Dining Over the Divide: A Meeting Between Opposing Perspectives
Meeting the Participants
First Participant: Peter, 34, London
Profession Former civil servant, currently a learner studying community health
Political history Supported the Green Party last time (also a member of the party); previously Labour Party. Describes himself as “left, and internationalist rather than nationalist”
Interesting fact A drawing of a tea cup Peter did as a kid was once displayed in the Irish National Gallery
Second Participant: Akshat, 43, Harrow
Profession Risk manager in the construction sector
Voting record Hailing from India, Akshat has resided in the United Kingdom for five years, and voted Conservative. Identifies as “slightly right of centre”
Interesting fact He taught himself to understand the Urdu language. “I have no use for it, I simply found it intriguing”
Initial impressions
The first participant During the past 20 years, I’ve lived and worked in Qatar, South Korea, the United States. The topics Peter and I talked about are UK-centric, but they are also universal, because human life largely evolve similarly wherever it is. I was expecting a staunch liberal, but Peter wasn’t all gung ho – we engaged in a productive, logical conversation. I had a couple of beers, Peter had mojitos.
The second participant We split appetizers – seafood rolls, dumplings, radish cakes with sprouts, which were excellent. 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 have resided in the US and Spain. We bonded over our love of the capital.
The big beef
The first participant I view migration like sprinkling salt to a dish. With a small amount, the food is delicious. Use too little or too much and the meal is insipid or overly seasoned.
The second participant Akshat used an analogy about salt. It would be odd to be if the state was selecting some ideal ethnic makeup of the country.
Akshat There are, unfortunately, people escaping oppression, but a lot of migrants arriving in the United Kingdom are those seeking better finances who may not add significant value and can weigh on the benefit system. No one compels you to move to a different nation for opportunity, so you ought to relocate if you are able to support yourself and your family.
Peter We got lost with some of the facts. In my view it’s like you arrive and work and then following a half-decade you obtain permanent citizenship. No process is guaranteed. It’s been a hostile environment since Theresa May, 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 regarding the new policies, whereby family reunification is restricted, it’s incredible to say: we desire your labor, but we don’t want you. I believe we have to have a certain level of compassion.
Sharing plate
Akshat Peter questions unregulated markets. So am I, but at the same time, wealth creation benefits society and should be encouraged.
The second participant We’re both internationalist. And we agreed that some parts of the community – politics, the press – benefit from creating conflict. We discovered common ground in fundamentals and ethics.
For afters
The first participant Peter is of the opinion that because the UK profited from the colonial era, it should pay compensation to affected nations. I simply think: it is unfair to assess history with contemporary ethics; eras vary, current society had no control of events decades or a century ago. Let’s say the UK had to compensate India, it would be a huge amount of money. Is the UK in a position to do that? No.
Peter In the past, I believe adequate reflection occurred with colonial history. For example, upon my arrival to the UK, the public had little knowledge of the Great Famine and the role that colonialism played in it. I hold that decolonisation isn’t just about issuing payments, it should be about looking at what went wrong and our current responsibilities.
Final thoughts
Akshat It won’t change the way I think, but I understand his worries. I talk to people every day whose views are opposite to my own. The goal is uniting people to the common understanding, in order that all of us can work towards the improvement of society.
The second participant We were there for two and a half hours. He enjoyed a sweet treat and I had some sweet Japanese wine. I did not convince him of anything, but we each liked the meal, so we might become more receptive to engaging in dialogues with other people in future.
