Conversing Over the Gap: An Meeting Among Different Perspectives
Introducing the Participants
One Participant: P., 34, London
Profession Former civil servant, currently a student studying public health
Voting record Supported the Green Party last time (also a member of the party); previously Labour. Identifies as “progressive, and globalist instead of patriotic”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a tea cup he did as a child was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland
Other Participant: Akshat, 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Hailing from the Indian subcontinent, he has resided in the UK for five years, and voted Conservative. Describes himself as “somewhat right of centre”
Amuse bouche He 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 During the past 20 years, I have resided and been employed in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The issues Peter and I discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also global, 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 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 excellent. I was a little nervous, as I think he was too. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. I grew up in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and Spain. We connected through our love of London.
Key disagreements
The first participant I look at migration like adding salt to a meal. With a small amount, the food is delicious. Add too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.
The second participant He had a metaphor regarding seasoning. It would be odd to be if the state was selecting some preferred demographic of the country.
Akshat There are, sadly, people fleeing persecution, but a lot of migrants arriving in the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the welfare system. No one compels you to move to a new country for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your relatives.
The second participant We became confused with certain details. In my view it is the case that you come over and work and then after five years you get indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are really high, there is an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is limited. There is no special treatment for anyone. And regarding the recent changes, whereby family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: 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 questions unregulated markets. So am I, but at the same time, wealth creation benefits society and ought to be promoted.
The second participant We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that some parts of society – politics, the media – thrive off creating conflict. We discovered shared understanding in basic principles and ethics.
Dessert and debate
Akshat Peter is of the opinion that since the UK benefitted from colonial times, it ought to provide reparations to affected nations. I simply think: it is unfair to assess history with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people were not responsible of events 50 or 100 years ago. Let’s say the UK was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is Britain able to do that? No.
Peter Until recently, I believe there was much reckoning with the colonial past. As an instance, upon my arrival to the UK, people weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the role that colonialism played in it. My view is decolonization isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about looking at what went wrong and where we should be now.
Final thoughts
The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I converse with individuals regularly whose views are opposite to my own. It’s about bringing everyone to the same page, 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 didn’t persuade him of anything, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we could hopefully be more receptive to engaging in dialogues with other people in the coming times.