Conversing Across the Gap: A Encounter Between Different Perspectives

Meeting the Participants

One Participant: P., 34, London

Occupation Former civil servant, currently a learner studying public health

Political history Supported Green recently (also a member of the political group); formerly Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of patriotic”

Interesting fact A sketch of a tea cup he created as a child was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery

Second Participant: A., 43, Harrow

Profession Risk manager in the construction sector

Political history Originally from India, Akshat has resided in the UK for five years, and supported Conservative. Describes himself as “slightly moderate right”

Interesting fact He self-learned to read and write Urdu. “I have no use for it, I was just fascinated”

Initial impressions

The first participant During the past 20 years, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, East Asia, the US. The issues Peter and I discussed are UK-centric, but they are also universal, because human life more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.

Peter We shared starters – seafood rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I think Akshat was. 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.

The big beef

The first participant I look at immigration similar to sprinkling salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the food tastes wonderful. Add too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.

Peter Akshat used an analogy regarding salt. It would be odd to exist if the state was choosing some preferred demographic of the country.

Akshat There are, unfortunately, people fleeing persecution, but many migrants coming to the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to go to a different nation for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support yourself and your family.

Peter We became confused with some of the facts. In my view it’s like you arrive and are employed and then following a half-decade you get permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are really high, there is an NHS surcharge, eligibility for support is restricted. There is no special treatment for anyone. And concerning the recent changes, under which family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we reject you as a person. I think we must maintain a degree of compassion.

Common ground

Akshat Peter questions unchecked capitalism. I am, too, but simultaneously, wealth creation helps communities and ought to be promoted.

Peter We each have global outlooks. And we concurred that some parts of society – politics, the press – thrive off creating conflict. We discovered shared understanding in basic principles and ethics.

Dessert and debate

The first participant Peter believes that since the United Kingdom benefitted from the colonial era, it ought to provide compensation to affected nations. My view is simply: it is unfair to assess history with contemporary ethics; times are different, current society were not responsible of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the UK had to compensate India, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is Britain able to do that? No.

The second participant In the past, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. For example, upon my arrival to the United Kingdom, people weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the role that imperial rule contributed to it. My view is decolonisation is not merely about signing a cheque, it ought to involve examining past errors and where we should be now.

Final thoughts

The first participant It won’t change the way I think, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I talk to people every day with opinions are opposite to mine. The goal is uniting people to the same page, in order that all of us can strive for the betterment 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 did not convince him of any point, but we each liked dinner, so we could hopefully be more open to having conversations with other people in future.