Conversing Across the Divide: A Meeting Between Opposing Viewpoints
Meeting the Individuals
One Diner: Peter, 34, from London
Occupation Former government employee, now a learner focusing on community health
Voting record Supported Green last time (and a affiliate of the political group); previously Labour. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of nationalist”
Interesting fact A drawing of a tea cup Peter did as a kid was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Diner: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Profession Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Political history Hailing from India, Akshat has resided in the UK for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat moderate right”
Interesting fact He self-learned to read and write the Urdu language. “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 discussed are UK-centric, but they are also universal, because people's lives more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, Peter had mojitos.
Peter We shared starters – fishy spring rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the US and Spain. We bonded over our affection for the capital.
Key disagreements
The first participant I view immigration like adding salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the dish is delicious. Use too little or too much and the dish is insipid or overly seasoned.
Peter He had a metaphor regarding salt. It would be a funny place to exist 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 add significant value and can weigh on the welfare system. No one compels you to go to a different nation for opportunity, so you should only go if you can take care of your own needs and your family.
Peter We became confused with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that you come over and are employed and then following a half-decade you obtain permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming for some time, application costs are really high, you pay an healthcare levy, access to benefits is limited. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And regarding the new policies, whereby family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we reject you as a person. I believe we must maintain a certain level of humanity.
Common ground
The first participant Peter questions unchecked capitalism. I am, too, but simultaneously, economic growth benefits society and should be encouraged.
Peter We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that certain elements of the community – politics, the press – 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 ought to provide compensation to affected nations. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with contemporary ethics; times are different, current society were not responsible of events decades or a century ago. Let’s say the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a huge amount of money. Is Britain able to do that? No.
The second participant Until recently, I believe there was much reckoning with the colonial past. As an instance, upon my arrival to the United Kingdom, the public had little knowledge of the Great Famine and the part that imperial rule played in it. I hold that decolonization isn’t just about signing a cheque, it should be about examining past errors and where we should be now.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I converse with people regularly whose views are opposite to mine. The goal is bringing everyone to the same page, so that everyone can work towards the betterment of society.
The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I drank a Japanese dessert wine. I didn’t persuade him of any point, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more receptive to having conversations with other people in future.
