Dining Across the Divide: An Meeting Between Different Perspectives

Meeting the Individuals

One Diner: P., 34, London

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

Political history Voted Green last time (also a affiliate of the party); formerly Labour. Identifies as “left, and globalist rather than nationalist”

Amuse bouche A drawing of a teacup Peter did as a kid was once hung in the Irish National Gallery

Second Diner: Akshat, 43, Harrow

Profession Risk manager in the construction sector

Political history Hailing from the Indian subcontinent, Akshat has lived in the UK for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “slightly right of centre”

Interesting fact He self-learned to read and write Urdu. “I have no use for it, I simply found it intriguing”

For starters

The first participant Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in Qatar, East Asia, the US. The topics Peter and I discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because human life largely evolve similarly wherever it is. I anticipated someone very liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, he opted for mojitos.

Peter We shared starters – seafood rolls, dumplings, daikon cakes with beansprouts, which were superb. I was a little nervous, as I believe he was too. Was he going to attack me for being a snowflake? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the US and the Iberian Peninsula. We connected through our love of London.

Key disagreements

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

The second participant He used an analogy about seasoning. It would be odd to be if the state was choosing some preferred demographic of the country.

The first participant There are, unfortunately, people fleeing persecution, but a lot of people coming to the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the welfare system. Nobody forces you to go to a new country for prospects, so you ought to relocate if you can take care of yourself and your family.

The second participant We became confused with certain details. I don’t think it’s like you arrive and are employed and then following a half-decade you get permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, application costs are quite expensive, there is an NHS surcharge, access to benefits is restricted. There is no special treatment for anybody. And concerning the new policies, under which you can’t bring your family over, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I think we have to have a degree of humanity.

Common ground

Akshat Peter questions unregulated markets. I am, too, but at the same time, economic growth helps communities and should be encouraged.

Peter We’re both internationalist. And we concurred that certain elements of the community – politics, the media – thrive off creating conflict. We discovered common ground in basic principles and values.

Dessert and debate

Akshat Peter is of the opinion that because the United Kingdom profited from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with contemporary ethics; times are different, modern people had no control of events decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK had to compensate the Indian nation, it would be a huge amount of money. Is Britain able to do that? No.

The second participant Until recently, I believe there was much reckoning with the colonial past. As an instance, when I first moved to the United Kingdom, people weren’t aware of the Great Famine and the part that imperial rule played in it. My view is decolonization isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about looking at what went wrong and our current responsibilities.

Final thoughts

Akshat It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I talk to individuals regularly whose views are opposite to my own. It’s about bringing everyone to the common understanding, in order that everyone can strive for the improvement of society.

The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of anything, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we could hopefully be more open to engaging in dialogues with other people in the coming times.