Dining Over the Divide: An Meeting Among Opposing Viewpoints

Introducing the Individuals

One Diner: Peter, 34, from London

Occupation Ex- civil servant, currently a learner studying public health

Voting record Supported Green recently (also a affiliate of the party); previously Labour. Identifies as “progressive, and globalist instead of patriotic”

Amuse bouche A sketch of a teacup Peter did as a kid was once displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland

Other Participant: A., 43, from Harrow

Occupation Risk manager in the construction sector

Voting record Originally from India, he has lived in the UK for half a decade, and voted the Conservative Party. Describes himself as “slightly moderate right”

Amuse bouche He taught himself to read and write Urdu. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”

Initial impressions

Akshat Over the last two decades, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The issues Peter and I discussed are focused on Britain, but they are also global, because human life more or less evolve similarly across the world. I anticipated a staunch liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we engaged in a good, rational discussion. I drank beer, Peter had mojitos.

Peter We shared appetizers – fishy spring rolls, steamed buns, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. I was a little nervous, as I believe Akshat was. Would he criticize me for my sensitivity? We’re both immigrants. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the United States and Spain. We connected through our affection for London.

The big beef

The first participant I look at immigration like sprinkling salt to a dish. With a small amount, the dish is delicious. Add too little or too much and the meal is insipid or overly seasoned.

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

Akshat There are, sadly, individuals fleeing persecution, but a lot of migrants coming to the United Kingdom are economic migrants who do not necessarily add significant value and can burden the welfare system. No one compels you to go to a new country for opportunity, so you should only go if you are able to support yourself and your relatives.

Peter We got lost with some of the facts. I don’t think it’s like you arrive and work and then following a half-decade you obtain indefinite leave to remain. Nothing is automatic. The climate has been unwelcoming since Theresa May, application costs are really high, there is an healthcare levy, access to benefits is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And regarding the new policies, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it’s incredible to say: we want your work, but we don’t want you. I think we must maintain a certain level of humanity.

Sharing plate

Akshat Peter questions unregulated markets. I am, too, but simultaneously, wealth creation helps communities and should be encouraged.

The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that certain elements of the community – government, the media – benefit from stoking division. We discovered shared understanding in basic principles and values.

Dessert and debate

The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the United Kingdom profited from colonial times, it ought to provide compensation to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with present day morality; times are different, current society had no control of what happened 50 or 100 years ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of money. Is Britain able to manage that? No.

Peter In the past, I believe adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. For example, upon my arrival to the UK, the public weren’t aware of the Irish famine and the part that imperial rule contributed to it. I hold that decolonisation is not merely about signing a cheque, it ought to involve looking at past errors and our current responsibilities.

Final thoughts

The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand Peter’s concerns. I converse with individuals regularly with opinions are contrary to my own. The goal is bringing everyone to the same page, so that all of us can work towards the improvement of society.

The second participant We remained for 150 minutes. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I drank a Japanese dessert wine. I didn’t persuade him of anything, but we each liked the meal, so we could hopefully be more receptive to engaging in dialogues with others in future.