Intervention is often conceptualized as a unidirectional process, whereby one side exerts influence over another. In such a schema, the influencing party is regarded as the active agent, while the other is cast as a passive recipient of external stimuli. A common example of this logic is found in immigration and interventionist policies that emphasize "integration" or "assimilation" into the host society. However, I argue that it is essential to highlight the bidirectional—and indeed multidirectional—nature of any socio-cultural and psychological interaction. No agent functions solely as an impactor, nor solely as an influencee; rather, every participant in interaction assumes a constructive role and shapes its dialogical counterpart. From a proculturative perspective, I contend that host societal institutions should not be viewed as superior, god-like actors managing immigrants' development, but as dialogical partners who are themselves transformed through encounters with newcomers. Likewise, immigrants should not be regarded as passive recipients of host cultural influence, but as active co-constructors of the host society. Accordingly, every interaction between immigrants and locals is a bilateral process, wherein each side intervenes in the other's lives. Thus, whether immigrant or local, we are all interveners.