Conversing Over the Gap: A Encounter Between Different Viewpoints
Meeting the Participants
First Participant: Peter, 34, from London
Profession Former civil servant, now a student studying public health
Political history Supported Green recently (and a member of the party); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of patriotic”
Amuse bouche A drawing of a tea cup Peter created as a kid was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery
Other Participant: A., 43, Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the construction sector
Voting record Originally from India, Akshat has lived in the United Kingdom for five years, and voted the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “slightly right of centre”
Amuse bouche Akshat self-learned to read and write the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I simply found it intriguing”
For starters
The first participant Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, East Asia, the United States. The topics we discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also universal, because people's lives more or less evolve similarly across the world. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a productive, logical conversation. I had a couple of beers, he opted for mojitos.
Peter We split appetizers – seafood rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were superb. I felt somewhat anxious, as I think Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and Spain. We connected through our affection for London.
The big beef
The first participant I view immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a meal. With a small amount, the dish tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty.
Peter Akshat used an analogy about salt. It would be a funny place to be if the state was selecting some preferred demographic of the country.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, people fleeing persecution, but many people coming to the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the welfare system. Nobody forces you to move to a different nation for opportunity, so you should only go if you can take care of yourself and your relatives.
The second participant We got lost with some of the facts. I don’t think it’s like you arrive and are employed and then following a half-decade you obtain indefinite leave to remain. No process is guaranteed. It’s been a hostile environment since Theresa May, visa fees are really high, there is an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is limited. There is no special treatment for anybody. And regarding the recent changes, 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 degree of humanity.
Common ground
The first participant Peter questions unchecked capitalism. So am I, but simultaneously, wealth creation helps communities and ought to be promoted.
The second participant We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that certain elements of society – politics, the press – benefit from creating conflict. We did find common ground in basic principles and ethics.
Dessert and debate
Akshat Peter believes that because the United Kingdom profited from the colonial era, it ought to provide compensation to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess history with contemporary ethics; times are different, modern people were not responsible of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Let’s say the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a huge amount of funds. Is Britain able to do that? No.
Peter Until recently, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with the colonial past. As an instance, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, the public had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the part that imperial rule contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation isn’t just about signing a cheque, it should be about examining what went wrong and where we should be now.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I talk to individuals regularly 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 the community.
Peter We were there for two and a half hours. Akshat had dessert and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of any point, but we each liked dinner, so we could hopefully be more receptive to having conversations with others in future.