engaged in a productive, logical conversation. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
The second participant We shared appetizers – seafood rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were excellent. I was a little nervous, as I think Akshat was. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our affection for London.
The big beef
Akshat I look at immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a dish. With a small amount, the food is delicious. Add too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty.
Peter He had a metaphor regarding salt. It would be odd to be if the government was choosing some preferred demographic of the nation.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but a lot of people coming to the UK are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily contribute much and can weigh on the benefit system. No one compels you to go to a different nation for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives.
The second participant We became confused with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that 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 for some time, application costs are quite expensive, there is an NHS surcharge, access to benefits is restricted. There is no special treatment for anyone. And concerning the new policies, whereby family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I think we must maintain a degree of humanity.
Common ground
The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unchecked capitalism. So am I, but simultaneously, wealth creation 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 discovered shared understanding in basic principles and values.
Dessert and debate
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that since the United Kingdom benefitted from colonial times, it should pay reparations to affected nations. I simply think: it is unfair to assess history with present day morality; times are different, current society were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Let’s say the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is the UK in a position to do that? Certainly not.
The second participant In the past, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. For example, when I first moved to the UK, people had little knowledge of the Great Famine and the part that imperial rule contributed to 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 may not alter the way I think, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I converse with individuals regularly whose views are opposite to my own. It’s about uniting people to the common understanding, in order that everyone can strive for the betterment of the community.
Peter We remained 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 both enjoyed dinner, so we could hopefully be more receptive to engaging in dialogues with others in future.
