Dining Across the Divide: An Encounter Among Opposing Perspectives
Introducing the Individuals
First Diner: P., 34, London
Profession Former civil servant, now a student focusing on public health
Political history Voted the Green Party recently (also a member of the political group); formerly Labour Party. Describes himself as “progressive, and globalist rather than patriotic”
Amuse bouche A drawing of a tea cup he created as a child was once hung in the Irish National Gallery
Second Diner: Akshat, 43, from Harrow
Occupation Risk manager in the construction sector
Political history Hailing from India, Akshat has resided in the United Kingdom for five years, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “slightly moderate right”
Interesting fact He taught himself to understand the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”
Initial impressions
The first participant During the past two decades, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, East Asia, the United States. The issues Peter and I discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because people's lives largely follows the same curve across the world. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but he was quite measured – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I had a couple of beers, he opted for mojitos.
Peter We split starters – fishy spring rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I was a little nervous, as I think he was too. Was he going to attack me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I have resided in the United States and Spain. We connected through our affection for London.
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.
The second participant Akshat had a metaphor about salt. It would be a funny place to be if the government was selecting some preferred demographic of the country.
Akshat There are, sadly, people fleeing persecution, but many people coming to the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the benefit system. Nobody forces you to go to a new country for opportunity, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support your own needs and your relatives.
Peter We got lost with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that you arrive and are employed and then after five years you obtain permanent citizenship. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment since Theresa May, 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, under which family reunification is restricted, it is astonishing to state: we desire your labor, 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 benefits society and should be encouraged.
The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that certain elements of the community – politics, the press – benefit from creating conflict. We did find shared understanding in fundamentals and values.
Dessert and debate
Akshat Peter believes that since the UK profited from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to affected nations. I simply think: you cannot judge the past with present day morality; times are different, modern people were not responsible of events decades or a century ago. Let’s say the UK was obliged to repay India, it would be a significant sum of funds. Is Britain able to manage that? Certainly not.
The second participant Until recently, I don’t think there was much reckoning with the colonial past. As an instance, when I first moved to the UK, people weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the part that colonialism contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about signing a cheque, it should be about looking at what went wrong 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 converse with individuals every day with opinions are opposite to my own. The goal is bringing everyone to the common understanding, in order that all of us can strive for the improvement of society.
The second participant We were there for 150 minutes. Akshat had dessert and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I didn’t persuade him of any point, but we each liked dinner, so we could hopefully be more open to having conversations with others in future.
