Dining Across the Divide: A Meeting Among Opposing Perspectives

Introducing the Individuals

One Diner: Peter, 34, London

Profession Ex- government employee, now a student focusing on community health

Voting record Supported Green recently (also a affiliate of the party); formerly Labour. Identifies as “left, and internationalist rather than nationalist”

Interesting fact A drawing of a teacup Peter did as a kid was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland

Second Participant: A., 43, Harrow

Profession Risk analyst in the construction sector

Political history Hailing from India, Akshat has resided in the United Kingdom for five years, and supported the Conservative Party. Identifies as “somewhat moderate right”

Interesting fact He self-learned to understand the Urdu language. “I have no use for it, I was just fascinated”

Initial impressions

The first participant Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in Qatar, East Asia, the US. The topics we talked about are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because human life more or less evolve similarly wherever it is. I was expecting 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 shared starters – fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I think he was too. Was he going to attack me for being a snowflake? We each have immigrant backgrounds. I grew up in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and Spain. We connected through our affection for London.

Key disagreements

The first participant I view immigration similar to adding salt to a dish. When you add a little bit, the food is delicious. Add too little or too much and the meal is either too bland or too salty.

Peter Akshat had a metaphor regarding salt. It would be odd to exist if the state was selecting some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.

The first participant There are, sadly, people fleeing persecution, but a lot of migrants arriving in the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much and can burden the welfare system. Nobody forces you to go to a new country for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support yourself and your family.

Peter We got lost with certain details. In my view it is the case that you arrive and are employed and then after five years you get indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. The climate has been unwelcoming for some time, application costs are quite expensive, you pay an healthcare levy, access to benefits is restricted. There is no special treatment for anybody. And concerning the new policies, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it is astonishing to state: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I believe we must maintain a certain level of humanity.

Common ground

The first participant 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 agreed that certain elements of society – government, the press – benefit from creating conflict. We discovered shared understanding in basic principles and values.

For afters

Akshat Peter believes that since the UK profited from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to those countries. I simply think: you cannot judge the past with present day morality; times are different, modern people were not responsible of events 50 or 100 years ago. Let’s say the UK had to compensate India, it would be a huge amount of money. Is Britain able to manage that? No.

The second participant In the past, I don’t think there was much reckoning with the colonial past. For example, upon my arrival to the UK, people weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the role that imperial rule played in it. My view is decolonisation isn’t just about issuing payments, it ought to involve looking at past errors and our current responsibilities.

Takeaways

Akshat It may not alter the my perspective, but I appreciate his worries. I talk to individuals every day whose views are opposite to mine. It’s about bringing everyone to the same page, in order that all of us can work towards the betterment of the community.

The second participant We remained 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 the meal, so we might become more receptive to engaging in dialogues with others in the coming times.