Dining Across the Divide: A Meeting Between Different Perspectives

Introducing the Participants

First Diner: Peter, 34, London

Profession Ex- civil servant, currently a student studying community health

Political history Voted the Green Party recently (also a member of the party); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and internationalist rather than nationalist”

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

Second Diner: Akshat, 43, from Harrow

Profession Risk manager in the infrastructure industry

Voting record Originally from India, he has resided in the UK for five years, and voted the Conservative Party. Identifies as “slightly right of centre”

Interesting fact Akshat taught himself to read and write the Urdu language. “It has no practical use for me, I was just fascinated”

Initial impressions

The first participant Over the last 20 years, I have resided and been employed in the Middle East, East Asia, the US. The issues Peter and I discussed are UK-centric, but they are also global, because human life largely follows the same curve across the world. I anticipated someone very liberal, but he was quite measured – we had a productive, logical conversation. I had a couple of beers, he opted for mojitos.

The second participant We shared appetizers – fishy spring rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, 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 each have immigrant backgrounds. My childhood was in Dublin; I’ve lived in the United States and the Iberian Peninsula. We bonded over our affection for the capital.

Key disagreements

The first participant I look at immigration similar to 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 had a metaphor regarding seasoning. It would be odd to be if the state was choosing some preferred demographic of the nation.

Akshat There are, sadly, people escaping oppression, but a lot of migrants coming to the UK are economic migrants who do not necessarily contribute much and can weigh on the welfare system. No one compels you to move to a new country for prospects, so you should only go if you are able to support your own needs and your family.

Peter We got lost with certain details. I don’t think it is the case that you come over and work and then after five years you get permanent citizenship. Nothing is automatic. It’s been a hostile environment for some time, application costs are really high, you pay an healthcare levy, eligibility for support is restricted. The red carpet isn’t rolled out for anyone. And concerning the new policies, whereby you can’t bring your family over, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we reject you as a person. I believe we must maintain a degree of compassion.

Common ground

The first participant Peter’s sceptical of unregulated markets. So am I, but at the same time, economic growth benefits society and ought to be promoted.

The second participant We each have global outlooks. And we agreed that certain elements of society – government, the media – benefit from stoking division. We did find shared understanding in fundamentals and ethics.

Dessert and debate

The first participant Peter believes that since the UK profited from the colonial era, it ought to provide compensation to those countries. I simply think: it is unfair to assess the past with present day morality; eras vary, current society were not responsible of what happened decades or a century ago. Suppose the UK was obliged to repay the Indian nation, it would be a significant sum of money. Is the UK in a position to do that? No.

Peter Until recently, I believe there was much reckoning with colonial history. For example, when I first moved to the UK, the public had little knowledge of the Irish famine and the part that colonialism played in it. I hold that decolonisation isn’t just about signing a cheque, it should be about examining what went wrong and where we should be now.

Final thoughts

The first participant It may not alter the my perspective, but I understand his worries. I talk to people regularly whose views are opposite to my own. The goal is bringing everyone to the same page, in order that everyone can work towards the betterment of society.

The second participant We remained for two and a half hours. Akshat had dessert and I drank some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of any point, but we both enjoyed the meal, so we might become more open to engaging in dialogues with others in future.