Conversing Over the Gap: An Encounter Between Different Viewpoints
Introducing the Participants
First Diner: Peter, 34, London
Occupation Former government employee, now a student studying community health
Voting record Voted the Green Party last time (and a member of the party); previously Labour. Describes himself as “left, and internationalist instead of nationalist”
Amuse bouche A sketch of a teacup Peter created as a child was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery
Second Participant: Akshat, 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the infrastructure industry
Voting record Hailing from India, he has lived in the UK for half a decade, and supported the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “somewhat right of centre”
Interesting fact He taught himself 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 two decades, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, East Asia, the United States. The topics we discussed are UK-centric, but they are also global, because human life more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, Peter had mojitos.
Peter We split starters – seafood rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I felt somewhat anxious, as I believe Akshat was. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We bonded over our affection for the capital.
The big beef
The first participant I look at immigration similar to adding salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the food tastes wonderful. Use too little or too much and the dish is either too bland or too salty.
The second participant Akshat used an analogy regarding salt. It would be odd to exist if the state was choosing some preferred demographic of the country.
The first participant There are, sadly, people fleeing persecution, but a lot of migrants arriving in the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to go to a new country for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives.
Peter We became confused with certain details. I don’t think it’s like you arrive and work and then following a half-decade you obtain indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment 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 anybody. And regarding the recent changes, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we reject you as a person. I think we have to have a degree of humanity.
Sharing plate
The first participant Peter questions unchecked capitalism. I am, too, but simultaneously, wealth creation benefits society and ought to be promoted.
The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that some parts of the community – politics, the press – benefit from stoking division. We discovered common ground in fundamentals and ethics.
For afters
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that since the UK benefitted from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with contemporary ethics; eras vary, modern people had no control of events decades or a century 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 adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. As an instance, when I first moved to the UK, the public had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the part that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonization isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about looking at what went wrong and our current responsibilities.
Takeaways
The first participant It may not alter the way I think, but I understand his worries. I talk to individuals regularly with opinions are contrary to mine. It’s about bringing everyone to the same page, so that all of us can work towards the improvement of the community.
The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of anything, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more open to having conversations with other people in future.
