Conversing Over the Divide: A Meeting Between Opposing Viewpoints

Meeting the Individuals

First Diner: Peter, 34, London

Profession Former civil servant, now a learner studying public health

Political history Supported Green last time (and a member of the political group); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and globalist instead of nationalist”

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

Second Participant: A., 43, from Harrow

Occupation Risk analyst in the infrastructure industry

Voting record Hailing from India, Akshat has resided in the UK for five years, and voted Conservative. Describes himself as “slightly right of centre”

Amuse bouche Akshat taught himself to read and write the Urdu language. “I have no use for it, I simply found it intriguing”

Initial impressions

The first participant During the past two decades, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, South Korea, the United States. The issues we discussed are UK-centric, but they are also global, because people's lives more or less follows the same curve wherever it is. I was expecting a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, Peter had mojitos.

The second participant We split appetizers – seafood rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I believe Akshat was. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the US and Spain. We connected through our love of the capital.

Key disagreements

Akshat I look at migration similar to adding salt to a meal. When you add a little bit, the dish is delicious. Add too little or too much and the meal is insipid or overly seasoned.

Peter He had a metaphor about salt. It would be odd to be if the state was selecting some preferred demographic of the nation.

The first participant There are, unfortunately, individuals fleeing persecution, but many migrants arriving in the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much and can burden the benefit system. No one compels you to move to a different nation for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your family.

The second participant We became confused with certain details. In my view it is the case that you come over and are employed and then following a half-decade you obtain permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, visa fees are quite expensive, there is an healthcare levy, access to benefits is limited. There is no special treatment for anyone. And regarding the recent changes, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we desire your labor, but we don’t want you. I think we must maintain a certain level of humanity.

Common ground

The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unchecked capitalism. So am I, but at the same time, wealth creation benefits society and should be encouraged.

The second participant We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that some parts of the community – government, the media – thrive off stoking division. We discovered common ground in fundamentals and ethics.

For afters

The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the United Kingdom benefitted from colonial times, it should pay reparations to those countries. My view is simply: you cannot judge the past with present day morality; eras vary, modern people were not responsible of events decades or a century ago. Let’s say 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.

The second participant In the past, I don’t think adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. As an instance, when I first moved to the UK, people had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the part that imperial rule played in it. My view is decolonization isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about examining what went wrong and where we should be now.

Takeaways

The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I appreciate his worries. I converse with people regularly whose views are opposite to mine. It’s about uniting people to the same page, in order that everyone can strive for the betterment of the community.

Peter We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we each liked dinner, so we might become more receptive to having conversations with others in future.