Conversing Across the Gap: A Encounter Between Different Viewpoints
Meeting the Individuals
First Participant: P., 34, London
Profession Ex- government employee, now a student focusing on public health
Political history Supported the Green Party recently (also a member of the political group); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “progressive, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a tea cup he created as a child was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery
Second Participant: A., 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the construction sector
Voting record Originally from the Indian subcontinent, he has resided in the United Kingdom for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “slightly right of centre”
Amuse bouche He self-learned to understand the Urdu language. “I have no use for it, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
Akshat Over the last two decades, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The issues Peter and I discussed are UK-centric, but they are also global, because human life more or less evolve similarly across the world. I was expecting a staunch liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we had a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, he opted for mojitos.
The second participant We split starters – fishy spring rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think he was too. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the US and Spain. We bonded over our affection for the capital.
Key disagreements
Akshat I look at immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a dish. With a small amount, the dish is delicious. Add 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 be if the state was choosing some preferred demographic of the country.
The first participant There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but many people coming to the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily add significant value and can weigh on the welfare system. Nobody forces you to move to a different nation for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives.
The second participant We became confused with some of the facts. In my view it’s like you come over and work and then following a half-decade you obtain indefinite leave to remain. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, application costs are really high, you pay an healthcare levy, access to benefits is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anybody. And concerning the recent changes, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I think we must maintain a certain level of compassion.
Common ground
Akshat Peter questions unchecked capitalism. So am I, but at the same time, wealth creation helps communities and should be encouraged.
Peter We’re both internationalist. And we concurred that certain elements of society – government, the press – thrive off creating conflict. We did find common ground in fundamentals and values.
For afters
Akshat Peter believes that because the UK benefitted from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to affected nations. I simply think: you cannot judge the past with present day morality; eras vary, current society were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose 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.
Peter Until recently, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. For example, upon my arrival to the UK, the public weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the part that imperial rule played in it. My view is decolonization is not merely about signing a cheque, it ought to involve examining what went wrong and where we should be now.
Final thoughts
The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I appreciate Peter’s concerns. I converse with individuals every day whose views are contrary to mine. The goal is uniting people to the common understanding, so that all of us can strive for the betterment of society.
The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. 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 engaging in dialogues with other people in future.
